An Approach to the Problem of Urban Art Objects Comprehensive Assessment Using Qualimetry Methods

Over the past few years, the issue of developing common criteria for assessing the significance of urban art works has been constantly discussed in the context of the dialogue between the government and society. Meanwhile, the decisions made by local authorities (for example, deputies of the Moscow City Duma and the Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg) are always of a private nature and do not rest upon a single science-based approach to legalizing the placement of urban art works in the urban environment. This study is aimed at justifying the use of qualimetric methods in a comprehensive assessment of the significance of urban art works. The study’s methodology is presented by comparative and qualimetric methods for evaluating the aesthetic parameters of urban art works. The article notes the complexity of the assessment due to the pronounced specificity that makes it difficult to interpret urban art unambiguously. Basing on the methodological principles of artworks examination (technography, technology, iconography and iconology), the authors propose a number of criteria for evaluating rational and emotional aspects of the significance of urban art objects. To evaluate an art object for each of the criteria, the article offers its own qualimetric scale. It can be described using a set of “points”, for example, from 1 to 10, where the lowest (1) and the highest (10) levels are described in strict and understandable terms, and the middle points (from 2 to 9) are determined by an expert basing on the extent of difference between the level detected by the expert and the two specified extreme levels for this particular art object. With their help, the derived figures can be translated into evaluation categories, thus obtaining particular assessments that are separate for each criterion, and the final value can be derived from a generalization of the particular assessments. The scientific novelty of the study is determined by the fact that the qualimetric method can provide a systematic approach to assessing the rational and emotional aspects of artistic interpretation of urban art objects. The method’s practical application can provide a compromise for the opposing parties struggling to claim the “rights to the city”, and regulate the visual culture of public spaces on an objective scientific basis.

qualimetric scale, urban art, comprehensive assessment, art object significance, street art, public art, graffiti, artistic interpretation, theory and history of art, art studies

1. Shaftoe H. Convivial Urban Spaces: Creating Effective Public Places. London-Sterling, VA, Earthscan Publ., 2008, 154 p.

2. Astafyeva O.N., Kuzmina N.V. “Interesting” in the Aesthetic Landscape of the City, Observatoriya kul’tury [Observatory of Culture], 2018, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 693—707 (in Russ.). DOI 10.25281/2072-3156-2018-15-6-693-707.

3. Lefebvre H. Writing on Cities. Oxford, Blackwell Publishers, 1996, 250 p.

4. Suppes P., Zinnes J. Basic Measurement Theory, Psikhologicheskie izmereniya: sb. nauchn. tr. [Psychological Measurements: collected scientific papers]. Moscow, Mir Publ., 1967, pp. 9—110 (in Russ.).

5. Pfanzagl J. Teoriya izmerenii [Theory of Measurement]. Moscow, Mir Publ., 1976, 248 p.

6. Khovanov N.V. Matematicheskie osnovy teorii shkal izmereniya kachestva [Mathematical Foundations of the Theory of Quality Measurement Scales]. Leningrad, LGU Publ., 1982, 185 p.

7. Zorya A.A. The “Street Wave” Art as an Object of Art Studies, Estetika strit-arta: sb. st. [Aesthetics of Street Art: collected articles]. St. Petersburg, SPbGUPTD Publ., 2018, pp. 18—22 (in Russ.).

8. Ponosov I.G. Iskusstvo i gorod: graffiti, ulichnoe iskusstvo, aktivizm [Art and the City: Graffiti, Street Art, Activism]. Moscow, Igor’ Ponosov Publ., 2016, 208 p.

9. Schmidt N. Die Kunst und die Stadt, Street Art, Legenden zur Straße. Berlin, Archiv der Jugendkulturen Verlag KG, 2009, pp. 78—91 (in German).

10. Vilchinskaya-Butenko M.E. Ballet Theme in Urban Art, Vestnik Akademii russkogo baleta im. A.Ya. Vaganovoi [Bulletin of the Vaganova Ballet Academy], 2018, no. 6 (59), pp. 52—73 (in Russ.).

11. Pilikin D.G. Terminology of Street Art. Vocabulary Definition, Estetika strit-arta: sb. st. [Aesthetics of Street Art: collected articles]. St. Petersburg,SPbGUPTD Publ., 2018, pp. 4—9 (in Russ.).

12. Lotman Yu.M., Petrov V.M. (eds). Iskusstvometriya: metody tochnykh nauk i semiotiki [Artmetry: Methods of the Exact Sciences and Semiotics]. Moscow, LIBROKOM/URSS Publ., 2009, 370 p.

13. Huston A.J., Huston J.P. Aesthetic Evaluation of Art: A Formal Approach, Art, Aesthetics, and the Brain. Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press, 2015. Available at: http://johnhuston.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Aesthetic-Evaluation-of-Art-A-Formal-Approach.pdf (accessed 15.11.2019).

14. Schiavi S. Investigating the Neural Network Underlying Aesthetic Experience: PhD dissertation. Milano, La Scuola di Dottorato, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, 2017, 103 p. Available at: https://boa.unimib.it/retrieve/handle/10281/158175/225340/phd_unimib_787769.pdf (accessed 15.11.2019).

15. Pelowski M., Fuminori A. A Model of Art Perception, Evaluation and Emotion in Transformative Aesthetic Experience, New Ideas in Psychology, 2011, no. 29, pp. 80—97.

16. Leder H., Belke B., Oeberst A., Augustin D. A Model of Aesthetic Appreciation and Aesthetic Judgments, British Journal of Psychology, 2004, no. 95, pp. 489—508.

17. Vdovyuk L.N., Motoshina A.A. Systematic Techniques of Aesthetic Features Evaluation of the Tyumen Region Landscape, Vestnik Tyumenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Nauki o Zemle [Bulletin of the Tyumen State University. Earth Sciences], 2013, no. 4, pp. 58—66 (in Russ.).

18. Dirin D.A., Popov E.S. Evaluation of Landscape and Aesthetic Appeal of Landscapes: A Methodological Review, Izvestiya Altaiskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Altai State University], 2010, no. 3, pp. 120—124 (in Russ.).

19. Krasovskaya T.M. Landscapes’ Aesthetic Functions: Methodology of Assessment and Preservation, Geopolitika i ekogeodinamika regionov [Geopolitics and Ecogeodynamics of Regions], 2014, no. 2, pp. 51—55 (in Russ.).

20. Demeshonok D.V. Evaluation of the Aesthetic Perception of Architectural Environment Objects on Perspective Images and Views, Dizain. Teoriya i praktika [Design. Theory and Practice], 2014, no. 16, pp. 6—15 (in Russ.).

21. Roussos L., Dentsoras A. Formulation and Use of Criteria for the Evaluation of Aesthetic Attributes of Products in Engineering Design, Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED13). Design for Harmonies. Seoul, 2013, vol. 7, pp. 547—556.

22. Yan Ke, Xiaoou Tang, Feng Jing. The Design of High-Level Features for Photo Quality Assessment, Proceedings of 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. New York, 2006, vol. 1, pp. 419—426. Available at: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~yke/photoqual/cvpr06photo.pdf (accessed 15.11.2019).

23. Datta R., Li D., Joshi J., Wang J.Z. Studying Aesthetics in Photographic Images Using a Computational Approach, Proceedings 2006 European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). Graz, 2006, vol. 3, pp. 288—301. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.81.5178&rep=rep1&type=pdf (accessed 15.11.2019).

24. Prishchenko S.V., Riltsev E.V. Qualimetric Assessment of the Aesthetic Parameters of Color in Advertising Graphics, Kul’tura і suchasnіst’ [Culture and Contemporaneity], 2017, no. 1, pp. 72—77 (in Ukr.).

25. Vilchinskaya-Butenko M.E. Street Art and the Anonymity of the Artist, Estetika strit-arta: sb. statei [Aesthetics of Street Art: collected articles]. St. Petersburg, 2018, pp. 39—48 (in Russ.).

26. Tamoikin M.Yu., Tamoikin I.Yu., Tamoikin D.M. Assessment of Cultural Values: The International Standard for the TES-Assessment of Items of Cultural Value, Antiques and Collectibles on a Cost-Based Approach, DocPlayer. Available at: https://docplayer.ru/60392415-Tamoykin-m-yu-tamoykin-i-yu-tamoykin-d-m.html (accessed 15.11.2019) (in Russ.).

27. Dronova N.D., Akkalaeva R.Kh. Otsenka rynochnoi stoimosti yuvelirnykh izdelii [Assessment of the Market Value of Jewelry]. Moscow, Delo Publ., 1998, 159 p.

28. Rozhdestvensky A.E. Historical and Cultural Values as Intangible Assets, Voprosy otsenki [The Appraisal Issues], 2009, no. 4, pp. 43—47 (in Russ.).

29. The Author’s Method of Evaluating Cultural Values — Zharov’s Method, Natsional’nyi nauchno-issledovatel’skii institut ekspertizy i otsenki ob’’ektov istorii i kul’tury “Ruskul’turekspertiza” [“Ruskulturekspertiza” National Research Institute for Examination and Evaluation of Historical and Cultural Objects]. Available at: http://rosculturexpertiza.ru/files/valuation/metod_zharova.pdf (accessed 15.11.2019) (in Russ.).

30. Gagarin A.G. Features of Artworks Evaluation, Imushchestvennye otnosheniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Property Relations in the Russian Federation], 2006, no. 3 (54), pp. 61—65 (in Russ.).

31. Puzynya N.Yu., Loktionov A.N., Mikhlin A.V. Questions of Movable Cultural Property Valuation, Imushchestvennye otnosheniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Property Relations in the Russian Federation], 2012, no. 3, pp. 36—52 (in Russ.).

32. Saaty T. Prinyatie reshenii: Metod analiza ierarkhii [Decision Making: Analytic Hierarchy Process]. Moscow, Radio i Svyaz’ Publ., 1993, 278 p.

33. Rozhkov N.N. Kvalimetriya i upravlenie kachestvom: Matematicheskie metody i modeli: uchebnik i praktikum dlya akademicheskogo bakalavriata [Qualimetry and Quality Management: Mathematical Methods and Models: textbook and practicum for academic baccalaureate]. Moscow, Yurait Publ., 2019, 167 p.

34. Bransky V.P. Iskusstvo i filosofiya: rol’ filosofii v formirovanii i vospriyatii khudozhestvennogo proizvedeniya na primere istorii zhivopisi [Art and Philosophy: The Role of Philosophy in the Formation and Perception of an Artwork by the Example of the History of Painting]. Moscow, 1999, 704 p.

35. Rozhkov N.N. Qualimetric Evaluation of the Quality of Services Using the Randomized Weighting Coefficients, Izvestiya Mezhdunarodnoi akademii nauk vysshei shkoly [Proceedings of the International Higher Education Academy of Sciences], 2008, no. 4 (42), pp. 166—175 (in Russ.).

36. Luce R., Galanter E. Psychophysical Scaling, Psikhologicheskie izmereniya: sb. nauchn. tr. [Psychological Measurements: collected scientific papers]. Moscow, Mir Publ., 1967, pp. 111—195 (in Russ.).