Sanatta ‘Özgün’ ve ‘Orijinal’ Ayrımı

Abstract

The most common definition of the word ‘original’ in Turkish is “unique” and the definition of ‘unique’ is made as "original", so the word original and the word unique are considered synonymous. However, although the words original and unique share the essence of the meaning to a large extent, because they differ in the secondary aspects they are considered 'close synonyms'. On the other hand, close synonymy is not sufficient for the condition that two separate words can be used interchangeably in every context. Since there are cases where the words "original" and "unique" cannot be used interchangeably, especially in the field of art, it has been considered that it is necessary to determine the correct usage conditions by comparing the etymological and dictionary meanings of both concepts used for characterizing something. As a result of the analysis of the etymological and dictionary meanings, the necessary conditions for the word original are to satisfy the characteristics of "first", "origin" and "beginning". The essential conditions for the word unique are having the features of "new", "exemplary" and "consciousness". In addition to these, since the definition, meaning, and function of art have changed over the centuries, it has been understood that it is necessary to evaluate the works of art "periodically" and "through the relationship they establish with their predecessors" to determine what is original and what is unique in art. In the light of the fundamental elements of the words original and unique identified in the first chapter, what can be called original and what can be called unique in art in the flow of art history is examined through representative examples that meet their periods in the second chapter. This chapter begins with the Primitive Period, which indicates the temporal "first" where the "first" symbolic examples are found, and it concludes with determining Dadaism as the closest movement or style to the primitive period in terms of originality. The information gained from the semantic and historical analysis of the original and unique determines the basis of artistic research in the third chapter. Accordingly, it has been understood that by using reflection and copying in personal art practices, when the "unique" takes the "original" as an "origin" and becomes "exemplary", the unique can be unlimited: In case the "new” is revealed not as a result of coincidence but by targeting with "consciousness", which is one of the fundamental elements of the unique. The original is the first, the origin, and the beginning that has no ties, and it is only when the original exists it is possible to create unique art through a connection to it. This art production can be unique if it reveals the new with consciousness and becomes exemplary for future art productions. Thus, a proposition has been developed to analyze the semantic confusion created, especially in the field of art, by the 'synonymous' use of the words original and unique even though they are 'close synonyms': With a “conscious” connection with the original, which carries the qualities of “first”, “origin” and “beginning”, infinite unique works of art can be given by creating something “new” when becomes “exemplary” for subsequent art productions in the field of art.