ISSN 2411-0795
ISSN 2411-0795
En Ru
A Work of Art as an Object for Interpretation in the View of Umberto Eco’s Theory

A Work of Art as an Object for Interpretation in the View of Umberto Eco’s Theory

Recieved: 03/03/2025

Accepted: 03/28/2025

Published: 04/10/2025

Keywords: culture, work of art, artistic image, interpretation, cultural meaning, author, recipient, limits of interpretation, historicity, contextuality, integrity

Available in the on-line version with: 30.05.2026

To cite this article

Denisova G.V. A Work of Art as an Object for Interpretation in the View of Umberto Eco’s Theory. // Theory and History of Art. 2025. N 3, p.39-51 https://doi.org/10.55959/MSU2411-0795-2025-3-02.

N 3, 2025

Abstract

The article outlines the characteristics of interpretating artworks. The author proceeds from Umberto Eco’s theory of “openness”, according to which the process of perceiving an artwork is centered on the recipient, who inevitably adds their “existential situation” to the information received. The author aims to demonstrate the way Eco’s theory promotes awareness of the limits of interpretation, determined by such factors as historicity, context and integrity of the text, while the society acts as its guarantor. The author brings out that a work of art is always “broader” than its author; otherwise stated, it has the potential to generate new cultural meanings. Additionally, the author highlights that the interpreter relies on the so-called “zero-degree values” to explore the text’s every potential (including meanings beyond the author’s original intention), which are shaped by the historical and socio-cultural context. This theoretical review provides every fact to conclude that, despite the range of approaches to analysing artworks is supposed to expand under new information and communication technologies, Eco’s methodological system of studying the prerequisites and constraints of interpretation should be considered universally applicable and could be exploited to investigate new forms of communication.

References

  1. Barthes R. Izbranny`e trudy`. Semiotika. Poe`tika [Selected works. Semiotics. Poetics]. Moscow: Progress, 1989. 616 p.
  2. Baxtin M. M. K metodologii literaturovedeniya [On the methodology of literary criticism]. Moscow: Xud. lit., 1975. P. 203-212.
  3. Baxtin M. M. Problema teksta: Zametki 1959−1961 gg. [The problem of text: Notes 1959–1961] [E`lektronny`j resurs]. — Rezhim dostupa: http://philologos.narod.ru/bakhtin/bakh_text.htm. 
  4. Veber M. Osnovny`e sociologicheskie ponyatiya [Basic concepts in sociology] // Veber M. Izbranny`e proizvedeniya. Moscow: Progress, 1990. 52 p.
  5. Griczanov A. A., Mozhejko M. A. Postmodernizm [Postmodernism]. Minsk: Interpresservis; Knizhny`j Dom, 2001. 1040 p.
  6. Kristeva Yu. Razrushenie poe`tiki [The destruction of poetics] // Franczuzskaya semiotika: ot strukturalizma k poststrukturalizmu [French semiotics: from structuralism to poststructuralism]. Moscow: Progress, 2000. P. 458–483.
  7. Kristeva Yu. Baxtin, slovo, dialog i roman [Bakhtin, word, dialogue and novel] // Franczuzskaya semiotika: ot strukturalizma k poststrukturalizmu [French semiotics: from structuralism to poststructuralism]. Moscow: IG Progress, 2000. P. 427–457.
  8. Leont`ev A. A. Osnovy` psixolingvistiki [Fundamentals of psycholinguistics]. Moscow: Smy`sl, 1997. 287 p.
  9. Lobodanov A. P. Innovacionnaya model` obrazovaniya v oblasti iskusstva [Innovative model of education in the field of art] // Teoriya i istoriya iskusstva. 2023. № 3–4. P. 33–58.
  10. Lotman Yu. M. Struktura xudozhestvennogo teksta [The structure of a literary text]. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1970. 387 p.
  11. Mamedov A. K., Korkiya E`. D., Chudnovskaya I. N., Denisova G. V. Germenevtika kak metod social`nogo poznaniya [Hermeneutics as a method of social cognition]. Moscow: Universitetskaya kniga, 2021. 220 p.
  12. Usmanova A. R. Umberto E`ko: paradoksy` interpretacii [Umberto Eco: paradoxes of interpretation]. Minsk, 2000. 200 p.
  13. Fateeva N. A. Kontrapunkt intertekstual`nosti, ili Intertekst v mire tekstov [Counterpoint of intertextuality, or Intertext in the world of texts]. Moscow: Agar, 2000. 280 p.
  14. Chernyakova N. S. Proizvedeniya iskusstva kak ob``ekt interpretacii [Works of art as an object of interpretation] // Teksty` i konteksty`. 2021. № 4. P. 104–113.
  15. Shapir M. I. E`steticheskij opy`t XX veka: avangard i postmodernizm [Aesthetic experience of the XX century: avant-garde and postmodernism] // Philologica. 1995. T. 2. № 3/4. P. 140–151.
  16. Shpet G. G. Germenevtika i ee problemy` [Hermeneutics and its problems] // Kontekst. Literaturno-teoreticheskie issledovaniya. Moscow, 1989–1993. 33 p.
  17. Shpet G. G. Yavlenie i smy`sl [Phenomenon and meaning]. Tomsk, 1996. 234 p.
  18. Eko U. Otsutstvuyushhaya struktura. Vvedenie v semiologiyu [The missing structure]. St. Petersburg: Petropolis, 1998. 704 p.
  19. Eko U. Ot interneta k Gutenbergu [From the Internet to Gutenberg] // Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 1998. № 4. P. 70–79.
  20. Eko U. Otkry`toe proizvedenie [The Open Work]. Moscow: Akademicheskij proekt, 2004. 512 p.
  21. Kristeva J. Sémeiotiké: Recherches pour une sémanalyse. Paris, 1969. 313 p.
  22. Landaw G. P. The Definition of Hypertext and Its History as a Concept. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992. 236 p.
  23. Eco U. Trattato di semiotica generale. Milano: Bompiani, 1975. 432 p.
  24. Eco U. I limiti dell’unterpretazione. Milano: Bompiani, 1990. 471 p.