Lecture. Modern culture and trends in its development

Current cultural situation:

· Eurocentrism and Westernization have become the basis of world culture;

· rationalism,

· subjectivism,

· Americanism – expansion of the norms and values ​​of American culture,

· change of the model of cognition – gradual abandonment of the traditional orientation towards knowledge and transition to an information model, transformation of knowledge into unified and impersonal information; "Diagnosis of our time" (Karl Mannheim) – this is the formation of a global information space, where general stereotypes, general assessments, general parameters of behavior dominate,

· pragmatic tendency - everything that is done must have a practical orientation, a measure of commensurate modernity - calculation, benefit and benefit,

· economiccentrism – the desire to see the most essential in economic processes,

· recognition of the absolute importance of technology and technical progress,

· strict specialization,

accelerating progress

· democratization,

· the tendency of universalization of world culture and particularism,

· the desire for globalization in all spheres of human life,

· transformation of human life into a process of communication,

· in relation to the world, the importance of the subject is exaggerated, the cult of individual success,

· cultural pluralism – the coexistence of different cultural values.

Westernization – penetration of American culture into the European continent in the second half of the twentieth century.

Globalization – the process of the development of any phenomenon into a phenomenon on a global scale, the prerequisites are the emergence of a single world infrastructure, a supranational level of standardization and unification, a distinctive feature of the modern cultural situation, gives rise to a contradictory trend - ethnicization, a return to the traditional style of behavior, when tribalism comes first ethnic isolation. Global culture was formed in the 20th century. Prerequisite The process of globalization is the creation of supranational institutions.

Modern, modernism - one of the main trends in European culture. XIX – beginning XX centuries, the last monological cultural and historical era with a clearly expressed system of hierarchical value systems, manifested in all aspects of human activity. Abstractionism – a modernist movement in the art of the 20th century, which fundamentally abandoned the depiction of real objects in painting, sculpture and graphics. Avant-garde – a set of experimental, modernist, emphatically unusual, exploratory endeavors in the art of the 20th century. Pop Art – a direction in fine avant-garde art of the 1950s-1960s, “revealing the aesthetic values” of samples of mass production. An image borrowed from popular culture is placed in a different context: the scale and material change; a technique or technical method is exposed; information interference is detected, etc. Surrealism – a movement in literature and art of the 20th century that emerged in the 1920s. The general features of the art of surrealism are: absurd fantasy, alogism, paradoxical combinations of forms, visual instability and variability of images (S. Dali, R. Magritte). Cubism – an avant-garde movement in fine art of the first quarter of the 20th century, whose representatives depict the objective world in the form of combinations of regular geometric volumes: cube, sphere, cylinder, cone (P. Picasso, Barque).

Modernization of cultural life – modernization (fr. newest, modern) has several meanings:

· modernism – a complex of avant-garde phenomena in the culture of the first half of the twentieth century,

· modernism - one of the main directions of European culture of the mid-nineteenth - early twentieth centuries. The last monologue era with a clearly expressed system of hierarchical value systems, manifested in all aspects of human activity,

· postmodernism – a broad cultural movement of the last 30 years of the twentieth century, a reaction to the innovation of modernism, the desire to include in contemporary art the entire experience of world artistic practice by citing it,

· modernization – complex and diverse processes of cultural transformation, innovative changes,

· modernization – a revolutionary transition from pre-industrial to industrial society through comprehensive reforms. Changes of the last 50 years, the processes of bringing any social education into line with modern standards. The method of entry of backward countries into the world economic system.

Modernization theories are among the most influential areas of Western “development sociology” today. The main attention is paid to the problems of developing countries, their transition from agricultural to economically developed ones.

In the 50-60s. XX century the concept of modernization was understood as the influence of developed countries on social processes in developing countries through an increase in economic “aid” - the transfer of modern technologies and public investments to the “third world” countries. But the “help” turned out to increase internal social contradictions and inequality, led to a slowdown in the rate of economic development, increased unemployment, poverty, and increased social tension.

Concept "lagging" modernization argues that the direct and formal borrowing of “rational” Western socio-economic models, not supported by social institutions and socio-cultural structures, leads to an “irrational” industrial society that absorbs more resources than it has a social “return”.

Two types of modernization:

· organic – the moment of the country’s own development, prepared by the entire course of previous evolution, begins with culture, and not with the economy,

· inorganic - a response to an external challenge from more developed countries, a method of catch-up development undertaken by the government in order to overcome backwardness and avoid foreign dependence. Done by purchasing foreign equipment, patents, borrowing foreign technologies, inviting specialists, attracting investments, it begins not with culture, but with economics and politics.

Scientific and technological revolution – a set of qualitative changes in technology, technology and production organization, occurring under the influence of major scientific achievements and discoveries and having a certain impact on the socio-economic conditions of public life; processes that began in the 1940-1950s. in the development of science and technology, which caused the transformation of science into a decisive factor in sociocultural development. For modern stage of scientific and technological revolution characteristic processes:

· a new structure of the social division of labor, where scientific activity becomes one of the leading elements,

· transformation of science into a direct productive force

· radical transformation of objects of labor, instruments of production and workers,

· use of fundamentally new types of technology.

Particularism– practice of cultural isolation, political disunity and fragmentation; movement towards the isolation and separation of individual territorial units of the state.

Contradictions of modern culture - increased individual freedom and violence; elitism and mass character, pluralism and unification.

Modern Western culture – spirit of entrepreneurship, dynamism, modernism and postmodernism, scientific and technological revolution, computerization, global problems, “consumer society” and its vices (cult of individual success, lack of spirituality, asocial tendencies, drug addiction, crime, terrorism).

Trends in modern world sociocultural development – the formation of a new socio-cultural stratification of the bulk of the population, the formation of a large elite stratum of highly qualified international specialists, the reduction of mass secondary education to the level of mastering an elementary “picture of the world”.

Universalism of culture – ideological orientation towards the rapprochement of cultures, their synthesis. Representatives of this concept, despite the diversity of cultures, believe that there is a single line of universal human culture.

Ecumenical movement - arose at the beginning of the 20th century. movement for the unification of all Christian denominations, with the goal of: strengthening the influence of religion; resistance to the process of secularization; and the development of a general Christian social program suitable for believers living in countries with different social systems.

Development of world culture in the 20th century. is a complex and contradictory process. It was influenced by a number of factors:

Two world wars and several local ones;

Dividing the world into two camps;

The establishment and fall of fascist regimes in a number of countries;

Revolutionary pro-communist movement;

Collapse of the socialist system, etc.

All this made its own adjustments to the world cultural and historical process. In the 20th century, out of four types of cultural activities

1. religious;

2. actually cultural:

a) theoretical-scientific,

b) aesthetic and artistic,

c) technical and industrial;

3. political;

4. socio-economic.

The socio-economic sphere has received the greatest development. At this time it was stormy process of industrialization of culture, which manifested itself both in the development of science and technology, and in the emergence of technical branches of culture, as well as in the industrial production of works of literature and art.

The scientific and technological revolution has entered a new stage of its development. Today, the problems of automation and computerization of production are being solved. But the scientific and technological revolution had not only positive, but also negative consequences. It led to the formulation of the question of human survival, which was reflected in artistic creativity.

The industrialization of culture led to the movement of the center of world cultural progress to the most economically developed country - the United States. Using its industrial power, the United States gradually expanded its influence in the world. American stereotypes of thinking and cultural values ​​are being imposed. This was especially clearly reflected in the development of world cinema and music. The expansion of the United States created the preconditions for establishing a monopoly in the field of culture. This forced many European and Eastern countries to intensify efforts to preserve their cultural and national traditions. However, this problem still remains unresolved. This seems problematic, especially with modern means of communication.

Exacerbation of social contradictions in the 20th century. contributed politicization of culture. This was expressed in its ideologization, in the political content of works of literature and art, in their transformation into means of propaganda, in the use of scientific and technological achievements for military-political purposes, as well as in the personal participation of cultural figures in socio-political movements. All this led, to a certain extent, to the dehumanization of world art.

1. Prospects for the development of world culture

The future of culture is being laid today. Right now, radical changes are taking place in people's lives, which open up unprecedented opportunities and create unprecedented dangers. Which of the modern trends in social development will be of decisive importance for the culture of the future? Firstly, it should be noted that the coming decades will be characterized by the accelerating development of the scientific and technological revolution. There will continue to be a steady trend towards replacing scarce raw materials with the most widespread desire to save the most important components of the production process: materials, energy, human labor. In the near future, automation will cover the entire production process from start to finish. New areas and types of production activities will become widespread. One of the decisive places among them will be taken by bioengineering and biotechnology. The scope of human production activity will expand: widespread exploration of the world's oceans and space will become possible.

Spheres of intellectual labor will increasingly turn into the main branches of material production. The process of intellectualization of labor will continue, i.e. The number of people engaged in mental work will increase. When enjoying free time, this social group is characterized by a desire to join cultural values. Consequently, the importance of culture in society will increase.

The second factor, defining trends in social and cultural development, can be called the growth of interdependence of the human community.

The one-world market, which developed back in the 19th century, has undergone changes. It has become global in the literal sense of the word, including all countries, regardless of region. Industrial relations between countries are very closely intertwined. Regional economic integration has received widespread development.

Throughout the 20th century. Transport developed rapidly. Communication media have also undergone a revolutionary transformation. Today, any information can be reproduced and delivered in the shortest possible time in any form: printed, visual, auditory. The availability of transmitted information and the possibility of its individual consumption have expanded.

The consequence of all this was the growing intensification of the exchange of cultural values. As a result of the expanded interaction of national and regional cultures, a qualitatively new situation arose. A world culture, a common fund of civilization, began to take shape more and more clearly. This process will take many decades, if not centuries, to complete. But the primary contours of such a fund are obvious. There is every reason to talk about the generally recognized achievements of world literature, fine arts, architecture, science, industrial knowledge and skills. All this contributes to the fact that humanity is increasingly aware of itself as a global community.

Interdependence is also manifested in the fact that, along with the cultural achievements of various peoples, the negative phenomena that exist among them are becoming increasingly widespread.

The third factor, which largely determines the trends in social and cultural development today, is emergence and aggravation of global problems. These are problems that affect all countries and peoples in one way or another, and the solution also depends on the joint efforts of countries and peoples.

In the middle of the 20th century. appeared on the planet the threat of omnicide - total self-destruction of the world community and life as a result of nuclear and environmental disasters. Global problems of our time are being studied global studies, considering the problems of man and his future. In this regard, modeling the future state and trends of global problems is becoming widespread.

In 1968, an independent community of leading scientists from around the world emerged, called the Club of Rome. Periodically, this organization makes reports that are addressed to all governments and peoples of the world. Already the first reports made a shocking impression.

One of the latest reports of the Club of Rome emphasizes that “never in history has humanity faced so many threats and dangers.”

The colossal growth of the world population, which increases by 1 million people every 4-5 days, leads to a huge increase in the demand for energy and raw materials. Uncontrolled population growth is outpacing the increase in food production. Moreover, it is happening in places where there is already high unemployment and severe poverty, and the task of providing millions of people with new jobs is difficult to achieve.

This applies primarily to developing countries, where the population is predominantly young, which will lead to further population growth. By the end of the first quarter of the 21st century. it will increase from 5 billion to 8.5 billion people. Industrialized countries will face the problem of slow population growth and the problem of aging. By the middle of the next century they will make up less than 20% of the world's population.

A situation is possible when the closed world of rich countries, armed with the latest and most powerful weapons, will confront hordes of hungry, unemployed and uneducated people from the outside. Living conditions in developing countries could trigger waves of mass migration on an unprecedented scale that may be difficult to contain.

The situation in the future may be further complicated by the fact that many of the factors that previously contributed to social cohesion have now weakened. These are religious faith, respect for the political process, faith in ideology and respect for the decision of the majority.

A serious problem is the huge stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. With the elimination of the confrontation between the USSR and the USA, the likelihood of its use decreased. However, the accumulation of such weapons is in itself extremely dangerous,

The solution to all these problems will require increased cooperation from humanity, and this is impossible without a serious shift in the scale of values, without a deep restructuring of the sphere of spiritual life and culture.

An important factor, which largely determines the future of culture, is what is already today fundamental changes are taking place in the consciousness of humanity. Their key point is the search for a holistic view of man in the context of his natural - in fact, cosmic - habitat. The first result of this search can be called formation of a new view of the world, i.e. new quality of culture.

a) The modern perception of the world is materialistic; the emerging concept of matter takes on a new meaning and is interpreted as a set of ordered energy flows that influence each other in their flow, giving rise to unpredictable processes and autonomously arising phenomena.

Test No. 1

By discipline: "Culturology"

on the topic of: "Main development trends
modern national culture"

Completed:
student group 67-22V
Kazakov V.A.
Checked:
Burkhanova N.A.

Almetyevsk, 2008

Introduction. 3
1. General trends and features of the development of modern domestic culture. 5
2. Politicization of Russian culture. 8
3. Features of the cultural process in modern Russia. 21
Conclusion. 24
List of used literature. 25

Introduction.

Modern Russian culture requires deep and multifaceted consideration. On the one hand, being in direct contact with the Russian culture of past centuries in the sense of at least simply a chronological “neighborhood,” modern culture is closely linked with accumulated cultural experience, even if it outwardly denies it or plays with it. On the other hand, being part of world culture, modern Russian culture absorbs, processes, and transforms trends related to the development of culture as a whole. Therefore, to understand the modern culture of Russia, it is necessary to turn to both the Russian culture of previous eras, and to world culture as a whole, to the general trends in the cultural development of our time.
It can also be noted that cultural problems are acquiring paramount importance today also because culture is a powerful factor in social development. “Permeating” all aspects of human life - from the foundations of material production and human needs to the greatest manifestations of the human spirit, culture plays an increasingly important role in achieving the program goals of the social movement, which includes the formation and strengthening of civil society, and the disclosure of human creative abilities, and building a legal state. Culture affects all spheres of social and individual life - work, everyday life, leisure, area of ​​thinking, etc., on the way of life of society and the individual. Culture acquires social influence, first of all, as a necessary aspect of the activity of a social person, which, by its nature, involves the organization of joint activities of people, and, consequently, its regulation by certain rules accumulated in sign and symbolic systems, traditions, etc.
In a radical way, questions of cultural development are posed in our time precisely because these questions are posed by the very life of our society; orientation towards a qualitatively new state of society leads to a sharp turning point in the understanding of traditionalist and innovative trends in social development. They require, on the one hand, the deep development of cultural heritage, the expansion of the exchange of genuine cultural values ​​between peoples, and on the other, the ability to go beyond the usual but already outdated ideas, to overcome a number of reactionary traditions that have developed and been implanted over the centuries, constantly manifesting themselves in the consciousness , activities and behavior of people. In resolving these issues, a significant role is played by knowledge and an adequate modern understanding of modern Russian culture as part of world culture.
The modern world has made significant changes in human consciousness - the human gaze is turned to the limits of life, which is not limited in consciousness by the dates of birth and death. There is a tendency to realize oneself in the context of historical time, in orientation both to one’s historical and cultural roots and to the future, which is seen primarily as a process of expanding international relations, involving all countries of the world in the global cultural and historical process. Thus, significant, first of all, social changes further confirm the importance, on the one hand, of issues of cultural identity, on the other hand, of issues of intercultural interaction
The culture of Russia throughout the twentieth century is an integral part of European and world culture.
Russia experienced two world wars in the 20th century and felt the influence of scientific and technological progress and the transition to information civilization. During this period, cultural processes, mutual influence of cultures, and stylistic dynamics accelerated significantly.
Russia in the twentieth century acted as a catalyst for sociocultural processes on the planet. The October Revolution led to a split of the world into two systems, creating an ideological, political and military confrontation between the two camps. The year 1917 radically changed the fate of the peoples of the former Russian Empire. Another turn, which initiated significant changes in the development of human civilization, began in Russia in 1985. It gained even greater momentum at the end of the twentieth century. All this must be taken into account when assessing sociocultural processes both in modern Russia and in Russia of the Soviet period.
The 20th century gave the Fatherland brilliant scientists and researchers, talented artists, writers, musicians, and directors. It became the date of birth of numerous creative communities, art schools, movements, movements, and styles. However, it was in the 20th century that a totalized sociocultural mythology was created in Russia, accompanied by dogmatization, manipulation of consciousness, destruction of dissent, primitivization of artistic assessments and physical destruction of the color of the Russian scientific and artistic intelligentsia.

General trends and features of the development of modern national culture.

One of the most important problems for modern culture is the problem of traditions and innovation in the cultural space. The stable side of culture, the cultural tradition, thanks to which the accumulation and transmission of human experience in history occurs, gives new generations the opportunity to update previous experience, relying on what was created by previous generations. In traditional societies, the assimilation of culture occurs through the reproduction of samples, with the possibility of minor variations within the tradition. Tradition in this case is the basis for the functioning of culture, significantly complicating creativity in the sense of innovation. Actually, the most “creative” in our understanding of the process of traditional culture, paradoxically, is the very formation of a person as a subject of culture, as a set of canonical stereotypical programs (customs, rituals). The transformation of these canons themselves is quite slow. Such is the culture of primitive society and later traditional culture. Under certain conditions, the stability of a cultural tradition can be attributed to the need for the stability of the human collective for its survival. However, on the other hand, the dynamism of culture does not mean abandoning cultural traditions altogether. It is hardly possible for a culture to exist without traditions. Cultural traditions as historical memory are an indispensable condition not only for the existence, but also for the development of culture, even if it has great creative (and at the same time negative in relation to tradition) potential. As a living example, we can cite the cultural transformations of Russia after the October Revolution, when attempts to completely deny and destroy the previous culture led in many cases to irreparable losses in this area.
Thus, if it is possible to talk about reactionary and progressive tendencies in culture, then, on the other hand, it is hardly possible to imagine the creation of culture “from scratch,” completely discarding the previous culture and tradition. The question of traditions in culture and the attitude towards cultural heritage concerns not only the preservation, but also the development of culture, that is, cultural creativity. In the latter, the universal organic is merged with the unique: each cultural value is unique, whether we are talking about a work of art, an invention, etc. In this sense, replication in one form or another of what is already known, already created earlier is dissemination, not the creation of culture. The need to spread culture seems to require no proof. The creativity of culture, being a source of innovation, is involved in the contradictory process of cultural development, which reflects a wide range of sometimes opposing and opposing trends of a given historical era.
At first glance, culture, considered from the point of view of content, falls into various spheres: morals and customs, language and writing, the nature of clothing, settlements, work, education, economics, the nature of the army, socio-political structure, legal proceedings, science, technology , art, religion, all forms of manifestation of the “spirit” of the people. In this sense, cultural history becomes of paramount importance for understanding the level of cultural development.
If we talk about modern culture itself, then it is embodied in a huge variety of created material and spiritual phenomena. These are new means of labor, and new food products, and new elements of the material infrastructure of everyday life, production, and new scientific ideas, ideological concepts, religious beliefs, moral ideals and regulators, works of all types of art, etc. At the same time, the sphere of modern culture, upon closer examination, is heterogeneous, because each of its constituent cultures has common boundaries, both geographical and chronological, with other cultures and eras. The cultural identity of any people is inseparable from the cultural identity of other peoples, and we all obey the laws of cultural communication. Thus, modern culture is a multitude of original cultures that are in dialogue and interaction with each other, and dialogue and interaction occur not only along the axis of the present time, but also along the “past-future” axis.
But on the other hand, culture is not only the totality of many cultures, but also world culture, a single cultural flow from Babylon to the present day, from East to West, and from West to East. And first of all, with regard to world culture, the question arises about its further fate - is what is observed in modern culture (the flourishing of science, technology, information technology, regionally organized economy; and also, on the other hand, the triumph of Western values ​​- the ideals of success) , separation of powers, personal freedom, etc.) – the flourishing of human culture as a whole, or, conversely, its “decline”.
Since the twentieth century, the distinction between the concepts of culture and civilization has become characteristic - culture continues to carry a positive meaning, and civilization receives a neutral assessment, and sometimes even a direct negative meaning. Civilization, as a synonym for material culture, as a fairly high level of mastery of the forces of nature, certainly carries a powerful charge of technical progress and contributes to the achievement of an abundance of material wealth. The concept of civilization is most often associated with the value-neutral development of technology, which can be used for a wide variety of purposes, and the concept of culture, on the contrary, has come as close as possible to the concept of spiritual progress. The negative qualities of civilization usually include its tendency to standardize thinking, its orientation toward absolute fidelity to generally accepted truths, and its inherent low assessment of the independence and originality of individual thinking, which are perceived as a “social danger.” If culture, from this point of view, forms a perfect personality, then civilization forms an ideal law-abiding member of society, content with the benefits provided to him. Civilization is increasingly understood as synonymous with urbanization, overcrowding, the tyranny of machines, and as a source of dehumanization of the world. In fact, no matter how deeply the human mind penetrates into the secrets of the world, the spiritual world of man himself remains largely mysterious. Civilization and science by themselves cannot ensure spiritual progress; culture is needed here as the totality of all spiritual education and upbringing, which includes the entire spectrum of intellectual, moral and aesthetic achievements of mankind.
In general, for modern, primarily world culture, two ways to solve the crisis situation are proposed. If, on the one hand, the resolution of the crisis tendencies of culture is assumed along the path of traditional Western ideals - strict science, universal education, reasonable organization of life, production, a conscious approach to all phenomena of the world, changing the guidelines for the development of science and technology, i.e. increasing the role of the spiritual and moral improvement of man, as well as improvement of his material conditions, then the second way to resolve crisis phenomena involves the return of the human race either to various modifications of religious culture or to forms of life that are more “natural” for man and life - with limited healthy needs, a sense of unity with nature and space, forms of human existence free from the power of technology.
Philosophers of our time and the recent past take one position or another regarding technology; as a rule, they associate technology (understood quite broadly) with a crisis of culture and civilization. The mutual influence of technology and modern culture is one of the key problems to consider here. If the role of technology in culture is largely clarified in the works of Heidegger, Jaspers, Fromm, then the problem of the humanization of technology remains one of the most important unsolved problems for all of humanity.
One of the most interesting moments in the development of modern culture is the formation of a new image of culture itself. If the traditional image of world culture is associated primarily with ideas of historical and organic integrity, then the new image of culture is increasingly associated, on the one hand, with ideas of a cosmic scale, and on the other hand, with the idea of ​​a universal ethical paradigm. It is also worth noting the formation of a new type of cultural interaction, expressed primarily in the rejection of simplified rational schemes for solving cultural problems. The ability to understand someone else's culture and points of view, critical analysis of one's own actions, recognition of someone else's cultural identity and someone else's truth, the ability to incorporate them into one's position and recognition of the legitimacy of the existence of many truths, the ability to build dialogic relationships and compromise are becoming increasingly important. This logic of cultural communication also presupposes corresponding principles of action.

Politicization of Russian culture.

Among the features of modern Russian culture, it is necessary to highlight the strong politicization of the cultural space. The politicization of culture is a process that has quite deep historical roots in Russia. Here, the events of the recently departed twentieth century played a huge role, understanding the significance of which for culture is extremely important.
The revolution in October 1917 marked the beginning of the transition to a new system of social relations, to a new type of culture. The ideal of culture formulated by Lenin as serving the millions of working people who constitute the color of the country, its strength, its future, demanded that culture and art become “part of the general proletarian cause,” that is, culture had to express the interests of the proletariat. In the first post-October decade, the foundations of a new Soviet culture were laid. The beginning of this period (1918-1921) is characterized by the destruction and denial of traditional values ​​(culture, morality, religion, way of life, law) and the proclamation of new guidelines for sociocultural development: world revolution, communist society, universal equality and fraternity.
The provision requiring the opening and making available to the working people all the treasures of art created on the basis of the exploitation of their labor, approved at the Eighth Congress of the RCP (b), began to be implemented almost immediately. The nationalization of culture has acquired enormous scope. Already in 1917, the Hermitage, the Russian Museum, the Tretyakov Gallery, the Armory and many other museums became the property and disposal of the people. The private collections of S.S. were nationalized. Shchukin, Mamontovs, Morozovs, Tretyakovs, V.I. Dalia, I.V. Tsvetaeva.
Somewhat later, from the 1920s. The party's cultural policy began to be implemented systematically. This meant that any philosophical or other system of ideas that went beyond the boundaries of Marxism in its Leninist version was qualified as “bourgeois”, “landowner”, “clerical” and was recognized as counter-revolutionary and anti-Soviet, that is, dangerous for the very existence of the new political system. Ideological intolerance became the basis of the official policy of the Soviet government in the sphere of ideology and culture. In the minds of the bulk of the population, the establishment of a narrow class approach to culture began. Class suspicion of the old spiritual culture and anti-intellectual sentiments became widespread in society. Slogans were constantly spread about distrust in education, about the need for a “vigilant” attitude towards old specialists, who were viewed as an anti-people force.
This principle applied to the creativity of representatives of the intelligentsia to an even greater extent and in a strict form. The establishment of political monopoly in science, art, philosophy, in all spheres of the spiritual life of society, the persecution of representatives of the so-called noble and bourgeois intelligentsia, led to the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of educated people from the country, caused irreparable damage to elite culture, and led to an inevitable decline in its overall level. But the proletarian state was extremely suspicious of the intelligentsia who remained in the country. Step by step, the institutions of professional autonomy of the intelligentsia - independent publications, creative unions, trade unions - were liquidated.
Ultimately, this ended in the complete defeat of the main body of the old intelligentsia in Russia.
The new culture was directly connected with the heroes of the revolution. In the name of the power of the people, monuments to new heroes were erected on the old pedestals. New revolutionary symbols were seen as a prerequisite for the continuation of the revolution. This position was the basis for changing historical names to the names of living ones. The first post-October decade required the creation of a new proletarian culture, opposed to the entire artistic culture of the past.
The mechanical transfer into the sphere of artistic creativity of the needs of a radical revolutionary restructuring of the social structure and political organization of society led in practice both to the denial of the significance of the classical artistic heritage and to attempts to use only new modernist forms in the interests of building a new socialist culture. Finally, the fruitfulness of the centuries-old functions of artistic culture was generally denied.
The result of this policy was the mass emigration of representatives of Russian culture. In 1922, about 200 writers, scientists, and philosophers who held their own views on what was happening inside the country were sent abroad (L. Karsavin, I. Ilyin, P. Sorokin, I. Lapshin and others). Famous writers, scientists, actors, artists, musicians, whose names rightfully became the property of world culture, found themselves outside of Russia. For various reasons and at different times, A. Averchenko, K. Balmont, I. Bunin, Z. Gippius, D. Merezhkovsky, A. Kuprin, Igor Severyanin, Sasha Cherny, M. Tsvetaeva, A. Tolstoy, P. Milyukov left their homeland , P. Struve, N. Berdyaev, N. Lossky, P. Sorokin, A. Benois, K. Korovin, S. Rachmaninov, F. Chaliapin and many other outstanding figures of Russian culture.
Thus, by the mid-thirties, Soviet national culture had developed into a rigid system with its own sociocultural values: in philosophy, aesthetics, morality, language, everyday life, and science.
The main features of this system were the following:

approval of normative cultural patterns in various types of creativity;
following dogma and manipulating public consciousness;
party-class approach in assessing artistic creativity;
orientation towards mass perception;
education of the nomenklatura intelligentsia;
creation of state cultural institutions (creative unions);
subordination of creative activity to social order.

Signs of modern culture: dynamism, eclecticism, ambiguity, mosaic, diversity of the overall picture, polycentricity, a break in its structure and the holistic hierarchy of the organization of its space. The development of information technology and the approval of the media shape public opinion and public spirit. The media reflect external, consumer, spiritual life, create certain ideas about the world, shape the destruction of traditionally valued qualities, and provide the effect of suggestion.

Main trends in the development of modern culture

The 20th century has ended... The century of the triumph of science and human intelligence, the century of paradoxes and shocks. He summed up the development of world culture. In this century, culture broke the bonds of regional or national isolation and became international. World artistic culture integrates the cultural values ​​of almost all nations.

A characteristic phenomenon of the twentieth century was a noticeable weakening of those social mechanisms on which people’s lives largely relied in past centuries. First of all, mechanisms of continuity in culture.

An individual strives to become independent, independent of cultural traditions, customs, established rules of etiquette, behavior, and communication. At the same time, internal freedom is increasingly being replaced by external freedom, the independence of the spirit is being replaced by the independence of the body, which gradually leads to a decrease in spirituality and the level of culture.

In modern philosophy and aesthetics, there are quite a lot of reasons that explain these processes. This is the accelerated progress of all aspects of material life, technology, and the industrial sphere, as a result of which a person did not have time to develop spiritually at the same pace. Consequently, he became superficial, in a hurry somewhere, having neither the time nor the strength to stop, peer, realize, and spiritually master the phenomena and facts of reality.

In other cases, technology was reproached with its naked rationalism, technocratic thinking that recognizes nothing but open pragmatism. They also reproached those who found themselves in power, at the levers of managing society, because they, often not possessing proper culture themselves, do not have the opportunity to correctly assess its meaning, and skimp on culture, thereby stimulating degeneration and degradation.

It is likely that all these parallel developing processes have a common root - the weakening of ties between generations in culture. As a result, spiritual culture suffered, and consequently, man suffered, because he was devalued as an individual, his life, nature, and environment were devalued.

What happens to art in the twentieth century? One should not proceed from the naive thought that art “suddenly became bad, decaying, base.” It can never become such without changing its essence, since in all eras it expresses the desire for the spiritual development of man and fights for humanity to carry through all the vicissitudes of history its main achievement - spirituality. And today art is not dying, it is in search of new forms, a new language - in order to find a way to express new spiritual processes that reflect the modern era.

One of the most important problems for modern culture is the problem of traditions and innovation in the cultural space. The stable side of culture, the cultural tradition, thanks to which the accumulation and transmission of human experience in history occurs, gives new generations the opportunity to update previous experience, relying on what was created by previous generations. In traditional societies, the assimilation of culture occurs through the reproduction of samples, with the possibility of minor variations within the tradition. Tradition in this case is the basis for the functioning of culture, significantly complicating creativity in the sense of innovation. Actually, the most “creative” in our understanding of the process of traditional culture, paradoxically, is the very formation of a person as a subject of culture, as a set of canonical stereotypical programs (customs, rituals). The transformation of these canons themselves is quite slow. Such is the culture of primitive society and later traditional culture. Under certain conditions, the stability of a cultural tradition can be attributed to the need for the stability of the human collective for its survival. However, on the other hand, the dynamism of culture does not mean abandoning cultural traditions altogether. It is hardly possible for a culture to exist without traditions. Cultural traditions as historical memory are an indispensable condition not only for the existence, but also for the development of culture, even if it has great creative (and at the same time negative in relation to tradition) potential. As a living example, we can cite the cultural transformations of Russia after the October Revolution, when attempts to completely deny and destroy the previous culture led in many cases to irreparable losses in this area.

Thus, if it is possible to talk about reactionary and progressive tendencies in culture, then, on the other hand, it is hardly possible to imagine the creation of culture “from scratch,” completely discarding the previous culture and tradition. The question of traditions in culture and the attitude towards cultural heritage concerns not only the preservation, but also the development of culture, that is, cultural creativity. In the latter, the universal organic is merged with the unique: each cultural value is unique, whether we are talking about a work of art, an invention, etc. In this sense, replication in one form or another of what is already known, already created earlier is dissemination, not the creation of culture. The need to spread culture seems to require no proof. The creativity of culture, being a source of innovation, is involved in the contradictory process of cultural development, which reflects a wide range of sometimes opposing and opposing trends of a given historical era.

At first glance, culture, considered from the point of view of content, falls into various spheres: morals and customs, language and writing, the nature of clothing, settlements, work, education, economics, the nature of the army, socio-political structure, legal proceedings, science, technology , art, religion, all forms of manifestation of the “spirit” of the people. In this sense, cultural history becomes of paramount importance for understanding the level of cultural development.

If we talk about modern culture itself, then it is embodied in a huge variety of created material and spiritual phenomena. These are new means of labor, and new food products, and new elements of the material infrastructure of everyday life, production, and new scientific ideas, ideological concepts, religious beliefs, moral ideals and regulators, works of all types of art, etc. At the same time, the sphere of modern culture, upon closer examination, is heterogeneous, because each of its constituent cultures has common boundaries, both geographical and chronological, with other cultures and eras. The cultural identity of any people is inseparable from the cultural identity of other peoples, and we all obey the laws of cultural communication. Thus, modern culture is a multitude of original cultures that are in dialogue and interaction with each other, and dialogue and interaction occur not only along the present time axis, but also along the “past-future” axis.

But on the other hand, culture is not only the totality of many cultures, but also world culture, a single cultural flow from Babylon to the present day, from East to West, and from West to East. And first of all, with regard to world culture, the question arises about its further fate - is what is observed in modern culture (the flourishing of science, technology, information technology, regionally organized economy; and also, on the other hand, the triumph of Western values ​​- the ideals of success) , separation of powers, personal freedom, etc.) - the flourishing of human culture as a whole, or, conversely, its “decline”.

Since the twentieth century, the distinction between the concepts of culture and civilization has become characteristic - culture continues to carry a positive meaning, and civilization receives a neutral assessment, and sometimes even a direct negative meaning. Civilization, as a synonym for material culture, as a fairly high level of mastery of the forces of nature, certainly carries a powerful charge of technical progress and contributes to the achievement of an abundance of material wealth. The concept of civilization is most often associated with the value-neutral development of technology, which can be used for a wide variety of purposes, and the concept of culture, on the contrary, has come as close as possible to the concept of spiritual progress. The negative qualities of civilization usually include its tendency to standardize thinking, its orientation toward absolute fidelity to generally accepted truths, and its inherent low assessment of the independence and originality of individual thinking, which are perceived as a “social danger.” If culture, from this point of view, forms a perfect personality, then civilization forms an ideal law-abiding member of society, content with the benefits provided to him. Civilization is increasingly understood as synonymous with urbanization, overcrowding, the tyranny of machines, and as a source of dehumanization of the world. In fact, no matter how deeply the human mind penetrates into the secrets of the world, the spiritual world of man himself remains largely mysterious. Civilization and science by themselves cannot ensure spiritual progress; culture is needed here as the totality of all spiritual education and upbringing, which includes the entire spectrum of intellectual, moral and aesthetic achievements of mankind.

In general, for modern, primarily world culture, two ways to solve the crisis situation are proposed. If, on the one hand, the resolution of the crisis tendencies of culture is assumed along the path of traditional Western ideals - strict science, universal education, reasonable organization of life, production, a conscious approach to all phenomena of the world, changing the guidelines for the development of science and technology, i.e. increasing the role of the spiritual and moral improvement of man, as well as improvement of his material conditions, then the second way to resolve crisis phenomena involves the return of the human race either to various modifications of religious culture or to forms of life that are more “natural” for man and life - with limited healthy needs, a sense of unity with nature and space, forms of human existence free from the power of technology.

Philosophers of our time and the recent past take one position or another regarding technology; as a rule, they associate technology (understood quite broadly) with a crisis of culture and civilization. The mutual influence of technology and modern culture is one of the key problems to consider here. If the role of technology in culture is largely clarified in the works of Heidegger, Jaspers, Fromm, then the problem of the humanization of technology remains one of the most important unsolved problems for all of humanity.

One of the most interesting moments in the development of modern culture is the formation of a new image of culture itself. If the traditional image of world culture is associated primarily with ideas of historical and organic integrity, then the new image of culture is increasingly associated, on the one hand, with ideas of a cosmic scale, and on the other hand, with the idea of ​​a universal ethical paradigm. It is also worth noting the formation of a new type of cultural interaction, expressed primarily in the rejection of simplified rational schemes for solving cultural problems. The ability to understand someone else's culture and points of view, critical analysis of one's own actions, recognition of someone else's cultural identity and someone else's truth, the ability to incorporate them into one's position and recognition of the legitimacy of the existence of many truths, the ability to build dialogic relationships and compromise are becoming increasingly important. This logic of cultural communication also presupposes corresponding principles of action.