Main trends in the development of modern world and domestic culture. General trends and features of the development of modern culture Main trends in the modern cultural process

1. The concept of “culture” is one of the most frequently used in modern humanitarian knowledge. It came to European languages ​​from Latin (cultura - cultivation, education, development, veneration). In the broadest sense, culture is what is created by man, it is the entire set of products of human activity, forms of socio-political organization of society, spiritual processes, human states and types of his activities. Thus, culture includes and unites objectified, “frozen” human activity, the results of the “cultivation” of reality and “living” - the very life of humanity, the current process of cultivation, cultivation of reality.

Culture can be defined as the level of development of man and society, reflected in the material and spiritual values ​​they create, as well as the very process of people’s creative activity.

The concept of “culture” is actively used by social sciences and humanities in the 20th century, which is accompanied by the development of a myriad of definitions of culture, of which we will pay attention to the two most laconic: culture is “second nature” (K. Marx) and culture is “not nature” (E. Markaryan). In both the first and second cases, the question of the relationship between culture and nature is raised and in some way resolved. The “first” nature is the most important condition for the emergence of the “second” nature. But, arising on the basis of nature, starting from it, culture changes it, isolating itself, gaining independence. The study of the long and gradual process of isolation of culture from nature, the growth of culture from nature allows us to deeply analyze the history of the development of society.

The specificity of the sociological approach to culture is the analysis of the relationship between culture and social development: with the stages of development of civilization, with shifts in the formational state of society, with ethnic evolution, with the development of relations between all major social actors. At the same time, not only is culture considered as a whole, as a single system, but its differentiation is explored, conditioned by the diversity of forms of social life - the cultures of various social subjects are distinguished: national cultures, class cultures, cultures of different generations, different types of settlements, etc.

Culture is a holistic phenomenon formed from the infinite variety of cultures of various social subjects included in it. At the same time, the ways of interaction, dialogue or conflict of these “subcultures” within the “big” culture are especially important for sociology. Analysis of this problem allows us to identify two vectors in the development of relations between cultures of classes, ethnic groups, generations, genders, city and rural residents: in the direction of self-isolation, isolation and in the direction of rapprochement. These trends have been traced in most detail in the study of national cultures by modern sociology, which is reflected in the design of alternative sociological directions - linear evolutionism and the cultural-historical school.

One of the central problems of cultural development - the interaction of tradition and innovation - is reflected in the interaction of urban and rural culture; the problem of elite and mass culture, considered from the point of view of sociology, is refracted in the problem of dialogue between the culture of people engaged in mental work and the culture of people engaged in physical labor; the problem of the historical development of culture, the change of styles in it is reflected in the sociological analysis of the dialogue of cultures of different generations, the process of emergence, formation of the “counterculture” of the younger generation and the gradual absorption of the most significant phenomena of this counterculture by the “big” culture, which ensures the continuity of the cultural-historical process.

At one or another stage of sociocultural development, first one or another subsystem within a culture can be updated. But sociological analysis shows that all subsystems are necessary and in this sense are equivalent for the development of culture. The role of every ethnic group, every generation, every class in culture is eternal.

It is customary to divide culture into material and spiritual, according to the two main types of labor and methods of human cultivation of reality - physical and mental.

Usually, material culture is understood as the sphere of material activity and her results (tools, housing, everyday items, clothing, means of transport and communication, etc.). The concept of “spiritual culture” is used to designate the sphere of consciousness, spiritual production (cognition, morality, education, law, science, art, literature, religion, ideology, mythology); spiritual culture can be defined as the level of development of man and society, reflected in the created by them spiritual values, as well as the process of creative activity of people. Physical effort allows the phenomenon of culture to take on flesh and materialize. Spiritual efforts determine the style of cultivating reality, developing measures and criteria for the culturality or unculturedness of human actions.

Culture cannot exist outside of society without relying on its certain economic level of development and on a system of legal norms. At the same time, its core is spiritual activity, reproduced in three main forms: science, art, morality. The entire “great” culture can be considered as a result of the development of this “core”, as the objectification of new achievements of science, art, morality and their reproducing traditional forms. It is necessary to pay special attention to the last point in order to optimize the process of foreseeing the prospects for the development of the sociocultural process. The reproduction in culture of religious, national, caste and other stereotypes of behavior, not only rational, but also irrational symbols and attributes of social activity is the empirical reality that is most difficult to take into account and is often overlooked when designing social changes. Ignoring the spiritual and cultural values ​​of social life most often ultimately determines the collapse of attempts to reform society. It was these realities that thwarted the plans of the Stolypin reform in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, the most left-radical projects for transforming society (“war communism” in Russia, Maoism in China, etc.) and others

attempts to “leap” over existing cultural and historical development paradigms. We are seeing something similar today.

In this regard, it seems appropriate to consider the basic sociological concepts of culture from the point of view of the interaction of “cultural” and “social”.

A significant role in overcoming illusions regarding the omnipotence of reason in the reproduction of the sociocultural process and in the formation of historical sociology was played by V. Dilthey, who considered the spiritual and mental integrity of being, culture as “spirit,” to be almost identical to life itself. The special “spiritual world” inherent in each culture and era determines, according to Dilthey, social activity by the totality of meaning-forming factors contained in it.

O. Spengler agrees with Dilthey on this issue, who emphasized that the “spiritual world,” being imprinted in the forms of economic, political, religious and artistic life, creates a cultural and historical era and distinguishes it as an integrity from another.

It should be noted the special merits of Russian philosophical and sociological thought in the study of culture as a social phenomenon. Neo-Kantian ideas in Russian sociology, developed by A. S. Lappo-Danilevsky, B. A. Kistyakovsky, P. I. Novgorodtsev, P. B. Struve and others, brought to the forefront of social cognition the understanding of the spiritual and ethical foundations of society that determine specificity of the social world. The position of the “national spirit” (national self-awareness or national character) as the most important factor in socio-historical development was consistently defended in Russian social thought.

The idea of ​​cultural and value-based conditioning of social processes was, in a certain sense, a “common denominator” for most Russian thinkers, and the theme of Russian socio-cultural civilizational uniqueness became one of the leading ones in the works of N. A. Berdyaev (“Soul of Russia”, etc.), I. A. Ilyin (“The Path of Spiritual Renewal”), S. L. Frank (“Russian Worldview”), N. O. Lossky (“Character of the Russian People”), I. A. Solonevich (“People’s Monarchy”) and in a number of works other major researchers.

E. Durkheim and M. Weber made their contribution to the formulation of the problem of culture as a social phenomenon.

Durkheim defined culture as “the collective or common consciousness.” The latter has, from his point of view, specific features that transform this “consciousness” into a special reality: a set of beliefs and feelings that are common mainly to the same society.

The author of understanding sociology, M. Weber, believed that it is impossible to “understand” the behavior of social subjects without comprehending the “meaning” of his behavior experienced by the subject himself. According to Weber, the primary reality of society is culture, which can manifest itself both in social structures such as family, state, and in spiritual forms - religion, art, science. Culture, unlike technological civilization, is emotional, personal, and socially orients the subject. Weber emphasized that the “intended meaning” of real behavior in the overwhelming majority of cases is vaguely or not realized at all by the actor himself.

Speaking about the concepts of culture, one cannot ignore the socio-psychological scheme of 3. Freud, according to which three levels of the psyche are distinguished: “It” - the concentration of the unconscious (instincts, drives, repressed ideas and images), striving to break out of its “basements”; “I” is the concentration of our consciousness, which carries out the functions of suppression and sublimation of the unconscious; “Super-ego” is the concentration of conscience, norms and values, “the representative of society in the psyche.” According to Freud, culture is a dynamic system that performs a kind of feedback function between the individual and society both along the line “unconscious - conscious - normative-value - social-behavioral” and in the opposite direction (adjustment of behavior - revaluation of values, revision of norms - repression of patterns and ideas into the unconscious). From Freud's point of view, the preservation of the past in mental life is the rule rather than the exception.

A unique approach to the problem of interaction between culture and society, reflecting the stylistic features of the culture of the 20th century, was developed in the theory of I. Huizinga, which considers play as the most important source and way of existence of culture. Huizinga places not only art, but also science, everyday life, jurisprudence, and military art into the “playing space.” He shows that the ability to play is deeply connected with culture, which is opposed by the denial of play, gloomy seriousness based on the lack of imagination, the idea of ​​relativity, temporality, and fragility. At the same time, true culture requires a balance of gaming and non-game principles.

Let us highlight the main functions of culture in society, which coincide with the classification of the main types and forms of human activity:

Practical-transformative - the needs of human practice bring to life certain cultural changes as a condition for the development of society;

Cognitive - studying the mechanism of interaction between culture and society with the help of all forms of cultural development and, first of all, science, accumulation and transmission of information, maintaining continuity, historical and social memory;

Value-oriented - the development of norms regulating social behavior, including political, legal, moral, aesthetic, religious ideals and behavioral stereotypes;

Communicative - exchange of information, communication, development of generally accepted attributes of behavior;

The function of socialization is the inclusion of the individual in the sociocultural process.

A constant source of development and reproduction of culture is the interaction of people, which makes it important to analyze the functional connection between personality and culture.

2. The role of the individual in the development of culture is a special, always actively discussed issue. Man is a “cell” of a cultural organism, the result of cultivation and the creator of culture. On the one hand, a person cannot bring the ultimate truth into culture, “cultivate” reality to perfection, to the absolute; on the other hand, the activity of an individual is always significant, never indifferent to culture, and can creatively develop or deform culture in all its forms.

For the sociological theory of culture, it is important to clarify the different content and individual significance levels of a person’s relationship with culture (culturality), to which certain levels of individual consciousness must correspond.

An individual’s cultural level can be high or low depending on how fully and harmoniously the subject has mastered culture in its traditional and innovative forms. Culture is a complex phenomenon; it is a complex system. Therefore, a high level of mastery of culture presupposes a systematic, rather than fragmentary, mastery of it. “By retreating from primitive elementarity,” a person becomes cultured. Therefore, in concept difficulties, as V.V. Rozanov noted, there is an external definition of culture, and its internal meaning is in the concept cult.“A cultured person is one who not only carries some kind of cult within himself, but who is also complex, that is, not simple, not monotonous in his ideas, in his feelings, in his aspirations, and finally, in his skills and the whole way of life.”

What appears, according to Rozanov, as the internal meaning of culture - a cult, or the internal and special attention of an individual to something, a preference for something over everything else - is gradually formed in the individual. It focuses on a person’s worldview, a way of seeing the semantic essence of the surrounding world and one’s own place in it. It arises under the influence of the general stylistic features of culture as a historical integrity, which determine the individual’s possible approaches to the objective world. The process of changing such approaches - discernment, contemplation, observation - was considered by S. S. Averintsev. Thus, the cultural personality of the ancient world was characterized by a spectacular approach. Contemplation becomes the dominant feature of medieval culture. Then this type of culture exhausts itself. Observation and, as a consequence of this, a practical-experimental approach to culture become a factor in the uniqueness of modern human culture. The cultural character of a person, his cult, arises under the direct influence of the sociocultural semantic field of the era, which determines the hierarchy of values ​​and objects of possible cult.

However, let us return to the “external” level of a person’s culture, directly related to the problem of complexity and multivariance of his behavior in society. Individual culture presupposes the role correlation of the individual with the culture, connecting his most important life needs with the norms and values ​​enshrined in the social institutions of society. The concept of role is one of the central ones in the empirical research of sociologists. However, the content of the role characterizes not so much the personality itself, the level of its mastery of culture, but rather the social system in which the person functions. One of the most important problems of self-realization of an individual in the sociocultural process is the problem of resolving contradictions that arise between an individual’s worldview, his basic spiritual values ​​and the requirements of his social roles, and stereotypes of behavior of an individual as a member of various social groups and processes. A cultured person finds in each case a unique way out that allows him to avoid extremes: either a complete rejection of “indulging in conventions” in order to maintain the purity of the cult, or absolute ideological relativism, which allows one to be guided only by considerations of momentary gain or convenience.

The framework of “appropriate” behavior in a particular role, in a particular social group can be perceived and considered by a cultured person not so much as a “Procrustean bed” limiting the freedom of self-realization, but as a disciplining factor that allows one to be included in the process of cultural creation not from scratch, but relying on established, established mechanisms for supporting the creative activity of the individual by society.

In the modern world, the problem of reflecting and recreating culture by an individual is also complicated because it involves mastering not only roles, but also what can be called “inter-role”, “marginal” behavior. A person increasingly finds himself not in one culture or another (national, class, generation, gender, territorial settlement group), but between cultures. Social differentiation in modern society is dynamic and rapidly transforming; Along with the globalization of social life, individualization and focus on the individual are also developing. Therefore, in an effort to be cultured, a person increasingly cannot rely on an established stereotype, take advantage of an already prescribed role, and is forced to create a relatively new pattern of behavior that corresponds to his worldview, on the one hand, and his non-trivial social status, on the other.

3. The current state of culture causes reasonable concern. One of the global problems in the development of society is the erosion of spiritual culture, which arises as a result of the total dissemination of monotonous information, isolating its consumers from the work of developing ideas about the meaning of existence in the socio-cultural process, aggravating the situation of “loss of meaning” in culture.

Overcoming the crisis and preserving culture are based on the main trends of its self-development and evolution.

Culture is an open system, i.e. . it is not completed, it continues to develop and interact with non-culture. Therefore, to begin with, let us pay attention to the external trend in the development of culture.

Culture is “not nature”; it arose and develops in interaction with nature. Their relationship was not easy. Gradually emerging from the power of natural forces, man - the creator of culture - made of his creation an instrument, an instrument for conquering and subjugating nature. However, as soon as power over earthly nature began to be concentrated in the hands of people, the most perspicacious of them came to the conclusion that, along with nature, culture, within which negative processes arose, fell into slavery to the power of human labor. Having changed the attitude towards oneself as part of nature to the attitude towards nature as a “stranger”, man found himself in a difficult situation. After all, he and his body are inseparable from nature, which has become “alien” to culture. Therefore, man forced himself to make a choice between nature and culture. Started in the 18th century. J.-J. Rousseau’s criticism of culture in some concepts was carried to the point of its complete denial, the idea of ​​“natural anti-culture” of man was put forward, and culture itself was interpreted as a means of his suppression and enslavement (F. Nietzsche). 3. Freud viewed culture as a mechanism of social suppression and sublimation of unconscious mental processes. And all this at a time when humanity was actively creating ways to suppress nature.

The confrontation between culture and nature has not disappeared today. However, there is a tendency to overcome it. The idea of ​​the noosphere - the future kingdom of Reason, Goodness, Beauty - revealed in the teachings of V.I. Vernadsky and P. Teilhard de Chardin is finding an increasingly wider response. As one of the attributes of the development of culture, the principle of conformity to nature is recognized, based on the mutually mediated ideas of culture’s responsibility to nature, on the one hand, and the relative freedom of the “second nature” from the “first”, artificial from the natural, a certain inevitable distance of sociocultural and biological processes - from another.

The main patterns of internal development of culture are closely intertwined with the external trend of cultural development, the evolution of its relations with nature.

One of the main trends in the internal development of culture is associated with a change in the balance of physical and mental expenditure of human energy in favor of the latter. Since the middle of the 20th century. Thanks to the use of scientific and technological advances, the need for hard physical labor began to sharply decrease. Human physical efforts play an increasingly smaller role in the reproduction of the sociocultural process. Culture, thus, increasingly defines itself as a product of the creativity of the human spirit, mind, soul. The value of spiritual efforts in this regard will steadily increase. And if previously natural science knowledge was often considered as a criterion for the progressiveness of culture, now its parity with humanitarian knowledge will be gradually restored.

Another internal trend in the evolution of culture is the transition from confrontation of “local”, “group”, “subjective” cultures to their dialogue. The 20th century introduced intense drama and a tragic sense of irreparable loss into the understanding of the cultural process. The idea of ​​discontinuity of culture and incomparability of cultures is most consistently embodied in the concept of O. Spengler. The perception of the cultures of individual social subjects as “sealed organisms” is based on the belief that each culture grows out of its own unique “proto-phenomenon” - a way of “experiencing life.” If in the theory of cultural-historical types and cultural circles this approach is used when analyzing relations between cultures of different ethnic groups, then in left- and right-wing radical doctrines it is used when comparing cultures of different classes (the theory of “two cultures” in a class society), and in the teaching of “new left” and then “right” - from the same positions the relations between the “new” counterculture and the “old” culture are characterized. Thus, within the framework of the sociology of economic determinism, the carriers of incompatible, mutually exclusive cultures are classes, for the “new” ones - youth and the older generation. Conflict, mutual misunderstanding and rejection of cultures are seen as an absolute inevitability.

However, the current situation in the sociocultural process demonstrates the futility and even disastrousness of the position of mutual ignorance of cultures. The need for the integrity of culture is comprehended “by contradiction” - through the awareness of the impossibility of its further existence in the form of a conglomerate of cultures.

Another important trend in the evolution of culture can be expressed as overcoming the conflict (while maintaining contradiction) between traditional culture and innovative culture. This trend is embodied in the culture of postmodernism.

No matter how conventional the designation of entire eras in the cultural life of society with the concepts of “classicism” or “modernism” is, it allows us to see how discontinuous culture is perceived in a given period.

At the beginning of the 20th century. The “modern” style established itself in culture. Modernism - the desire to reflect reality and especially culture in a new way as “not nature”, as an unnatural, artificial, pure, refined phenomenon - has permeated all spheres of spiritual life and, first of all, art and the humanities. Non-triviality, unconventionality and anti-traditionality are considered within the framework of this style as identical concepts. Gradually, what was modernism was partially included in the tradition, from which the avant-garde of culture carefully distanced itself. However, in the search for forms and meanings that are not in contact with what already existed in culture (and therefore old and unnecessary), the avant-garde led itself into the dead end of the absurd - tuneless music, non-representative painting, non-explanatory science, ideology that serves not self-preservation, but self-destruction a subject of ideology that breaks with the tradition of mythology. The natural need of the creator of culture to express the absurdity and disharmony of the world is satisfied in such a way that it leads to a deepening of the absurd.

In a culture filled with cacaphony, the need for silence is increasingly felt, which is sometimes defined as the only thing that is still missing “to replenish the golden fund of cultural values ​​of humanity.”

Gradually, “silence” leads to calm, once-burned bridges to traditional culture are restored, and values ​​acquired and developed by the cultures of previous eras reappear in a modern-enriched form. The broken connection of times is being restored, and once again it is revealed that “manuscripts do not burn.”

Contemporary postmodern culture is a culture that painfully but steadily overcomes the gap between the old and the new, the created and the created. Its fabric is saturated with “signs”, symbols of culture; it develops a “consensus” of desires to preserve tradition and keep up with the times.

Finally, the last of the identified trends in the evolution of culture at the present stage reflects the process of change in personality as a subject of culture. The diversity of culture from the external personality becomes internal, turns into the most important characteristic of its internal life.

The creation of modern culture by an individual presupposes its distance from both attempts to abandon the desire for integrity and from a false imitation of integrity. Internal contradiction and the desire to resolve it are the natural state of the spiritual life of the individual as a subject of culture. The one-dimensional person is replaced by a person who perceives contradiction not as a tragedy, but as a stimulus for the unfolding of the creative process.

Self-test questions

1. Define culture.

2. What are the specifics of material and spiritual culture? What is the essence of the social functions of culture?

3. What is the role of culture in the formation and development of the spiritual life of society?

4. How are changes in culture and changes in the structure of society related?

5. What key points can be identified in the process of cultural diffusion? Why do we say that any cultural pattern is a product of collective creativity? Determine your opinion about the role of the individual in the development of culture.

6. What is the current state of culture? What are the main trends in its development?

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 national 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 domestic 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.

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.

The list of factors determining the shape of the culture of the future can be continued, however, the most significant, in our opinion, seem to be:

1) the accelerating development of the scientific and technological revolution;

2) the growth of interdependence of humanity and the formation of a common cultural fund of civilization;

3) the emergence and aggravation of global problems;

4) fundamental changes in the consciousness of humanity and the formation of a new view of the world;

5) globalization of religions, the beginning of the transition of interfaith relations to the level of mystical unity;

6) entry of humanity into the information stage of development.

The modern sociocultural situation in our country is incredibly complex and contradictory. On the one hand, crisis phenomena in the political, economic and social spheres of life could not but affect the state of culture. On the other hand, culture often asserts itself as an independent force, which in some cases has a decisive impact on the entire atmosphere in society.

Changes in Russian society have given rise to both positive and negative phenomena in the field of culture. It should be noted that the inconsistency of changes in culture sometimes manifests itself more acutely, more painfully and carries greater consequences than in politics, economics or social relations.

The modern sociocultural situation in Russia is primarily characterized by unprecedented degree of freedom. This is manifested in the ability to turn to a variety of ways of expression in creativity, a variety of subjects, which was previously very difficult under conditions of totalitarian control over culture.

It should be noted that along with this, the names of authors and their works, which were erased from the history of art and literature, the memory of which was destroyed in the process of falsification of history, were returned to the people and their culture.

We have the right to say that people’s hopes for spiritual renewal and cultural emancipation have come true. However, this process does not occur painlessly. Another, very contradictory trend has emerged that characterizes the current sociocultural situation: the return to the people of some names of cultural figures is accompanied by the simultaneous removal from cultural use of others that do not “fit” into the process of democratic transformations. Thus, the creative heritage of M. Gorky, V. Mayakovsky, M. Sholokhov is criticized, i.e. the largest representatives of Russian culture of the Soviet period. Just as in the 30s the Bolsheviks excommunicated the symbolists, futurists, and acmeists from culture, so today representatives of socialist realism are ostracized. In such conditions, it is difficult to talk about the freedom of expression of the artist, his right to express any aesthetic tastes.

The modern sociocultural situation has another important feature: the base of artistic creativity is expanding, new organizational forms appear, new theaters, ensembles, associations of scientists and researchers emerge. This makes it possible to identify potential talents and bring them into the orbit of culture. What was previously prohibited by the regime was legalized. Rock culture, various groups, associations, movements, trends came out of the shadows.

The entire social life of mass culture came to the fore. Those social groups that were themselves brought up on mass culture and that were not recognized by official circles of society entered the arena of cultural activity. The role of the mass media in the current situation comes down primarily to the consumption and development of free time, entertainment and entertainment.

It's going intense the process of reorientation of mass cultural activity from public to home forms. The space of modern apartments is filled with cultural objects and is increasingly becoming competitive with public institutions. In this regard, attendance at various cultural institutions is sharply decreasing.

In modern conditions, for a huge mass of people, there are many new sociocultural problems. Social insecurity of a person, an atmosphere of emotional tension in society, alienation from the usual cultural environment deprive one of internal stability and psychological security. This has given rise to a new phenomenon in our society, which can be characterized as a religious awakening or spiritual revolution. This means unprecedented conversion to religion as the only means of salvation from all adversity.

Along with the appeal to traditional religions, a wave of neo-mysticism and various religious and mystical movements is spreading in society. They often mix a variety of elements inherent in Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, as well as borrowed from the occult, theosophy and other mystical doctrines. Some of these movements are antisocial and criminal in nature.

It should be noted that the normal existence of culture is possible only with the harmony of social, political and economic conditions, each of which is equally important. Material factor always, and today especially, has been and remains decisive. The sociocultural situation in this regard is critical. The residual principle of cultural financing has produced negative results in the recent past. In connection with the transition to the market, this already crisis socio-cultural situation has become critical. Funding for culture primarily from the state budget has been replaced by local funding. As a result, there has been a widespread reduction in allocations for culture; the network of cultural institutions, printed publications, etc. is being reduced. In such conditions, talking about fulfilling the strategic task of the spiritual revival of the Fatherland becomes very problematic.

The modern sociocultural situation is characterized shortage and further outflow of qualified personnel from the cultural sector. Their reason lies in a decline in living standards, economic and political instability, and uncertainty about the future. One of the most important aspects of this problem is the so-called "brain drain"- a wave of emigration of scientists, which is becoming widespread.

Research conducted by the Russian Academy of Sciences in its institutes showed that 13% of scientists are ready to go abroad at the first opportunity, about 40% do not exclude this option. It should be especially noted that the most active, educated and young people are planning to leave. 2/3 of potential emigrants are under 40 years old, 25% are not even 30 years old, only 7% are over 50 years old.

Most young scientists under the age of 30 are focused on leaving. Moreover, the most qualified specialists are leaving. Here's just one example: at the Minnesota Institute of Theoretical Physics, five out of six professorships are occupied by emigrants from Russia.

As a result of the departure of scientists from the country, the scientific, technical, cultural and spiritual potential is being destroyed. Particularly alarming is the fact that children, the intellectual future of science, are being taken away.

Commercialization of culture led to the creation of an atmosphere of competition in which, as we know, the strongest wins. We are talking not only about competition within the country, but also outside it. Domestic culture, unprotected financially and economically, is giving way to Western culture, based on a powerful monetary and technical basis. Our art, ballet, opera, painting, although occupying one of the leading places in the world, cannot compete in the Western market. As a result, the dialogue of cultures is gradually turning into a monologue: Western mass culture has poured into the country. Today the danger of the loss of the national spirit of culture and its unbridled Americanization is becoming real. The reaction of both the Russian people themselves and their cultural figures to this phenomenon is different. Some see this as “entry into world culture” and “incorporation into universal human values,” while others consider it a “national tragedy.”

The danger of the Americanization of Russian national culture, the formation of a market personality, is poorly understood by the Russian public and is deliberately ignored by opponents of Russian national culture. At the same time, in the West, in almost all European countries, for decades there have been effective laws preventing the penetration of American spiritual products into the national market. Thus, in France, back in the mid-60s, a law was passed defining quotas for the screening of American films in both private and public cinemas. Excess of the number of American films over national ones (according to the law, the ratio should be 49: 51) is punishable by a fine and loss of license. A whole system of protectionist measures has been developed in Spain, Holland, Italy, Germany, etc.

Any people, any nation can exist and develop only when they preserve their national-cultural identity, when, being in constant interaction with other peoples and nations, exchanging cultural values ​​with them, they nevertheless do not lose the originality of their culture. In history one can find numerous examples of how states disappeared, whose people forgot their language and culture. A similar danger awaits the Russian nation today, because the price for Western technology may turn out to be too high. It is extremely difficult to regain lost positions in world culture, and to come to terms with the loss means to find yourself on the edge of an abyss in cultural and historical development.

With all the very complex interweavings of different artistic movements in the art of the 20th century. two main trends are clearly visible: the search for new realistic forms and a departure from the principles of the realistic system that has been inherent in European art since the Renaissance. The second trend belongs to modernist art, which each time comes out from the position of opening new paths and therefore is called avant-garde these days.

3.1 Realism

Despite the widespread advance of modernism and mass culture, realistic trends still developed in the 20th century. They were based on well-known principles of real reflection of life, disclosure of universal and social problems.

At the beginning of the century, realism received its most striking manifestation in US fiction. This is explained by the fact that the literary work of the United States in the previous century was characterized by some lag: the late flowering of the romantic school and the later, in comparison with Western European countries, the establishment of realism. In the accelerated development of realism in the 20th century. great credit goes to Theodore Dreiser. His novels “Sister Carey,” “The Financier,” and “American Tragedy” revealed the most important social problems of American society at the turn of the century. Dreiser paved the way for a whole galaxy of talented realist writers of later times: Sinclair Lewis, Sherwood Anderson, William Faulkner, Ernest Hemingway.

Separately, the name of Margaret Mitchell should be mentioned, who for a long time was not accepted as a writer by US literary circles. However, by mid-century, her novel Gone with the Wind, published in 1936, had gained widespread popularity. This work reflects problems that have not lost their significance to this day. The novel is about the American Civil War in 1861-1865, about the problems of “survival,” which is especially clearly reflected in the image of the main character Scarlet, about cynical enrichment, expressed in the activities of Rhett Butler. This character argued that “big money can be made in two cases: when creating a new state and when it collapses. During creation this process is slower, during destruction it is faster.”

Realistic tendencies also appeared in US cinema, which, using the industrial power of the country, took a leading place in the world. In the first half of the century, the development of American cinema was associated with the work of the great screenwriter, actor and director Charles Spencer Chaplin. His films showed signs of democracy to the greatest extent. At the beginning of the Second World War, Chaplin directed the pamphlet film “The Great Dictator,” in which the main character’s resemblance to Hitler was beyond doubt. An interesting fact is that this film, which is a parody of Hitler, was banned from showing in the USSR by Stalin personally.

In the second half of the century, US film production has reached such proportions that it is quite difficult to give preference to anyone. However, realistic tendencies remained to a greater extent in the work of director and producer Francis Ford Coppola. His most famous film, The Godfather, intertwined different threads: a naturalistic depiction of cruelty and violence, poeticization of the mafia, criticism of corruption, and the connection of the underworld with politics. No less famous is his film “Apocalypse Now,” which revealed the tragedy of the Vietnam War.

It should be noted that realistic art, having encountered at the beginning of the 20th century. with new facts and processes of life unknown to the realism of the previous century, it changed its visual language and the nature of the analytical study of man.

In 1905, at an exhibition in Paris, artists Henri Mathis, Andre Derain and others exhibited their works, which, due to the sharp contrast of colors and simplified forms, critics called works of “wild” - les fauves, and the whole movement was called “Fauvism”.

The Fauvists, with their understanding of the relationship between spots of pure color, a laconic design reduced to an outline, and simple, childish linear writing, had great opportunities for solving decorative problems. The most talented of the Fauves was Henri Mathis. He went through a fascination with impressionism, but in his search he came to the simplicity and flatness of forms.

In realistic literature, a change in the nature of the analytical study of man was manifested in the work of Stefan Zweig, who, under the influence of the theory of Sigmund Freud, in his works “Mary Steward” and “Impatience of the Heart” tried to shift social conflicts and processes into the plane of psychological experiences and clashes of heroes.

In cinema, the transformation of realistic art was reflected in the movement of neorealism, which became most widespread in Italy. The films of Fellini, Montaldo, Pietri, Rosi, Damiani and other directors revealed problems that worried not only Italy, but also other countries: social conflicts, corruption, mafia, crime, the dominance of American capital.

3.2. Modernism

To sum up, it should be said that changes are currently taking place in art with far-reaching consequences. Analyzing them, the greatest Spanish philosopher Ortega y Gasset pays special attention to the following:

Tendency towards dehumanization;

Tendency to avoid living forms;

The desire to ensure that a work of art is only a work of art;

The desire to understand art as a game and nothing more;

Gravity towards deep irony;

The tendency to avoid any falsehood and, in this regard, careful performance skills;

The tendency to avoid transcendence, i.e. do not go beyond the limits of experience and knowledge.

1. Current problems of culture of the 20th century. - M., 1993.

2. Gombrich E. History of Art. - M., 1998.

3. Gorelov A.A. Culturology: Textbook / A.A. Gorelov. - M.: Yurayt-M, 2002.

4. Karmin A.S. Culturology: textbook / A. S. Karmin. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - St. Petersburg: Lan Publishing House, 2003.

5. Kertman L.E. History of culture of European and American countries. - M., 1987.

6. Kravchenko A.I. Culturology: textbook for universities / A.I. Kravchenko. - 4th ed. - M.: Academic Project; Trixta, 2003.

7. Cultural studies. History of world culture: Textbook for universities / Markova A.N. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M: UNITY, 2002.

8. Culturology: a textbook for students of higher educational institutions / scientifically. ed. Doctor of Philology, Prof. G.V. Dracha. - 6th ed. - Rostov n/a: “Phoenix”, 2004.

9. Nalivaiko D.S. Art: directions, trends, styles. - K., 1986.

10. Self-awareness of European culture of the 20th century. - M., 1991.

The 20th century is the most dynamic in the history of human civilization, which could not but affect the entire character of its culture

General characteristics of the 20th century.: the triumph of science, human intelligence, the era of social storms, upheavals, paradoxes. Modern society, while forming high ideals of love for people, equality, freedom, democracy, has simultaneously given rise to a simplified understanding of these values, which is why the processes occurring in modern culture are so diverse.

Since the 20th century - a century of rapidly changing social systems, dynamic cultural processes, it is very risky to give unambiguous assessments of the development of culture of this period and only a few characteristic features can be identified.

In the history of culture of the 20th century. Three periods can be distinguished:

1. beginning of the 20th century - 1917 (acute dynamics of socio-political processes, diversity of artistic forms, styles, philosophical concepts);

2. 20-30 years (radical restructuring, some stabilization of cultural dynamics, the formation of a new form of culture - socialist),

3. post-war 40s. - the entire second half of the 20th century. (the time of the formation of regional cultures, the rise of national self-awareness, the emergence of international movements, the rapid development of technology, the emergence of new advanced technologies, the active development of territories, the fusion of science with production, a change in scientific paradigms, the formation of a new worldview). Culture is a system, everything in it is interconnected and mutually determined.

Spiritual and material culture of the 20th century. - this is a continuation of the socio-cultural processes of the 19th century, which did not live up to the hopes of mankind and gave rise to a new crisis and upheavals: the contradictions that had accumulated within society could not be resolved by the course of natural historical changes. At the end of the 19th century. irreversible changes have occurred regarding a new understanding of man, his relationship to the world, and a new language of art. An example of such a new attitude was given by French painting, which became not only actively temperamental, but colored by the subjective experiences of a person: impressionism appears, the main goal of which is to capture a moment of life.

A breakthrough beyond the boundaries of conventional art that developed in the 19th century also occurred at the beginning of the 20th century. At the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. Fundamental changes are taking place: culture is becoming international, integrating the spiritual values ​​of almost all ethnic regional types and from this becoming even more diverse. This diversity could not but affect art, literature, philosophy, i.e., culture as a whole, which reflected both cultural decline and degradation of technogenic civilization at the turn of the last two centuries of the 2nd millennium, and a metaphysical approach to solving global problems, an attempt to understand the new the role of man in the world. In cultural studies, art history and science, this cultural process at the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries. was called "decadence", and art and literature - decadent. The main property and feature of decadence is confusion in the face of a dramatically changing world: society turned out to be unable to rationally and scientifically explain the changes that were taking place in politics and economics, new social relations, and a new picture of the world. A contradictory consciousness has emerged that has affected the most important element of the worldview - the question of patterns in natural and social reality. That is why there is a surge of irrationalism and mysticism, and new religious movements are emerging. At the beginning of the 20th century. Philosophical, artistic and literary thought were closely connected (especially in Russia). This is explained by the fact that the development of both philosophy and artistic culture was based on a crisis of social consciousness. Decadence arose on this theoretical basis.

The art of decadence is a reflection of all social and ideological contradictions. In 1909, Futurism appeared, its “Godfather” was an Italian writer F. Marinetti. Later, a new society of expressionists, the “Blue Rider,” appeared, adherents of Dadaism, Audiism, etc. appeared. In 1915, the “wild” Fauvists made themselves known in Paris, and in the same year, the “Bridge” appeared in Dresden, a group of united expressionist artists. Three years later, “The Bridge,” Cubism was formed. In Russia, innovative processes in culture are similar to Western European ones: they created in a lyrical spirit M. Nesterov, I. Levitan, wrote in the spirit of impressionism K. Korovin. A figurative-romantic method is being formed M. Vrubel, complex symbolism V. Borisova-Musatova. The newly appeared magazine "World of Art" focused on detachment from real life impressions, illusoryness, and masquerade, which was unconventional for Russia. And finally, the exhibition “Jack of Diamonds”, held in Moscow, defined a new direction in the development of art. Similar processes took place in literature, theater, and music.

Culture in the 20th century developed in several parallel directions. At the same time, not a single series of stylistic evolution of art and literature exhausts their entire development and does not cover it as a whole; only in interaction do they form the integral history of the culture of the 20th century.

In contrast to movements in the culture of the 19th century that were approximately the same in ideological and stylistic principles. - romanticism, academicism, realism, the artistic culture of the 20th century, breaking up into a number of movements, represents a different attitude of artistic creativity to reality. The variety of styles and methods in the culture of the 20th century, moving away from the classical techniques of artistic creativity, was called modernism. Translated from French, modernism means “new, modern.” In general, this is a set of aesthetic schools and movements of the late 19th - early 20th centuries, characterized by a break with traditional realistic movements. Modernism united various creative understandings of the features of the time of decadence: a sense of disharmony in the world, the instability of human existence, rebellion against rationalistic art and the growing role of abstract thinking, transcendentalism and mysticism, the desire for innovation at any cost
In its extreme manifestations in art, literature, and theater, modernism renounces the meaningfulness and visual originality of images, harmony, and naturalness. The essence of the modernist movement is the dehumanization of man, as he wrote about in “Philosophy of Culture” X. Ortega y Gasset. Often modernism operates within the framework of realistic reflection, but in a unique form. In addition, one should distinguish between modernism as a method and modernism as a movement. If modernism in the broad sense implies all the diversity of non-realistic trends in artistic culture, then modernism in the narrow sense is an artistic system that has a certain unity, integrity, and common artistic techniques

Close to the concept of “modernism” is another concept - “avant-garde” (French vanguard), which unites the most radical variety of modernism.

Modernism is a characteristic feature of the aesthetics of the 20th century, independent of social strata, countries and peoples. In its best examples, the art of modernism enriches world culture through new means of expression.

Along with modernism, in parallel with it, realism existed and continued to develop. At the turn of the century, it underwent multifaceted changes, manifesting itself in different ways, but most clearly as neorealism, especially in cinema ( L. Visconti, M. Antonioni, R. Rossellini, St. Kramer, A. Kurosawa, A. Vaida). Neorealism fulfilled the task of a truthful reflection of social existence, the struggle for social justice and human dignity. The principle of neorealism has found its expression in art ( R. Guttuso, E. Wyeth), and in literature ( A. Miller, E. Hemingway, A. Zegers, E.M. Remarque). Writers and artists worked from the perspective of neorealism: J. Amado, G. Marques, D. Siqueiros.

Decadent literature of the turn of the century is also represented by symbolism, the formation of which is associated with names A. Rimbaud, P. Verlaine, O. Wilde.

In the literary process of the 20th century. changes occurred due to socio-economic and political reasons. Among the main features of the literature of this time we can highlight: politicization, strengthening the connection of literary trends with various political movements; strengthening mutual influence and interpenetration of national literatures, internationalization; denial of literary traditions; intellectualization, the influence of philosophical ideas, the desire for scientific and philosophical analysis; fusion and mixing of genres, variety of forms and styles; desire for the essay genre.

In the history of literature of the 20th century. It is customary to distinguish two major periods:

1)1917-1945
2) after 1945

Literature in the 20th century. developed in line with two main directions - realism and modernism
Realism allowed for bold experiments, the use of new artistic techniques with one goal: a deeper comprehension of reality ( B. Brecht, W. Faulkner, T. Mann)

Modernism in literature is most clearly represented by creativity D. Joyce and F. Kafka, which are characterized by the idea of ​​the world as an absurd beginning, hostile to man, disbelief in man, rejection of the idea of ​​progress in all its forms, pessimism.

Of the leading literary movements of the mid-20th century. should be called existentialism, which as a literary movement arose in France ( J. P. Sartre, A. Camus)

The features of this direction are: the approval of “pure” unmotivated action; affirmation of individualism; a reflection of a person’s loneliness in an absurd world hostile to him.

Avant-garde literature was a product of the emerging era of social change and cataclysm. It was based on a categorical rejection of reality, the denial of bourgeois values ​​and the energetic breaking of traditions. To fully characterize avant-garde literature, one should dwell on such movements as expressionism, futurism and surrealism

The aesthetics of expressionism is characterized by the priority of expression over image; the artist’s screaming “I” comes to the fore, which displaces the object of the image.

The futurists completely rejected all previous art; they proclaimed vulgarity, the unspiritual ideal of a technocratic society, and naivety. The aesthetic principles of the Futurists were based on the breaking of syntax, the denial of logic, word creation, free associations, and the rejection of punctuation.

Surrealism is associated with the work of the French poet G. Appolinaire, who first used this term. The leading aesthetic principle of surrealism was automatic writing, based on the theory 3. Freud. Automatic writing - creativity without mind control, recording free associations, dreams, dreams. A favorite technique of the surrealists is the “stunning image”, consisting of disparate elements. Avant-garde continued to exist in the second half of the 20th century.

In general, for literature of the 20th century. characterized by stylistic and genre diversity, non-standard literary movements that are in complex relationships.

In the art of the 20th century. There were changes in the traditional approach to reflecting reality. They manifested themselves: in a noticeable increase in the desire for generalization of the image; disappearance of detail; increasing interest in simplifications or exaggerations of individual details; shifting the author’s focus towards the inner life of the image; a shift towards transformations in the appearance of an object due to the individual vision of the artist

The art of painting was distinguished by extreme complexity, inconsistency, diversity, the desire to modify and transform traditions, a protest against academicism and the search for new forms. As a result, a crisis has matured within art itself, associated, on the one hand, with complex relationships in the artistic environment, and on the other, with difficulties in understanding innovations by the general public, who have not been able to move away from the usual academic ideals. It is not surprising that any art exhibition was accompanied by heated discussions and criticism.

Art of the 20th century developed in several directions, but no one style followed from another, no one method was the cause of the emergence of new ones. But the main thing is: none of the directions of stylistic evolution covers the entire development of art as a whole. To understand the integrity, it is necessary to consider the totality of all existing methods and styles: only in interaction do they form the history of art of the 20th century.

The fate of the most striking artistic styles turned out to be different: some (cubism, Dadaism) shone brightly, but did not receive development, others (realism) underwent numerous modifications and, being modernized, “survived” until the end of the 20th century.

By the turn of the century, realism ceased to be a single system, but functioned in different forms. Sometimes this movement took different forms, but the goal was the same. Impressionism (P. Cezanne, W. van Gogh, P. Gauguin, O. Renoir) changes style characteristics. During this period, an intensive rethinking of the tasks of art began, a movement “into the depths” of a person’s personality in order to reveal all his potential capabilities. This became the subject of heated debate about the fate of art and culture.
All forms and all trends in the art of decadence, rebelling against traditions, were called modernist. What is their essence? Firstly, in a subjectivist vision of the world, secondly, in switching attention to the aesthetic existence of the work of art itself, its coloristic and plastic design, thirdly, in declaring the unconditional role of imagination and fantasy in the creation of a work. As a result, there is a contrast between the artistic world and the real world. Modernism developed in several stages and manifested itself in many movements. Starting from the 60s, modernism entered the stage of postmodernism. It is not easy to understand the labyrinths of modernist movements. It is advisable to consider its most striking manifestations: abstractionism and avant-gardeism.

Abstractionism, an extreme form of modernism, arose as a challenge to society and as a consistent destruction of the real image that reflects the world by familiar means. We can say that abstractionism arose on the ruins of cubism, futurism and a number of other modernist movements that had reached their decline. V. Kandinsky, K. Malevich, P. Klee, V. Tatlin, M. Larionov, R. Delaunay, P. Mondrian and others stood at the origins of abstract art.

They, affirming the importance of the subconscious, viewed the creative process as immersion in the world of intuitive movements of the soul, the automatic transmission of their feelings. They proceeded from the fact that the connection between art and forms of life has already exhausted itself and man is not capable of understanding the world, much less capable of embodying it in plastic images due to the diversity of the new world. The means of displaying a vague subconscious image can be anything: from classical paints and canvas to stone, wire, garbage, pipes, etc. The main thing in abstract art is a combination of colors, lines, spots, strokes, divorced from natural and social reality. This is a non-objective and formless art.

In abstract art, the figurative basis that constitutes the essence of artistic creativity is excluded.

Early (1920 - 1930) abstractionism became widespread in architecture and applied art. Its breeding ground was the sentiments of the bourgeois intelligentsia.

Late (post-war years) abstractionism is represented by three streams:

1) expressive painting and graphics (free, spontaneous combination of lines and spots),
2) surrealism (gravitation towards mystery, magic, nightmarish psychological visions, delusional associations, absurd combination of various objects and images), which is most fully represented in creativity S. Dali and R. Mogritta,
3) abstract-geometric, technical art (purely decorative solutions, abstract sculpture from various types of metal using modern means of processing). Abstractionism was most fully developed in the USA.

Abstractionism was replaced by avant-gardeism. A bright surge of this trend of modernism occurred at the end of the 60s. Avant-garde lies at the heart of the ideas of the hippie counterculture, expressing protest against everything in the world, protest for the sake of protest. Avant-garde is a surrogate for art, to which beauty, the concept of beauty, and harmony are alien. Representatives of avant-garde art create between art and non-art.

The result is:

· op art (optical art) - ornamental and geometric compositions;

· spatial art; earth art; the art of new figurativeness;

· pop art (popular art).

Of the listed types of avant-gardeism, the most famous is popular, or pop Art. Artists who create in this style use in their work real objects, advertising, photography, any other images taken from their natural environment, and create arbitrary combinations of them, trying to find a relationship, or without any relationship. The result is a so-called artifact (an artificially arranged composition, structure), and not a work of art. This composition should evoke certain associations and experiences that arise in addition to the artistic impression.

Pop art emerged as a kind of reaction to the phenomenon of abstract art, opposing its extreme abstraction. A prominent representative of pop art is K. Rauschenberg, American artist.

Pop art manifested itself as the aggression of mass culture, revealed everything that it carried, turning art into a spectacle, reflecting irreconcilability with modernity. In the Soviet Union, avant-gardeism also manifested itself as a protest against officialdom in culture, against social realism, but as “catacomb”, that is, illegal, modern art. Realism as an artistic phenomenon in art combines two principles - ideological and methodological. Realism in 20th century culture is the continuing influence of 19th century culture. Along with the direct tradition inherited from this century, two new trends in realism are emerging.

Picturesque realism - gravitates towards an emotional, impulsive interpretation of the image, as if under the influence of the ideas of impressionism,

Socialist realism - focuses on solving social problems.

In the works of the first, the world is presented naturalistically, impulsively, emotionally, and vividly. Artists of this movement were primarily interested not in events and actions, but in the state of the environment, uniting objects and figures into a pictorial whole that did not require a strict construction of space. This type of realism tends to be multicolored, richly colorful, broad strokes, graphic lines and silhouettes.

The style of the artists of this school can be said to be a synthesis of impressionism and modernism. A significant place in their work was occupied by the people as the bearer of sustainable beauty. Folk motifs in their works appear in a colorful, festive form ( A. Zorn, A. Arkhipov, K. Yuon). In line with pictorial realism, plein air, landscape-lyrical painting, in which the character and state of nature were interfaced with the moods and feelings of man, reached a special rise ( I Grabar, K. Yuon). They worked in the genre of theatrical portraits M. Vrubel, P. Kustodiev, V. Serov.

Social realism is a form of realism that focuses on the reflection of social reality, promoting socialist ideas in the forms of an artistic ideal. Socialist realism is characterized by allegorical, symbolic compositions glorifying freedom and labor. Concepts and judgments about life are expressed in this art indirectly in the artistic theme of the work, which contains a conceivable, desired world. The democratic beliefs or sentiments of socialist realist artists, their humanistic views, feelings of the drama of life are reflected in their work (early Picasso, A Matisse, M Saryan, P Kuznetsov).

Both events and characters are depicted as they are, without a touch of romance or beautiful fiction ( N. Kasatkin, E Munk, A Arkhipov) In the art of socialist realism, the theme of awakening the people, awakening their consciousness consistently developed.

One of the varieties of realism is neorealism, whose representatives were P. Picasso, F Leger, A Fou-geron, A Tsitsinato.

Particular attention should be paid to the Mexican school of neorealism - the muralists, the essence of which was to decorate public buildings with cycles of frescoes from the history of the country, the life of the people, their struggle. Monumentalists recreated the art of the Aztecs, Mayans, and turned to the monumental art of the Renaissance. The main character of these frescoes is the people. Philosophically generalizing social phenomena and historical events, penetrating into their deep meaning, the artists of this school laid the foundations of democratic national art ( D. Rivera, D. Siqueiros, X. Orozco, R. Guttuso).

In the 80s new forms of realism arose, called “angry realism”, hyperrealism, or photo-documentary painting, naive realism, folk realism, etc. This suggests the conclusion that the term “realism” can be applied in a conditional form to that conglomerate of realistic schools and movements. But, nevertheless, realistic art is now very widely developed.
The main trends in the development of modern culture include the process of forming the integrity of the world. The integrity of the world is the interconnection and interdependence of people and nations. It appeared as a result of the development of production on a global scale and the emergence of global problems. The integrity of the world served as the basis for the formation of modern humanity and a single universal human culture.

Humanistic principles and ideals have become widespread in modern culture. The essence of modern humanism lies in its universality: it is addressed to every person, proclaims the rights of everyone. In other words, we are talking about democratic humanism.

The humanistic orientation of the culture of the 20th century manifests itself in various spheres - economic, moral, political, artistic, etc. this trend determined, for example, the formation of political culture in advanced countries

Another important result of the development of culture, perceived in our century, is the orientation towards scientific and rational knowledge of the world and the socio-cultural system associated with it - science. The global scientific integrity that emerged in the 20th century marked the beginning of the economic unification of the world. The internationalization of industrial and economic relations is growing. One of the expressions of this process has become transnational corporations with their uniform forms of organizational culture operating in dozens of countries and on various continents. The increasing internationalization of life in the modern world is evidenced by the all-encompassing nature of the scientific and technological revolution and the fundamentally new role of the media and communications.

The technogenic attitude towards nature as a means of satisfying technical needs has become one of the leading trends in the development of culture in the 20th century.

Also, one can observe the tendency of the formation of a single planetary civilization, which is based on the ever-increasing intensity of various kinds of connections: communication, political, economic. As a result, a new systemic quality emerges - world civilization, the interconnection of different countries and peoples increases, crisis and anti-cultural phenomena in one sector are reflected in other regions. At the same time, a more intense global interconnection arises when cultural patterns, scientific achievements, works of art, new forms of social and political life are transmitted and assimilated in a fairly short time throughout the entire civilizational space.

One of the methodological approaches that conceptually comprehends the ongoing changes was the idea of ​​the Japanese sociologist E. Masuda. In 1945, he proposed the theory of the "information society". This is a society united by a single information network. A new information culture is emerging, new ways of obtaining information, production and scientific activities. The concept of the “information society” determined the ways of forming the “material body” of culture.

Cultural modernization.

In the second half of the century, developed countries increasingly abandoned assembly lines, standard consumption went out of fashion, individuality and the difference of people became popular, and political pluralism and cultural diversity were considered the preferred values. The economy has moved from serial, continuous production to small-scale and individual production; small businesses and venture capital firms have flourished in the vicinity of large transnational corporations; enterprises and institutions have moved from cumbersome bureaucratic structures to flexible matrix organizations.

The era of unmanned production has arrived. The main characters were “white collar workers” - workers employed in automated production, scientific and applied development, as well as in the information sector. A special form of employed people has emerged - “computer home workers”, who press the keys of ultra-precise machines and operate with huge flows of information.

Thus, the first and second half of the 20th century are two qualitatively different sociocultural eras. In the first half there were two world wars, in the second - none. The nuclear danger looming over the entire planet made us feel the fragility of human existence and led to the formation of a hitherto unseen type of worldview, which is called planetary thinking. It is based on completely objective processes - the transition of the most developed countries in the 70s from the era of industrial society to the post-industrial era, which is also called the “cybernetic” and “information society”. Personal computers, automatic word processing, cable television, video discs and recording devices have moved from scientific laboratories into everyday life.

Every year, information in the world doubles and triples, and new information channels appear.

The 20th century is called the most dynamic in the history of mankind. The processes of renewal, or modernization, have affected all countries of the world and each person individually. Scientists came up with the theory of modernization, and artists came up with a new style of art called modernism.

Considering the cultural situation of the first half of the 20th century, which developed under the sign of modernism, it can be noted that art historians understand it in two ways - in a broad and narrow sense. In the first, it denotes the entire set of artistic movements, schools and trends of the early 20th century, which expressed a departure from the cultural values ​​of the 18th-19th centuries and proclaimed new approaches and values. Fauvism, expressionism, cubism, futurism, abstractionism, dadaism, surrealism - this is a far from complete list of areas of artistic search at the beginning of the 20th century.

In a narrow sense, modern designates only one direction in art. In this case, its name is placed in quotation marks. "Modern" (fr. moderne- the latest, modern, art nouveau, art nouveau) - a stylistic direction in European and American art of the late 19th - early 20th centuries. The new direction spread throughout Europe and primarily affected architecture and decorative arts. Representatives of "modern" used new technical and constructive means, free planning, and unique architectural decor to create unusual, distinctly individualized buildings ( X. Van der Velde in Belgium, I. Olbrich in Austria, A. Gaudi in Spain, C.R. Mackintosh in Scotland, F.O. Shekhtel in Russia). In Italy it was called the floral style, or "liberty", in Great Britain - the "modern" style, in Spain - modernism, in Belgium - the Velde style, in Austria - secession, in Germany - art nouveau. The Art Nouveau style arose as a reaction to eclecticism and the lifeless copying of historical styles of the past. Art Nouveau is characterized by flexible, flowing lines and stylized floral patterns. The eccentric decorative style was used to decorate large stores, which at this time began to be built in the large cities of Europe and America, and world exhibitions, thus symbolizing the prosperity and power of trade.

When they talk about the broad meaning of modernism, they also use the term “avant-garde.” In other words, the mentioned movements can be called either modernist or avant-garde. Avant-garde (avant-garde) - a collective name for those artistic trends that are more radical than the art style "modern". This term, unlike modernism, has one meaning.

Modernism (avant-garde) is associated with the departure of culture from realism, with the proclamation of the independence of art from reality. The performances of modernist artists often took the form of an anarchic aesthetic rebellion against established traditions and canons in art. Avant-garde meant those who were ahead of everyone, that is, those who experimented with artistic material, creating new, unique style, language, and content in the visual arts. Revolutions and wars into which the whole world is drawn do not prevent experiments and the search for new things. There is a revision of previous ideas about beauty, color and space. Paris is becoming a place of pilgrimage for artists from all over the world. The taste for sharp, destructive deformation turned out to be the banner of the new century.

test

General trends and features of the development of modern global culture and Russian 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.

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.

In Russia, the beginning of the 90s of the last century is characterized by the accelerated disintegration of the unified culture of the USSR into separate national cultures, for which not only the values ​​of the common culture of the USSR, but also each other’s cultural traditions turned out to be unacceptable. The sharp opposition of different national cultures led to an increase in cultural tension and caused the collapse of a single socio-cultural space.

The culture of modern Russia, organically connected with previous periods of the country's history, found itself in a completely new political and economic situation, which radically changed many things, first of all, the relationship between culture and power. The state stopped dictating its demands to culture, and culture lost its guaranteed customer.

Since the common core of cultural life as a centralized management system and a unified cultural policy has disappeared, determining the paths of further cultural development has become a matter for society itself and a subject of sharp disagreement. The range of searches is extremely wide - from following Western models to an apology for isolationism. The absence of a unifying cultural idea is perceived by part of society as a manifestation of the deep crisis in which Russian culture found itself at the end of the 20th century. Others consider cultural pluralism to be the natural norm of a civilized society.

If, on the one hand, the elimination of ideological barriers created favorable opportunities for the development of spiritual culture, then, on the other hand, the economic crisis experienced by the country and the difficult transition to market relations increased the danger of the commercialization of culture and the loss of national traits in the course of its further development. The spiritual sphere in general was experiencing an acute crisis in the mid-90s. The desire to direct the country towards market development has led to the impossibility of the existence of certain spheres of culture that objectively require state support.

At the same time, the division between elite and mass forms of culture, between youth and the older generation continued to deepen. All these processes are unfolding against the backdrop of a rapid and sharp increase in uneven access to the consumption of not only material, but cultural goods.

Due to the above reasons, the first place in culture began to be occupied by the media, called the “fourth estate”.

In modern Russian culture, incompatible values ​​and orientations are strangely combined: collectivism, conciliarity and individualism, egoism, enormous and often deliberate politicization and demonstrative apoliticality, statehood and anarchy, etc.

If it is quite obvious that one of the most important conditions for the renewal of society as a whole is the revival of culture, then specific movements along this path continue to be the subject of heated debate. In particular, the subject of dispute is the role of the state in regulating culture: whether the state should intervene in cultural affairs, or whether culture itself will find the means for its survival. Here, apparently, the following point of view has been formed: ensuring freedom of culture, the right to cultural identity, the state takes upon itself the development of strategic tasks of cultural construction and responsibilities for the protection of cultural and historical national heritage, the necessary financial support of cultural values. However, the specific implementation of these provisions remains in question. The state, apparently, is not fully aware that culture cannot be left to business; its support, including education and science, is of great importance for maintaining the moral and mental health of the nation. Despite all the contradictory characteristics of national culture, society cannot allow separation from its cultural heritage. A disintegrating culture is little adapted to transformation.

Various opinions are also expressed regarding the ways of cultural development in modern Russia. On the one hand, it is possible to strengthen cultural and political conservatism, as well as stabilize the situation based on ideas about the identity of Russia and its special path in history. However, this is fraught with a return to the nationalization of culture. If in this case there is automatic support for cultural heritage and traditional forms of creativity, then, on the other hand, foreign influence on culture will inevitably be limited, which will greatly complicate any aesthetic innovations.

On the other hand, in the conditions of Russia’s integration under external influence into the world system of economy and culture and its transformation into a “province” in relation to global centers can lead to the dominance of alien trends in domestic culture, although the cultural life of society in this case will also be more stable for account of commercial self-regulation of culture.

In any case, the key problem remains the preservation of the original national culture, its international influence and the integration of cultural heritage into the life of society; integration of Russia into the system of universal human culture as an equal participant in world artistic processes. Here, state intervention in the cultural life of the country is necessary, since only with institutional regulation is it possible to fully utilize the cultural potential, radically reorient state cultural policy, and ensure the accelerated development of the domestic cultural industry within the country.

In modern Russian culture, numerous and very contradictory trends are manifested, partially outlined above. In general, the current period of development of national culture is still transitional, although it can be stated that certain ways out of the cultural crisis have emerged.

Individual approach to the individual in the process of training and education in NHT teams

Folk artistic culture is a widely used concept, but despite its apparent simplicity, defining its boundaries, listing at least its main components and characterizing them is difficult even for specialists. There are several reasons for this...

Historical dynamics of development and modern forms of Russian folk artistic culture

Such a transformation is associated primarily with the general dynamics of the development of society and its culture, which led to the loss of traditional cultures of their universal role in new conditions...

The cultural crisis of the twentieth century

Humanistic ideas of culture of the twentieth century can be traced at all stages of development of modern society - economic, moral, political, artistic and others. This trend, in turn, determined, for example...

Culturology as a product of modern culture

In the absence of generally accepted moral guidelines, social ideals, lack of reliable information about the processes taking place in society, uncertainty about the future...

Holidays in Russia and abroad: cultural, historical and social aspects

The festive culture of different peoples of the world is a set of ritual and ritual practices, traditions and norms for celebrating the main celebrations characteristic of a particular society...

Project for the creation of a social and cultural service enterprise

At the present stage of development of choreographic art, there are so many styles and types of stage dance that not a single choreographer can name their exact number...

Development of corporate culture of social institutions

The phenomenon of corporate culture is the result of mutual influence and interaction between the phenomena of culture and the corporation - organization. Culture is the core of the concepts of many sciences...

Semantics of pagan plasticity

The beginning of the process of separation of the Slavs from the ancient Indo-European community dates back to the 2nd millennium BC. In Greek, Roman, Arabic, Byzantine sources of the beginning of our era, the Slavs are mentioned under the names of Wends, Antes, Sklavins...

Trends in the development of Russian culture

Modern Russian culture at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries finds itself simultaneously included in market mechanisms and in the process of post-totalitarian stagnation; it is completely monopolized...

Civilization

This question is one of the most controversial today. No one, however, doubts that culture plays not just a special, but an increasing role in the prospect of global civilization. One of the positions that is quite common...

Stages of formation and originality of Russian culture

A significant part of the Russian population, having lost faith in the tsar and trust in the church, made Bolshevism their religion and committed a revolution. The price of revolution for Russia and Russian culture is very high...