بازخوانی شیوه‌های طبقه‌بندی طرح و نقش پارچه‌های تاریخی ایران

در عمده مطالعات پارچه های دست‌بافت ایرانی از منظر طرح و نقش، ترکیب ظاهری پارچه های ادوار مختلف به‌صورت مضمونی و با گروه بندی انسانی، جانوری، گیاهی، هندسی و انواع دیگر نظیر آن، بررسی شده است. بازخورد نهایی این روش، معمولا به جهت عدم قطعیت، در دایره توصیف محدود می ماند؛ چرا که با فقدان ثبات لازم برای یک طبقه بندی محرز، هر پژوهشگری برای حصول نتیجه مورد نظر، به حد بضاعت و متناسب با اهداف تحقیقی خود، آن را دگرگون می کند. برای ترمیم این نقص، نگارندگان به این پرسش می پردازند: چگونه می توان با نظر به اصول هنرهای سنتی درباره شیوه های گسترش نقش در زمینه طرح، نسبت به طبقه بندی انواع پارچه های تاریخی ایران اقدام نمود؟ این مقاله، به‌شیوه توصیفی تحلیلی، نشان می دهد تقسیم موضوعی به جهت ناکارآمدبودن، به‌نوعی پراکندگی به ظاهر باقاعده انجامیده است. درصورتی که با تاسی به طبقه بندی رایج در هنرهای سنتی، بر اساس شیوه گسترش نقش در زمینه طرح که نتایج آن پیش تر در هنر هم عرض نساجی سنتی، یعنی قالی بافی نیز به آزمون درآمده می توان رده بندی دقیق تر با چهارچوب ساختاری مشخص، ایجاد کرد؛ که پارچه های دست‌بافت ادوار مختلف ایران، تا به امروز، در آن قابل تعریف باشد. در این رویکرد، با برقراری تمایز میان اصطلاحات طرح و نقش، هر نقش، می تواند در بستر هر طرح قرار گیرد و درعین حال ، تطور بنیادی در هویت آن، ایجاد نکند.

Restudying the Historical Textiles in Iran(Based on Methods of Classifying Designs and Motifs)

In a general perspective, the classification of Iranian historical textiles is subject to dispersal. This turmoil becomes more highlighted when some researchers use two terms of design and motif interchangeably. This is while, design signifies a general combination and motif is the smallest significant component of the design. Hence, each of these two concepts defines a different quality, so that their interchangeable use is not only inappropriate but also disrupts understanding of the actual meaning. The prevalence of this inadequacy is to the extent that the authors of this article, in many of their references, were compelled to modify the terms of design and motif, because in most cases, the creators of the handful of reliable sources available on Iranian handwoven products, have ignored the difference between these two terms and have considered them equivalent. On the other hand, the classification of the types of traditional fabrics, which are usually defined differently in the ruling periods of the historical dynasties, paying attention to the gist of motifs has earned the greatest effectiveness. Therefore in most studies of Iranian handwoven textiles in terms of designs and motifs, the composition of the textiles of different eras have been analyzed in terms of the theme and categorized as human, animal, plant, geometric and other types of designs. Due to the lack of reliable theoretical foundation in the aforementioned method, the ultimate feedback is limited to description only. On the other hand, because of the shortcomings resulting from the certainty of this method, there is a tendency for each research to add a few imaginative categories to the type of historical textile which it is related to. In fact, due to lack of stability required for a clear categorization, each researcher make adjustments to their study according to its goals in order to achieve the desired results. To mend this flaw which originates from the concern of most researchers in areas other than applied arts, the authors of this article attempted to find the answer to the following question: How can various types of textiles be classified with regard to the principles of traditional arts on the methods of adding motif to the design? This analysis by utilizing library studies proves analytical descriptive that thematic classification, due to its inefficiency, has led to a seemingly organized but fake dispersion. However, following the common classification in traditional arts by the method of adding motifs to the design which results have already been tested in carpet weaving which is an art parallel to traditional textile art, a more precise classification can be achieved with a structural framework in which handmade textiles of different historical eras can be defined. In this approach, by making a distinction between the terms design and motif, each base image can be in the context of each design and yet avoid making fundamental changes in its identity. In order to overcome this defect and organize things, using the same method of classification of other traditional arts such as different types of carpets seems efficient. In this approach, the types of fabrics are categorized from a different perspective and according to the manner in which the motifs are spread in the design. Accordingly, the types of these textiles can be categorized to (1) story (2) inscription, (3) scattered, (4) altar, (5) medallion, (6) Vagireh or tangled, (7) framed, (8) Muharramat or striped and (9) combined, based on the ways the main design is executed, including independent, axial symmetry (reflexive) and repetitive symmetry (thorough). This is a ninepart classification, capable of covering all historical textiles and ending the disorganized status in the field, with no manipulation needed. In this method, considering the differences between design and motif, any motif is introduced under the name of the main design, such as Shah Abbasi scattered or shrub tangled. Ultimately, this paper distinguished between the applied and effective terms of design and motif and created a reliable categorization, which put an end to subjectivity in scientific researches on future studies (report, comparative or approachoriented studies) about traditional textiles.