Artistic culture as a phenomenon and subject of study. Culture as a subject of research

Interest in folklore and folk culture arises all over the world, and not just in Russia at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries, during the period of formation and flourishing of romanticism, which in a certain sense rehabilitates and idealizes antiquity. Romanticism criticized the process of isolation and hypertrophy of professional artistic creativity, taking as a model the past, when art was created by the whole people. Romanticism was the starting point for the development of the science of folk art, its nature, peculiarities of poetics and functions.

Folk oral poetic art in all its diversity of forms began to be associated with folk culture as a whole. Although this was a one-sided and incomplete view of folk culture, it became the most widespread until the beginning of the 20th century. Samples of this creativity provided an opportunity to compare, study and identify its typological, social, and aesthetic features.

In Russia, interest in oral and poetic creativity as a phenomenon of spiritual life begins in the 19th century. G.V. Florovsky considers one of the main reasons for this interest to be the awakening of historical feeling - one of the most characteristic features of Russian culture of the 19th century. 1 . During this period, there was a somewhat superficial attitude towards history, a sentimental idealization of the past. Nevertheless, the actualization of the problems of folk culture was a consequence of the awakening of historical and national consciousness. Through folk traditional culture, the discovery of the national-ethnic uniqueness of the mentality of the Russian nation took place. The fundamental works of A. N. Afanasyev, M. Zabylin, I. M. Snegirev, A. V. Tereshchenko, N. I. Kostomarov, and other scientists seemed to be the factual basis for the development of problems of folk art. Most works not only described everyday life, everyday culture, customs and practices, and festive behavior, but also provided literary texts of fairy tales, beliefs, songs, and rituals.

Folk artistic culture as a subject of study 2\_

It was in the middle of the 19th century. The first discussions unfolded about the Russian idea, Russian character, and the special path of Russia’s historical development. Here the points of view of Slavophiles (K. and I. Aksakov, I. Kireevsky) and Westerners (P. Chaadaev, P. Annenkov, T. Granovsky, K. Kavelin) collided. The whole history of the 19th century. is inseparable from the search for the content of the concepts “people”, “nationality”, “ethnicity”, “nation”, “national identity”. This period was also characterized by the Russian people’s intense search for their place among other peoples of the world and, of course, their awareness of their role in the development of the cultures of the East and West.

In this regard, there is a need to understand in a broad historical context the question of the relationship between the folk culture of Russia and world culture, to comprehend its contacts with it. A kind of turning point and a new starting point in the history of such contacts was the baptism of Russia, when, according to Florovsky, through Christianity, Ancient Russia entered into creative and living interaction with the entire surrounding cultural world 1 . This interaction has been and is assessed very ambiguously, remaining one of the most difficult problems of historical science until recently.

Particular interest in folk culture was formed in Russia in the years 1830-1840, when the question of its relations with the West again became relevant. It was then that the question of Russia’s place in world history was raised with all determination. The contrast to the Romano-Germanic world required an in-depth study of the historical fate of the Russian people. The fundamental “History of the Russian State” in 12 volumes (M., 1816-1829) by N. Karamzin was one of the first attempts to answer this question. Slavophiles, in particular I.S., also gave a unique answer. and K.S. Aksakovs, I.V. and P. V. Kireevsky, A. S. Khomyakov, whose works not only idealized pre-Petrine Russia, its patriarchy, conservatism, Orthodoxy, but also contributed to the expansion of knowledge about folk culture and people's life.

The worldview of the Slavophiles, associated with the idealization of pre-Petrine Russia, was provoked by Russia’s desire for planetary contacts with the whole world, which was stimulated first by Christianity, and then by the rapid assimilation of the values of the Western world, begun by the reforms of Peter the Great. From the contradiction between the defense of identity and the desire for unification

Cm.: Florovsky G. Paths of Russian theology. K., 1991. P. 232.

1 See: Florovsky G. Paths of Russian theology. S. 4.

Chapter!

with the whole world and an intense spiritual, religious, state and secular life arises in Russia.

The activation of thought about folk art resulted in the emergence of special studies on its history. Folklore studies emerge, and studies on Russian mythology appear 1 . Throughout the 19th century. Various sciences turn to the study of folk art: history, philology, ethnography, art history. Scientific methods determined the pluralism of scientific approaches and reflected the historical features of scientific thinking of the 19th century, for example, the underestimation of humanitarian knowledge. Nevertheless, many researchers expanded the boundaries of research and considered folk art in a broad cultural context. It can be argued that it was precisely the need to study folk art that stimulated the need to develop cultural studies, which will be finally realized in the 20th century. The question of the genesis of folk culture required the study of the archaic, manifested in myth, religion, ritual, holiday, and rite.

Since in the 19th century. Culturology proper did not yet exist; it was necessary to find a field that would include the cultural aspects of folk art. Perhaps such a discipline was ethnography, within the boundaries of which the study of general issues of folk culture, as well as folk art, was undertaken 2. True, for a long time this science remained quite descriptive, claiming to study the facts, life, rituals and customs of a particular people.

It is important to note that in the 19th century, when considering folk art, folklore, in fact, they were considering folk artistic culture. In this regard, it is interesting to cite one of the definitions of folklore, given at the end of the 19th century. VLesevich. In his opinion, folklore “includes fables, fairy tales, legends, tales, songs, riddles, children’s games and sayings, witchcraft, divination, wedding and other rituals, meteorological and other signs, proverbs, sayings, sayings, stories about the moon, stars , eclipses, comets and all kinds of superstitions: distinctions between light and hard days, stories about witches, ghouls, vovkuls, viyas, etc. - in a word, everything that the people inherited from their fathers

and grandfathers through oral tradition" 1. And then a definition of Folklore is given as the "most ancient phase" of culture, preserving the "historical foundations of everything that makes up our spiritual life." 2. Obviously, we are talking here, in the modern sense, about folklore as an artistic folk culture as a whole.Certainty in the relationship between these concepts arises only in the second half of the 20th century.

While studying folk art, researchers raised questions that were relevant specifically for folk artistic culture. In particular, they were interested not only in the development of folk art, but also in the processes of its social functioning. This was inherent in the works of A.N. Afanasyev, F.I. Buslaev, A.N. Veselovsky, the classical works of B.M. and Yu.M. Sokolovs, V.Ya.Propp, D.K.Zelenin, M.Kazadovsky, L.V.Bakushinsky, P.G.Bogatyrev, M.M.Bakhtin, E.V.Pomerantseva, N.I.Tolstoy, A. B. Saltykova and others. However, from the 20s to the 60s of the XX century. Russian folkloristics, defining its subject, as if in contrast to its previous history, increasingly differentiated the subject of its study to oral poetic creativity and the art of words.

/The study of folk artistic culture today is entering a new stage in its history: from disparate studies of folklore, arts and crafts, amateur performances, folk costume, and folk holidays, varying in scope and completeness, it is moving on to a systematic presentation of the most general issues of the theory and history of folk art culture as a holistic, syncretic, complex phenomenon, included in the fabric of the spiritual life of the people and serving as an important component of this life.

Naturally, the question arises about the place and characteristics of folk culture among other types of culture - elite and mass. Only by correlating them, identifying what is specific, can one open up broad opportunities for deepening knowledge about each type of culture. Ultimately, one or another type of culture relates differently to folk, professional and mass art. Depending on the value orientations of a culture, both its status and the hierarchical relationships between types of culture turn out to be.

1 See: Azadovsky M.K. History of Russian folklore. T. 1. M., 1958; T. 2. M., 1963.

2 See: Pypin A. History of Russian ethnography: In 4 volumes. St. Petersburg, 1890-1892.

1 Lesevich V. Folklore and its study//In memory of V.G. Belinsky. Literarya collection compiled from the works of Russian writers. M, 1899. WITH. 343.

2 Right there. WITH. 344.

ChapterI

When studying each of the layers of folk culture, a methodology that considers their development and functioning in relation to the nature of the features of folk culture inherent in it at one or another stage of history will be truly fruitful. Only within the framework of this correlation can the question of the social functions of folk culture as a whole be raised.

So, Firstly, it is necessary to state the fact of greater knowledge of Russian folk artistic culture and the presence of a huge number of source studies and fundamental works. Secondly, The historically established international connections of Russian culture with the national cultures of all the peoples inhabiting Russia and neighboring states make it possible, to a certain extent, to extrapolate conclusions and patterns in general to any other culture, including non-Slavic. Third, Russian culture due to its outstanding contribution to the world artistic treasury during the 19th-20th centuries. remained one of the most attractive in terms of knowledge of its mentality and influence on other cultures.

By distinguishing three periods in Russian folk culture (pagan, archaic and urban), we focus our main attention on the modern stage of its development. This means that we do not associate the fate of folk culture only with its archaic forms. Nevertheless, the archaic layer of culture is the “golden” core of folk culture.

Throughout the history of Russia, while archaic culture was preserved and did not experience contradictions, restraints, or restrictions in its development, it developed as the dominant of artistic culture. This is fully related to medieval Russian culture, to the culture of pre-Petrine Rus', to the culture of the Golden and Silver Ages, etc. Folk culture continued to form a significant layer in Russian artistic culture even at the stage when various subcultures began to emerge in the depths of archaic culture, replacing each other, cultivating various personal and social values, which were then expressed in professional and mass art.

Of course there are other things too. Modern Russian folk culture is connected by its origins not only with the pagan and archaic world, but also with the world of European and Byzantine values, having inherited and developed them in its system of artistic traditions. Several directions in development can be noted

Folk artistic culture as a subject of study 25

Russian folk culture: interaction and mutual assimilation of values with the peoples historically inhabiting Russia; assimilation of pagan values that preceded the introduction of Christianity in Rus', and their processing and adaptation to the new religious system; finally, active interaction and exchange of values with professional art. Similar p;13novector horizontal and vertical processes, coinciding or diverging in time, constitute the architectonics of the development of Russian folk culture.

LECTURE 1

FOLK ART CULTUREIN THE STRUCTURE OF SOCIETY CULTURE

^The artistic culture of society is a complex, multidimensional and multi-element formation/ By the mid-1990s, experts counted from 300 to 400 definitions of culture, in which attempts were made to more or less completeness to understand what culture is, its subject, structure, functions, patterns of development 1. The question seems justified: is it even possible to give it a definition that suits sociologists, philosophers, cultural scientists, educators, art historians, and representatives of a number of other sciences who study different historical types and layers of culture?

It is very likely that the answer to this question is predetermined by the very nature of the phenomenon, which acts as the general spiritual environment of human existence and activity. Artistic culture is part of a more general phenomenon - culture. It is also the environment into which a person enters from the moment of birth. At every stage of life, in every specific manifestation, a person in one way or another comes into contact with the world of artistic culture, with its certain aspects, layers, phenomena, institutions, carriers, performers, images, etc. 2. And again

1 See: Categories and concepts of cultural theory. M., 1985; Kroeber A., Kpakhon S. Culture. Critical analysis of concepts and functions. M., 1992; Sokolov E.V. The concept, essence and main functions of culture. L., 1989; Orlova E.A. Cultural anthropology: Textbook. M., 1995; Rozhdestvensky Yu.V. Introduction to cultural studies: Textbook. M, 1996.

All these questions are the subject of a special course in the history and theory of culture (cultural studies). This course covers them only to the extent dictated by its own objectives.

26 Chapter I . Lecture 1

Folk culture in the structure of the culture of society

questions arise: is culture as a whole reducible to a certain sum of its currently existing formations? What is the nature of their relationships at different stages of the history of culture and the history of Russia? What is the role and place of folk artistic culture in the life of society?

If we proceed from the idea of the parallel development of cultures of different types and social groups in modern artistic culture, it is likely that the origins of each of them must be sought in the most ancient, primary formation - folk culture. However, the relationship between culture as a whole and folk artistic culture does not exhaust all the richness of the relationships between their constituent parts, structures, and elements. Cultural formations that arise within the boundaries of each culture independently interact both vertically and horizontally with the formations of other cultures.

Each of the cultures and even each of its individual formations can be considered as fairly independent subsystems in production, conservation, reproduction and social functioning roving cultural values.

In addition to the complex relationships of elements and formations within cultures, each of which claims to be universal, universal, and a special role, there is also a system of more global relations between elite and popular cultures (subcultures), which appear throughout history in opposition to each other. Recently, their relationship with mass culture has worsened.

The relationship with the super-elite culture that has been dynamically emerging in recent decades, which has received the name “universal values,” is not simple and has not been fully clarified.

Different authors build the structure of society's culture in their own way. Professor A.I. Arnoldov, for example, believes: “Considering national culture in all the richness of its content and diversity of colors as a logical step in the development of world culture and a necessary contribution to universal human civilization, we can define it as a synthesis of nationally special, foreign and universal ( world), processed and mastered by the national 1 "1 The relationships of these layers of culture and their joint formations determine the dialectics of the development of culture as a whole.

Obviously, V artistic culture of modern society (see diagram 1) can be distinguished the following layers:

1 Arnoldov A.I. Introduction to cultural studies. P. 167.

The structure of artistic culture

Culturology is a young science (date of birth 1931) When the American professor Leslie White first taught a course on cultural studies at the University of Michigan. However, cultural studies became a subject of research long before this.

Since ancient times, philosophers have posed and discussed questions related to the study of culture, namely about the characteristics of the human way of life in comparison with the way of life of animals, about the development of knowledge and arts, about the differences between the customs and behavior of people in a civilized society and in “barbarian” tribes Ancient Greek thinkers did not use the term “culture”, but gave a meaning close to it to the Greek word enlightenment. In the Middle Ages, culture was considered mainly under the name of religion.

The Renaissance was marked by the cultivation of culture into religious and secular ones. Understanding the humanistic content of culture, and especially art. But only in the 18th century. - During the Enlightenment, the concept of culture entered the language of science and attracted the attention of inheritors as a designation of one of the most important spheres of human existence. One of the terms “culture” was coined by Herder (1744 - 1803). In his understanding, culture contains as its parts: language, science, craft, art, religion, family and state. In the 19th century Gradually, the need to develop the science of culture as a special scientific discipline began to be realized. And in the first half of the 20th century. The German scientist and philosopher Wilhelm Oswald in his book “System of Sciences” suggests the word “culturology” to denote the doctrine of culture.

Currently, cultural studies is a fundamental science and academic discipline, which has become one of the basic subjects of humanities education.

In a broad sense, cultural studies is now interpreted as a comprehensive humanitarian science, which covers the entire body of knowledge about culture and includes:

· -philosophy of culture
- theory of culture
-history of culture
-cultural anthropology
- sociology of culture
· -applied cultural studies
· -history of cultural studies students.

In a narrow sense, culturology is understood as a general theory of culture, on the basis of which culturological disciplines are developed that study individual forms of culture such as art, science, morality, law, etc. Particular culturological sciences relate to it in the same way as individual physical sciences, for example thermodynamics with general physics .

Every science has philosophical problems. They concern its ideological foundations and methodological principles of scientific knowledge. Philosophy of culture is the sphere of philosophical problems of cultural studies, which includes questions about the essence of culture, prospects, goals and fate of its development, its role in society. Life and historical progress of mankind, etc. Cultural history studies the cultural and historical process in different countries and regions of the world. It describes the cultural achievements of peoples, clarifies the uniqueness of their cultures, collects, analyzes and summarizes the factual material on which researchers rely when developing the history of culture.

Cultural anthropology examines human life in a particular cultural environment and examines its impact on the formation and development of personality. The focus is on the dependence of the psyche and spirit of people on the characteristics of the culture in which they live.

Sociology of culture brings to the fore issues related to the analysis of the relationship between culture and the social, economic, and political life of society. Culture is practiced as a system of means by which the joint life and activities of people are organized and regulated. As one of the most important factors in the organization and migration of social groups existing in society and society as a whole.

Applied cultural studies is distinguished by its practical orientation. She deals with issues of the work of cultural institutions (museums, libraries, clubs) and organizational cultural events (festivals, holidays), problems of management in the field of culture and cultural policy of the state.

History culturologist. Teaching is important as a source of knowledge about the process of developing knowledge about culture. Know their history code. A revolution is necessary in order to assess the current state of cultural development. Summarizing what has been said, it is worth noting that cultural studies is:

1. Science, which sees culture as the subject of scientific analysis - a unique complex object, a global phenomenon that has no localization in time and space.
2. Integrative science or meta-science, which systematizes and integrates the knowledge about culture that has been accumulated by various special sciences about culture: art history, literary criticism, etc. and comprehends the position of knowledge about culture at a higher level compared to the special sciences.

What is the reason for such a variety of interpretations? First of all, culture expresses the depth and immeasurability of human existence. To the extent that man is inexhaustible, diverse, culture is multifaceted and multifaceted. In each of the above interpretations of culture, individual aspects of such a complex phenomenon as culture are recorded, although one-sided definitions often lead to very controversial conclusions when, for example, science, religion, and negative aspects of social life are excluded from the sphere of culture.

Attempts to understand culture were made long before the science of cultural studies emerged. The desire to understand and define the phenomenon of culture laid the foundation for the emergence of this science, or rather, it was the source that fed the search for its initial concepts.

The concept of “culture” (Latin – cultura) was born in Ancient Rome and originally meant “cultivation, cultivation of the land,” i.e. it was associated with farming, agriculture. Ancient Roman orator and philosopher Marcus Tullius Cicero in the work “Tusculan Manuscripts” (45 BC), the concept of “culture”, meaning cultivation of the soil, was used in a figurative sense, as the cultivation of the human mind in the process of training and education. Believing that a deep mind arises through philosophical reasoning, he characterized philosophy as the culture of the mind. In Ancient Greece, the term “paideia” (Greek pais - child), close to the concept of “culture”, was also used, denoting the process of raising a husband from an unintelligent child, the process of training citizens in the ancient polis (city-state). It is noteworthy that already in these first interpretations of culture, its two-way functioning was noted: the focus of culture on the world (cultivation, humanization of nature) and on man (cultivation of all the properties of social man).

In the Middle Ages (V-XV centuries AD), culture began to be viewed as a “cult”, “veneration” (of God). The man of this era perceived culture as something eternal, given from the beginning, existing outside of time and space. Culture was understood as something that had become, as a result of activity, embodied in codes, embodied in public institutions, primarily in universities.

The word “culture” came into philosophical use only in the 18th century, ceasing to be a word of everyday speech, precisely because there was a need for an integrative definition of what and how a person does and how it affects him. In the teachings of S. Pufendorf, G. Vico, C. Helvetius, I. G. Herder, I. Kant, man is defined as a being endowed with reason and the ability to create, and the history of mankind is considered as its self-development, thanks to objective activity. It was during the Enlightenment that an awareness of culture was formed in its difference from nature and in its relationship with it. Culture is seen as supernatural education that characterizes the life of Homo sapiens, as opposed to the existence of an animal or savage.

Modern interpretations of culture, as already mentioned, can be very different. Thus, prominent domestic researchers in the 20th century defined culture both as a set of values (V.P. Tugarinov), and as a way of society’s activities (E.S. Markaryan, E.S. Sokolov, Z.I. Fainburg), and as a system signs and symbols (Yu. M. Lotman, B. A. Uspensky), and as a lifestyle program (V. Sagatovsky), etc. At the same time, it is easy to notice that all these definitions of culture are the essence of definitions of human activity and the person himself as an actor. The connection between activity and culture is the initial one, determining its explanation and study.

Human activity in this case is understood as a versatile, free activity of a person that has a certain result. Human activity is free in the sense that it goes beyond instinct. A person is capable of such activity that is not limited by nature, by the boundaries of the species, while the behavior of animals is genetically programmed. Thus, a bee will never be able to weave a web, and a spider will never be able to take nectar from a flower. The beaver will build a dam, but will never explain how he did it, and will not be able to make a tool. A person can move from one form of activity to another, creating himself and creating culture.

However, not every human activity leads to the creation of culture. Reproduction, copying of known rules, samples (for example, monotonous mass production, everyday colloquial speech) is also an activity, but it does not lead to the creation of culture, but creative human activity, which is impossible without reason, without progress towards meaning, without creating something new.

The creative abilities of a person, being his essential forces, are not the same in the degree of development, since there are genetic differences between people and the conditions of their existence are different. There are two levels of human creative abilities.

The first level of creativity lies in the ability to improvise, to create new options based on already given elements and rules. This is inherent in every person, but to varying degrees. This level of creativity is realized, for example, in masterpieces of handicraft, folklore, refined literary speech, technical solutions such as rationalization proposals, etc. We can call this creativity within tradition.

The second level of creative activity is manifested by updating elements and rules, expressing new content. It is inherent in a few individuals, although the number of people who have the potential ability to create something radically new is much greater than the number of people who have the opportunity to develop and realize it under the influence of social conditions. At this level of creativity, fundamental scientific discoveries are made, technical solutions such as inventions appear, classical works of art are created, religious doctrines are put forward, etc. In other words, we are talking about creating something new not only for an individual, a specific society, but for all of humanity.

It is in creativity that the generic, socially active essence of a person is most fully and holistically revealed. In this regard, the figurative formula of culture proposed by B. Pasternak in response to the question “What is a person?” is quite productive. from the questionnaire of the German magazine “Magnum”: “Culture is a fruitful existence. This definition is sufficient. Let man change creatively over the centuries, and cities, states, gods, art will appear by themselves, as a result, with the naturalness with which fruits ripen on a fruit tree.”

As a way of realizing the essential powers of man, culture permeates all areas of human activity and cannot be reduced to just one of them. Culture (in the broadest sense of the word) is everything created by the hands and spirit of man (material and spiritual culture), that is, it is “second nature,” in contrast to the primordial nature.

Bibliography

1. Golovashin, V.A. Culturology: textbook / V.A. Golovashin. – Tambov: Tamb publishing house. state tech. University, 2008. – 204 p.

2. Dedyulina M.A., Papchenko E.V., Pomigueva E.A. Lecture notes on cultural studies. Textbook allowance. Publishing house of technology. Institute of Southern Federal University. – Taganrog, 2009. – 121 p.

3. Culture and cultural studies: dictionary / comp. and ed. A.I. Kravchenko. – M.: Academic Project; Ekaterinburg: Business book, 2003. – 709

4. Culturology / E. V. Golovneva, N. V. Goryutskaya, N. P. Demenkova, N. V. Rybakova. – Omsk: Omsk State Technical University Publishing House, 2005. – 84 p.

5. Culturology: Textbook. for students tech. universities / Coll. auto; Ed. N. G. Bagdasaryan. - 3rd ed., rev. and additional - M.: Higher. school, 2001. pp. 38-41.

6. Culturology: Textbook / Ed. Yu.N. Solonina, M.S. Kagan. - M.: Higher Education, 2010. - 566 p.

7. Culturology: Textbook / Ed. prof. G.V. Dracha. - M.: Alfa-M, 2003. - 432 p.

8. Culturology: Textbook / Compiled and responsible. editor A.A. Radugin. - M.: Center, 2001. - 304 p.

9. Rudnev V.P. Dictionary of culture of the twentieth century. - M.: Agraf, 1997. - 384 p.

The concept of “culture” (Latin - cultura) was born in Ancient Rome and originally meant “cultivation, cultivation of the land,” i.e. it was associated with farming, agriculture. The ancient Roman orator and philosopher Marcus Tulius Cicero in his work “Tusculan Manuscripts” (45 BC) used the concept of “culture”, meaning cultivation of the soil, in a figurative sense, as the cultivation of the human mind in the process of training and education. Believing that a deep mind arises through philosophical reasoning, he characterized philosophy as the culture of the mind. In Ancient Greece, the term “paideia” (Greek pais - child), close to the concept of “culture”, was also used, denoting the process of raising a husband from an unintelligent child, the process of training citizens in the ancient polis (city-state). It is noteworthy that already in these first interpretations of culture, its two-way functioning was noted: the focus of culture on the world (cultivation, humanization of nature) and on man (cultivation of all the properties of social man).

The word “culture” came into philosophical use only in the 18th century, ceasing to be a word of everyday speech, precisely because there was a need for an integrative definition of what and how a person does and how it affects him. In the teachings of S. Pufendorf, G. Vico, C. Helvetius, I. G. Herder, I. Kant, man is defined as a being endowed with reason and the ability to create, and the history of mankind is considered as its self-development, thanks to objective activity. It was during the Enlightenment that an awareness of culture was formed in its difference from nature and in its relationship with it. Culture is considered as a supernatural formation that characterizes the life of Homo sapiens, in contrast to the existence of an animal or savage.

Modern interpretations of culture, as already mentioned, can be very different. Thus, prominent domestic researchers in the 20th century defined culture both as a set of values (V.P. Tugarinov), and as a way of society’s activities (E.S. Markaryan, E.S. Sokolov, Z.I. Fainburg), and as a system signs and symbols (Yu.M. Lotman, B.A. Uspensky), and as a lifestyle program (V. Sagatovsky), etc. At the same time, it is not difficult to notice that all these definitions of culture are the essence of definitions of human activity and the person himself as an actor. The connection between activity and culture is the initial one, determining its explanation and study.

However, not every human activity leads to the creation of culture. Reproduction, copying of known rules, samples (for example, monotonous mass production, everyday colloquial speech) is also an activity, but it does not lead to the creation of culture, but the creative activity of man, which is impossible without reason, without progress towards meaning, without the creation of something new.

In modern social science, the concept of “culture” is one of the fundamental ones. It is difficult to name another word that would have such a variety of semantic shades. In ordinary usage, “culture” serves as an evaluative concept and refers to personality traits that would be more accurately called not culture, but culture (politeness, delicacy, education, good manners, etc.). The concept of “culture” is used to characterize certain historical eras (ancient culture), specific societies, nationalities, nations (Mayan culture), as well as specific areas of activity or life (work culture, political culture, artistic culture, etc.). By culture, researchers also understand the world of meanings, a system of values, a way of activity, symbolic activity, the sphere of self-reproduction of the individual, the way of development of society, its spiritual life, etc. According to some estimates, to date there are more than 500 definitions of culture.
What is the reason for such a variety of interpretations? First of all, culture expresses the depth and immeasurability of human existence. To the extent that man is inexhaustible, diverse, culture is multifaceted and multifaceted. In each of the above interpretations of culture, individual aspects of such a complex phenomenon as culture are recorded, although one-sided definitions often lead to very controversial conclusions when, for example, science, religion, and negative aspects of social life are excluded from the sphere of culture.
Attempts to understand culture were made long before the science of cultural studies emerged. The desire to understand and define the phenomenon of culture laid the foundation for the emergence of this science, or rather, it was the source that fed the search for its initial concepts.
The concept of “culture” (Latin - cultura) was born in Ancient Rome and originally meant “cultivation, cultivation of the land,” i.e. it was associated with farming, agriculture. The ancient Roman orator and philosopher Marcus Tulius Cicero in his work “Tusculan Manuscripts” (45 BC) used the concept of “culture”, meaning cultivation of the soil, in a figurative sense, as the cultivation of the human mind in the process of training and education. Believing that a deep mind arises through philosophical reasoning, he characterized philosophy as the culture of the mind. In Ancient Greece, the term “paideia” (Greek pais - child), close to the concept of “culture”, was also used, denoting the process of raising a husband from an unintelligent child, the process of training citizens in the ancient polis (city-state). It is noteworthy that already in these first interpretations of culture, its two-way functioning was noted: the focus of culture on the world (cultivation, humanization of nature) and on man (cultivation of all the properties of social man).
In the Middle Ages (V-XV centuries AD), culture began to be viewed as a “cult”, “veneration” (of God). The man of this era perceived culture as something eternal, given from the beginning, existing outside of time and space. Culture was understood as something that had become, as a result of activity, embodied in codes, embodied in public institutions, primarily in universities.
The word “culture” came into philosophical use only in the 18th century, ceasing to be a word of everyday speech, precisely because there was a need for an integrative definition of what and how a person does and how it affects him. In the teachings of S. Pufendorf, G. Vico, C. Helvetius, I. G. Herder, I. Kant, man is defined as a being endowed with reason and the ability to create, and the history of mankind is considered as its self-development, thanks to objective activity. It was during the Enlightenment that an awareness of culture was formed in its difference from nature and in its relationship with it. Culture is considered as a supernatural formation that characterizes the life of Homo sapiens, in contrast to the existence of an animal or savage.
Modern interpretations of culture, as already mentioned, can be very different. Thus, prominent domestic researchers in the 20th century defined culture both as a set of values (V.P. Tugarinov), and as a way of society’s activities (E.S. Markaryan, E.S. Sokolov, Z.I. Fainburg), and as a system signs and symbols (Yu. M. Lotman, B. A. Uspensky), and as a lifestyle program (V. Sagatovsky), etc. At the same time, it is not difficult to notice that all these definitions of culture are the essence of definitions of human activity and the person himself as an actor. The connection between activity and culture is the initial one, determining its explanation and study.
Human activity in this case is understood as a versatile, free activity of a person that has a certain result. Human activity is free in the sense that it goes beyond instinct. A person is capable of such activity that is not limited by nature, by the boundaries of the species, while the behavior of animals is genetically programmed. Thus, a bee will never be able to weave a web, and a spider will never be able to take nectar from a flower. The beaver will build a dam, but will never explain how he did it, and will not be able to make a tool. A person can move from one form of activity to another, creating himself and creating culture.
However, not every human activity leads to the creation of culture. Reproduction, copying of known rules, samples (for example, monotonous mass production, everyday colloquial speech) is also an activity, but it does not lead to the creation of culture, but the creative activity of man, which is impossible without reason, without progress towards meaning, without the creation of something new.
The creative abilities of a person, being his essential forces, are not the same in the degree of development, since there are genetic differences between people and the conditions of their existence are different. There are two levels of human creative abilities.
The first level of creativity lies in the ability to improvise, to create new options based on already given elements and rules. This is inherent in every person, but to varying degrees. This level of creativity is realized, for example, in masterpieces of handicraft, folklore, refined literary speech, technical solutions such as rationalization proposals, etc. We can call this creativity within tradition.
The second level of creative activity is manifested by updating elements and rules, expressing new content. It is inherent in a few individuals, although the number of people who have the potential ability to create something radically new is much greater than the number of people who have the opportunity to develop and realize it under the influence of social conditions. At this level of creativity, fundamental scientific discoveries are made, technical solutions such as inventions appear, classical works of art are created, religious doctrines are put forward, etc. In other words, we are talking about creating something new not only for an individual, a specific society, but for all of humanity.
It is in creativity that the generic, socially active essence of a person is most fully and holistically revealed. In this regard, the figurative formula of culture proposed by B. Pasternak in response to the question “What is a person?” is quite productive. from the questionnaire of the German magazine “Magnum”: “Culture is a fruitful existence. This definition is sufficient. Let man change creatively over the centuries, and cities, states, gods, art will appear by themselves, as a result, with the naturalness with which fruits ripen on a fruit tree.”
As a way of realizing the essential powers of man, culture permeates all areas of human activity and cannot be reduced to just one of them. Culture (in the broadest sense of the word) is everything created by the hands and spirit of man (material and spiritual culture), that is, it is “second nature,” in contrast to the primordial nature.

Review questions

1. What is the meaning of cultural studies in the concept of “culture”?
2. Are there absolutely uncultured people?
3. How are culture and society interconnected?
4. “Culture is language, beliefs, aesthetic tastes, knowledge, professional skills and all kinds of customs” (A. Radcliffe-Brown). What is wrong with this definition?