Traditional culture concepts and properties. Main features of traditional culture

Each exam question may have multiple answers from different authors. The answer may contain text, formulas, pictures. The author of the exam or the author of the answer to the exam can delete or edit a question.

Traditional culture is the autochthonous culture of a traditional society, as well as folk culture. As a rule, it is opposed to those elements of culture that arose relatively recently (over the last 100-150 years), were introduced from the outside, or are of elite origin. For example, the culture of pre-Petrine times is usually called “Russian traditional culture,” while Russian literature XIX century (developed under European influence and created by the nobility) refers to “Russian classical culture.” Interest in traditional culture in modern research has increased significantly. This is due to the fact that in the conditions of globalization and informatization, tradition becomes a link with historical memory and helps preserve national and cultural identity. However, the analysis of specialized literature is significantly complicated due to the fact that the very concept of “traditional culture” is interpreted in various ways. Hence the existence on equal terms of such terms as “traditional”, “archaic”, “pre-industrial”, “agrarian”, “peasant”, “pre-literate”, “household”, “everyday”, “non-specialized” (culture), and finally , "folklore" that is demonstrated modern research, devoted to similar issues. It seems that the choice of name is related to research tasks and those aspects of the phenomenon that require certain fixation. This may be a method of objectifying information (in this case, culture is defined as “pre-literate”), a type of social transmission (“traditional”), a social medium (“peasant”), the nature of production (“non-specialized”), the level of expectation and precedent ( “everyday”, “everyday”), correlation with certain period social development(“archaic”, “pre-industrial”), type of management (“agrarian”). This article highlights the main ones.

Philosophical and sociological approach to consideration traditional culture involves the identification of two of its aspects - substantial (these are those elements of sociocultural experience that are transmitted) and functional (taking into account the “communicative-translation-transmutation” method of “intra- and intergenerational interaction of people” this transmission is carried out). In other words, traditional culture is defined here as “a mechanism for the reproduction of social institutions and norms, in which the maintenance of the latter is justified and legitimized by the very fact of their existence in the past.” Traditional culture functions as a system that ensures the reproduction in the systems of modern culture of those patterns of past activity that have stood the test of time and were tested in similar sociocultural conditions.

This culture is directly related to the tradition that characterizes such self-organizing and self-regulating systems of human activity and the associated sociocultural experience, the functioning and development of which is not associated with institutional forms of support through special apparatus authorities. The legitimacy of these patterns of life activity is determined by the very fact of their existence in the past, and their effectiveness is assessed through the accuracy of following the precedent pattern. The main forms of translation of this culture are folklore and mythological forms and rituals. The constant reproduction of once set patterns of behavior acts as customs, gradually losing their sacred-ritual component. Hence conservatism, static, extensive development.

A very meaningful interpretation of folk culture within the framework sociological approach suggested by K. B. Sokolov. The researcher proceeds from the fact that one of the main functions of traditional culture is the affirmation of a certain picture of the world. Remaining within the framework of this logic, the author considers it necessary to study folklore from the point of view of the theory of subcultural stratification. The researcher relies on the theses of B. Asafiev and B. M. Bernstein about the creation of art close to them by “every culture” and “every social layer” and, accordingly, on the existence in each society of various cultures serving a certain class, as well as on the subcultural concept of M S. Kagan. The author notes a significant complication of the subcultural structure modern city, including dozens of subcultures of various kinds. At the same time, each subculture develops a special picture of the world and special image lives embodied by a kind of folklore.

This concept was presented a little earlier in a detailed study prepared by the team of the State Institute of Art Studies under the leadership of K. B. Sokolov, “ Artistic life modern society", the first volume of which is devoted to the study of the specific manifestations of subcultures and ethnic groups in the artistic culture. In an article devoted to subcultural stratification modern folklore, the author identifies the following subcultures that create specific folklore: national subcultures of ethnic minorities, humanitarian intelligentsia, subcultures of entrepreneurs and representatives of the bureaucracy, subcultures of different faiths - from Orthodox to Hare Krishnas, youth subcultures, subcultures of professional cadre workers, limit workers and homeless people, subcultures of street teenage groups. Of particular interest are the new subcultural formations identified by the author that arose as a result of economic transformations in society, around which and in the midst of which a certain folklore also developed - “mobile professionals” (“yuppies”), “new Russians”.

It should be noted that the subcultural approach to the analysis of folklore turned out to be so productive that it gave rise to a number of publications following this principle. Among them, the research project “Modern Urban Folklore” is distinguished by its fundamental nature, where the following scheme of its research is used, reflected in the composition of the book: traditions of subcultures - rituals and ceremonies of the modern city - a picture of urban space - the genre composition of verbal folklore - the speech habits of the city. Exploring subcultures in terms of the information that is transmitted within their boundaries in a traditional way, the authors highlight the mythology and rituals of tourists, professional programmers, doctors, conscripts, students, paratroopers and many other groups. These social strata are not quantitatively representative (for example, the world of the hospital, the temple environment, communal apartments), however, have their own vision of the world, priorities, life strategy, fashion, slang, lifestyle, everyday habits, a special attitude towards representatives of all other subcultures and, of course, folklore.

Within the framework of the sociological approach, A. V. Zakharov builds his theory of traditional culture. The key question for him is what tradition is - the content of culture or the way it functions and, accordingly, which methodology is more acceptable and adequate to the very subject of research. The author prefers the functional approach to the substantial one and tries to identify the specifics of this method of transmitting culture in comparison with all other methods of social communication. In his opinion, we can talk about traditional culture when modernity is “interpreted, assessed, legitimized through the “prism” of the past, when the past is made starting point to understand the present." For the author, the main thing is, first of all, not the aesthetic or moral content of the artifacts of a certain culture, but the social way “by which spiritual (symbolic) values are produced, replicated, and consumed.” It seems that such an approach is very productive, since it allows us to consider both mass and elite culture from similar positions.

The “socio-humanitarian” approach dominates in the collective monograph devoted to the peculiarities of the functioning of traditional culture in modern conditions. The authors identify two blocks in traditional culture, including “norms-values-meanings-symbols” (“ideas about nature, space, man’s place in the world, religious and mythological concepts about man’s relationship with certain higher and lower powers, ideas about the ideals of wisdom, strength, heroism, beauty, good and evil, about the forms of “right” and “wrong” behavior and structure of life, about serving people, the fatherland (literally - the country, the land of the fathers), etc.), embodied in cultural texts of different symbolic nature , as well as “the forms of their functioning and social transmission.”

The authors highlight the following components of traditional culture as the most significant: cultural text in a broad (not only verbal) sense; social carrier - subject of culture; social mechanisms of cultural transmission; social functions culture in society. Such an approach to the analysis of folk culture seems productive, since it allows us to consider as its elements not only the finished results of activity, but also “technologies of behavior” - institutionalization, regulation and regulation - as mechanisms for including an individual in a certain social community, and this community - into the surrounding world. This method of cultural analysis is not only justified, but also in some cases, when studying specific historical types of cultures and local sociocultural communities, necessary.

Such an examination of culture makes it possible to establish its parameters as fundamentally different from all others, to make the functioning of culture within the boundaries of a “qualitatively defined” social community “empirically perceived.” Within the framework of this paradigm, it is possible to create a model current culture a certain social formation and a description of those that are universal for any human community, and at the same time having a specific historical character cultural forms, which are knowledge, customs, traditions, values, ideas, norms, beliefs, language, myths, ideas, etc.

At the same time, this approach also has significant drawbacks and, above all, the unification of various principles for considering this phenomenon. Sensing the problematic nature of applying the overall definition of folk culture, which is proposed in the monograph, the author of the section devoted to the substantiation of such an approach, N. G. Mikhailova proposes to “form the subject of study in a “composite way”” and include in folk culture its historically established varieties (urban, peasant, Slobodskaya), creative products of modern subcultures, adapted forms professional culture, as well as its various intermediate forms. Indeed, traditional culture is a rather complex phenomenon, the essential features of which are difficult to fix, which the author herself notes, defining it as “a collective concept that does not have clearly defined boundaries and includes cultural layers of different eras from ancient times to the present.” Its main features are: the awareness of the subject-bearer of identification with the people (which allows the authors to define this culture as “folk”) and the non-specialized nature of cultural activity. However, as a comment, it can be noted that these signs cannot act as essential characteristics this type of culture: identification with the people is also characteristic of a subject of high culture (it is another matter to emphasize its ethnogenetic or ethnosocial component in the content of this concept). The principle of non-specialized activity does not allow including in this phenomenon, for example, handicrafts, created by masters who gain experience through long practice. (By the way, K. B. Sokolov also notes the unsatisfactory nature of these signs of folk culture). Indeed, the essential quality of folk culture, highlighted by N. G. Mikhailova, seems to be its ability to function outside of institutional and organizational forms (this is “a culture primarily or exclusively of oral tradition, existing both in the past and in the present according to the folklore type, i.e. transmitted from face to face, from generation to generation in an act of direct communication").

In folkloristics, the terms “folk culture”, “traditional culture” and “folklore” in its “broad” (K. V. Chistov) sense, covering “the whole complex of phenomena” are equally used of a given people" Nevertheless, the difference between these terms is quite significant. Traditional culture in most studies is understood as “all folk traditional peasant spiritual and partly material culture”, which determines “the qualitative, most stable... parameters that have demonstrated their unconditional value” and “has become generally significant for all or at least for the majority of social groups” Moreover, traditionality determines the value-normative content of a given culture, as well as the social mechanisms of its transmission, and “nationality” determines self-identification with the people, expressed in stereotypes social behavior, value-normative systems, everyday ideas. Folklore is interpreted as a “specific subsystem” that plays a very important role in the system of traditional culture, in specific forms integrating, consolidating and accumulating traditional information developed by an ethnic group or its local group.

In other words, folklore is “a specific “language” of traditional culture, different from other “languages” - ornament, melodic, sign and symbolic information transmitted by things - objects of material culture.” It is characteristic that the researchers themselves perceive such semantic mobility of the boundaries of these terms as evidence of a certain theoretical disadvantage within the boundaries of folklore and ethnology. It is characteristic that this problem of theoretical polyvalence was noted in many studies of the middle and first half of the last century, where well-known domestic and Western scientists made active attempts to systematize and classify definitions of folklore, highlighting conceptually similar ones among them. Meanwhile, the problem of defining folkloristics’ own subject of research has not been resolved to this day, as evidenced, according to K. V. Chistov, by the presence of “broad” and “narrow” uses of the term.

In some studies, folklore is still defined as a kind of survival phenomenon. This term denotes both exclusively oral creativity - verbal and song, as well as choreographic and gaming. At the same time, splints are artificially rejected from this phenomenon, folk toy, objects of folk crafts, which in the empirical space are inextricably linked with verbal folk art as having a common nature with it and expressing common values. In an effort to overcome this contradiction, some scientists include not only applied fine arts in the totality of phenomena denoted by this category, but also extend this concept to all known forms of folk art, including folk knowledge, folklore, and art. Thus, the term "folklore" since its introduction by William Thoms in 1846 scientific circulation, still does not have a single, generally accepted meaning, which reflects scientific literature, both dedicated to this phenomenon itself and discussing this terminological problem.

At a meeting of government experts on the preservation of folklore at UNESCO, held in Paris on March 1, 1985, the following definition was developed: “folklore (more in a broad sense traditional folk culture) is the collective and tradition-based creativity of groups or individuals, determined by the hopes and aspirations of society, which is an adequate expression of their cultural and social identity; folklore patterns and values are transmitted orally, through imitation and other means. Its forms include tongue, oral literature, music, dances, games, mythology, rituals, customs, crafts, architecture and other types of artistic creativity.”

Reflecting this diversity of approaches to defining the concept of “folklore,” K. V. Chistov proposed to distinguish 4 main concepts among them:

1) sociological (and historical-cultural), where folk culture is understood as orally transmitted common experience and knowledge. In other words, folk culture here is interpreted as broadly as possible as all spiritual culture and some forms of material culture dating back to the archaic period of development and having a sociological limitation (“common people”);

2) aesthetic, where folklore is defined as “artistic” communication;

3) philological, emphasizing verbality, the connection of this tradition with the word;

4) “teretic-communicative”, where folklore is understood as a sign-symbolic system that arises within the boundaries of pre-literate culture.

Thus, within the framework of the ethnographic approach, such qualities of folk culture as its connection with archaic culture and belonging to a certain social group(“to the people” as opposed to the “privileged minority”). This fairly well-established idea of folklore as a folk peasant spiritual culture, the method of functioning and transmission of which is oral tradition, is currently considered by many researchers as limited. Today, those signs of folklore (namely, belonging to a peasant tradition and the oral nature of translation), which in the classical works of V. Ya. Propp were considered as its unchangeable, generic qualities, are today perceived as depriving this category of universality, not allowing it to be considered as folklore , in essence, a predominant part of modern folk culture.

Authoritative researchers of oral folklore have repeatedly drawn attention to the historical and methodological limitations of this category in modern conditions. poetic creativity S. Yu. Neklyudov and K. V. Chistov, who note that in such a local perspective of consideration, all texts that claim to be folklore, but do not meet the principle of “orality” and have no connection with peasant environment, are deprived of legitimacy. Meanwhile, according to scientists, in modern culture, phenomena of the folklore type clearly manifest themselves in the urban context - in science, literature, art, and everyday life. Taking into account the changed social and cultural reality, many researchers are inclined to such an understanding of folklore, where it is considered exclusively in a functional aspect as a set of verbal or verbal-nonverbal structures circulating in everyday practice.

Thus, within the framework of various sciences where folk culture is understood, the functional approach begins to predominate, where the definition of a given phenomenon gradually moves from the area of its content to the area of the conditions of its functioning. In the present study, this aspect of the existence of folk culture is certainly taken into account, which is actually reflected in the thesis defended by the author for almost ten years, according to which mass and folk culture exhibit a significant not genetic, but functional relationship, manifested in their anonymity and variability , lack of specialization ( we're talking about about the content level of the artifacts themselves, and not their creators), formulaicity, interactivity.

Meanwhile, such an approach, despite all its advantages, also has a pronounced drawback, which is manifested in the fact that in the conditions of a post-industrial and information society, the main channel of circulation of the overwhelming majority of cultural forms has become the means of mass communications, including network technologies. Moreover, what is very important, this method of information circulation means not only the consumption of cultural phenomena, but also familiarization with a tradition, entry into a certain culture, and even the creation of certain cultural artifacts (an example of this is the entire network culture). Therefore, reference to a communication channel in modern conditions does not always allow us to determine the specifics of a culture circulating in such a way. Based on this, it seems that the only basis that allows such operations of distinction to be carried out is the type of personality produced by a given culture, the type of subject of historical action.

Hence, we consider it possible, within the framework of the culturological approach, to define traditional culture as a culture that reproduces such a subject of historical action as a collective personality. For a person of this type, it is most typical to identify oneself with a social group, all representatives of which are united by common cultural ties and mechanisms of life. In such societies, called traditional or pre-industrial, collectivist social ideas presuppose strict adherence to traditional norms of behavior and exclude the possibility of individual personal freedom.

In other words, this culture reproduces a subject of historical action who, as an individual or as a person, acts only as a performer of the function assigned to him by the community. That is why the dominant ideas appear as collective, and the individual as a “collective personality.” In archaic classless societies, this collective personality represents on behalf of the entire tribe, clan; in class societies - slaveholding, feudal - on behalf of the “people” as “ common people", that is, on behalf of the class standing at the base of the social pyramid; in modern societies of the bourgeois type - on behalf of ethnic communities, individual subcultures, reminiscent of the people in mentality and structural forms. Both tribal, archaic culture, and folk (that is, common people), and modern subcultural communities, reminiscent of quasi-ethnic sociocultural formations, reproduce the same collective type of personality.

Throughout human history and in the modern era, a huge variety of types of cultures have existed and continues to exist in the world as local historical forms of human communities. Each culture is the result of the activity of its creator - an ethnos or ethnic community. The development and functioning of culture is special way life activity of the ethnic group. Therefore, each culture expresses the specifics of the way of life of its creator, his behavior, his special way of perceiving the world in myths, legends, religious beliefs and value orientations that give meaning to human existence.

Among the diversity of ethnic cultures, scientists distinguish a type of traditional (archaic) culture, which is common in societies where changes are imperceptible over the life of one generation. This type of culture is dominated by customs and traditions passed on from generation to generation. Traditional culture organically combines its constituent elements; within it, a person does not feel discord with society. Such a culture organically interacts with nature, is united with it, it is focused on preserving its originality, its cultural identity. Traditional culture, as a rule, is pre-industrial, unwritten, and its main occupation is agriculture. There are also traditional cultures in the world that are

are still in the hunting and gathering stage. Currently, the Areal Card Index of Human Relations records more than 600 traditional (archaic) cultures.

For ethnology, the question of the relationship between traditional cultures and modern historical reality is quite natural. Studying this issue, in turn, requires research into the main features of traditional culture.

The most important property of traditional culture is its syncretism, expressed primarily in the integrity and indivisibility of three forms of existence: culture, society and man. Each member of the tribal group is equal to the whole - everyone has the same name, the same body coloring, the same jewelry, the same myths, rituals, and songs. In other words, “I” is completely dissolved in “we”. Man does not separate himself from nature, considering himself the same part of it, endowed with a soul, like plants, animals, mountains, rivers, etc. Syncretism also manifests itself in the structure of culture itself, which has not yet been divided into separate spheres with developed independent functions.

The embodiment of this syncretism is myth - a syncretic formation that perceives the world as a whole and contains in embryo all the spheres of culture that emerged later. In myth there is a coincidence of a sensory image received from certain elements of the external world and a general idea. He does not exist in general concepts, but in concrete sensory images, which leads to the identity of the material world and its picture, the spiritual image created by man. This is not faith or knowledge, but a sensory experience of reality. But most importantly, this way of perceiving and explaining the world determines a person’s place in the world around him and creates a sense of confidence for existence and activity in it. The indivisible holistic thinking that is formed connects, and does not separate, identifies, and does not oppose, various aspects of human life. Therefore, at this stage of the development of consciousness, myth turns out to be many times stronger than analytical thinking.

The second essential feature of non-literate cultures is traditionalism. All the features of the structure of life and everyday life, myths and rituals, norms and values of such a society were stable, rigid, inviolable and passed on from generation to generation as an unwritten law. The power of tradition - this cultural substitute for the genetic method of transmitting behavioral programs lost by humanity - was absolute, consecrated by mythological ideas. After all, myth by its nature claims to be the absoluteness of everything affirmed.

them, requires from each individual the unconditional acceptance of his system of ideas and feelings and their transmission intact from generation to generation.

But no matter how great the power of traditions was, they could not be preserved forever. Slowly and gradually, innovations penetrated the culture; in a single syncretic culture, its separate independent spheres began to stand out; people began to isolate themselves from the world, to realize their “I”, different from “we”. This is how traditional cultures arose.

The power of tradition is very great here too. And although human behavior is much more diverse than in archaic culture, it still obeys the norms developed in society. In reality, these norms are presented in the form of a set of special standard programs - behavioral stereotypes. They usually foresee in advance most of the situations that may arise in front of a person in his daily practice. The justification for this kind of stereotypes is a reference to the law of ancestors - the main way of motivating actions in traditional culture. Question: “Why is this and not otherwise?” - simply has no meaning in it, since the whole point of tradition is to do it the way it was done the first time. Thus, it is the past (in the form of ancestral law, myth) that acts in traditional culture as an explanation of the present and future.

These behavioral stereotypes are based not on rules, as in modern society, but on images, models (originally recorded in myths), and following them becomes a prerequisite social life team. Such samples have a syncretic, undifferentiated character. Later, legal, ethical, religious and other norms will emerge from them, which are still contained in them in the form of embryos.

An important property of traditional behavioral stereotypes is their automation. They are committed unconsciously, since in traditional culture a person’s entire life is predetermined in the only possible way, he does not have the right to choose, as in modern society, which is aware that life can follow different, often alternative, paths of development, and the decision is made by the person himself.

In traditional culture, the idea of the existence of a center and periphery is structuring. In the center are sacred elements that define norms, values, ideas about good and evil in a given culture, as well as knowledge about the necessary actions to maintain the harmony of the world. On the cultural periphery - ordinary, everyday life of people. The legacy left from archaic cultures and their syncretism is the principle of unity

the world, the inseparability of its individual constituent elements. There are no objects or phenomena in the world that are absolutely isolated from others. Each of them is connected with other objects and phenomena by many threads and contains their particles. Everything is in everything. In particular, this means that everyday life, the sphere of the profane (ordinary) turns out to be saturated with symbolism, the true meaning of which lies in the area of the sacred. This is how the mythological model of the world is formed, and in traditional culture it continues to play vital role. Only later stages of cultural development led to the polarization of these two spheres.

The integrity of this culture, combined with the absence of special means of information circulation, leads to the fact that each element of culture is used much more fully than in modern society.

The point is that for modern man the entire world around him is divided into two parts: the world of signs and the world of things. There is a specialization of sign systems, according to which all phenomena of the world can be used both as things and as signs. Depending on which of their properties are actualized, thinginess or signification, they take on one or another status. A person is constantly engaged in determining the semiotic status of the things around him. This process is automated and occurs on a subconscious level. Three groups of things can be distinguished: with a constantly high semiotic status - things-signs (amulets, masks, flags, coats of arms), they are important not for their material value, but for their symbolic meaning; things with a constantly low semiotic status - material objects that are used in modern culture and can only satisfy specific practical needs; the main group consists of things that can be both things and signs, have material value, satisfying some practical needs, and carrying a certain symbolic load. In fact, only last group constitute complete things. The problem is that there are not too many such things in our world, and the extreme rationalism of the modern scientific worldview has taught us not only to the firm belief that sign activity is secondary, but also to the fact that a clear separation of the utilitarian and sign aspects has always existed. And we do not see that this statement is incorrect not only for traditional culture, but also for modern one. Indeed, in our culture, many things for utilitarian purposes have an additional aesthetic meaning or indicate a certain social status their owner. For example, a Rollex watch, a Parker fountain watch, are not just watches and hand-made

coy, but also symbols of belonging to a certain social group, symbols of wealth and respectability.

Therefore, it is impossible to clearly separate the rational and the irrational, including in things. Everything that is capable of influencing the mind, feeling and will asserts its undoubted reality. And in this sense, the symbolic meaning of things is no less real than their utilitarian value. It is also impossible to raise the question of what comes first: thinghood or signification. An object becomes a fact of culture if it meets both practical and symbolic requirements.

All these properties of things are much more clearly visible in traditional culture.

Since in traditional culture the world is perceived as a whole, all things and phenomena of the world simply cannot perform any one function - they are necessarily multifunctional. There are no things-signs, no things-material objects. Any thing can serve both utilitarian and symbolic purposes at the same time. Therefore, traditional culture uses not only language, myth, ritual, but also utensils, economic and social institutions, kinship systems, housing, food, clothing, and weapons as semiotic (sign) objects. For example, even in mature Chinese culture, bronze vessels were used not only for their intended purpose: their decorations and reliefs carried a large amount of information about the structure of the world, its value orientations, etc. At the same time, we can rightfully say that the main purpose of these vessels is to serve as a source of information about the world, and the possibility of their utilitarian use is a consequence of their main function. Thus, in traditional society things are always signs, but signs are always things.

Therefore, if in modern society we can talk about the existence of material and spiritual culture, then in the traditional one such a division will give a deliberately distorted picture.

The fundamental features of the functioning of things in a traditional society appear already in the process of their manufacture. A master in archaic and traditional culture, when creating a thing, realizes that he is repeating the operations that the Creator of the Universe performed at the Beginning of the World. Thus, there arises a fairly clear awareness of the fact that man continues the work of the demiurges, not only making up for natural losses, but also further filling the world. Therefore, the technology of making things has always belonged to the sphere of the sacred. Even in “very distant times”, artisans were separated into separate castes, and their strength and power in the eyes of

" A. P. Sadokhii

tal society went far beyond the scope of crafts, making them mediators between the human world and nature. Even in the last century, Europe maintained a special attitude towards blacksmiths and millers - as sorcerers who knew the devil.

A person of traditional culture maintains a constant dialogue with the natural environment. It is aimed not at conquering nature (as is typical of modern European culture), but at collaborating with it. Therefore, when collecting material to make something, the master had to not just take any suitable material (wood, clay, ore, etc.), but also ask nature for consent. This was necessary so that it satisfied not only physical, but also symbolic requirements, and correlated with such concepts as life, happiness, purity, etc. The materials that were used to make things had a special status - they were the raw materials for the creation of the world and man himself. Therefore, the techniques that, according to myths, were used by the gods in this case, formed the basis of traditional technology. Usually this meant a strict space-time framework for the entire process (to make a thing there and then or to throw away the unfinished), a strictly limited choice of material, a fixed transformation of the material for each specific case with the help of fire, water, air, and, finally, “revival” of the created - because a dead object cannot exist in the living world.

All these steps took quite a lot of time and, from the point of view of modern researchers, included many unnecessary operations (rituals, dances, spells) that were not required in the technological chain. This is the so-called redundancy of technological processes. But it exists only from the point of view of modern man, who does not pay attention to the symbolic world. In fact, it was ritual that gave birth to technology, and not technology that was accompanied by ritual actions. The master performed a ritual, and the fact that it resulted in a useful object was understood as a natural consequence of the correct initial scheme.

Based on this, the forms of all things were strictly fixed, the design of things did not allow any imagination. Here magic came into play, since things were given the shape of some object from the human environment (animal, plant, etc.), and the things were endowed with their characteristics. In this case, we are faced with phenomena of the same order as hunting magic (before the start of the hunt, a special ritual was carried out - in a magical dance, the hunters had to kill the beast - a shaman in disguise, this was supposed to ensure

success in real hunting). If for our rational mind there is only the function of a thing inherent in the process of its production, then for a mythologically thinking person it is a manifestation of its own, only its inherent features.

It was not enough just to make a thing. New things were always treated with caution. Therefore, before they began to be used, a check was carried out to ensure their compliance with the original samples. Usually these were some symbolic procedures. If a thing did not pass the test, this meant that the ritual of its creation had been violated - usually in some symbolic operations. Such things were rejected and were considered the focus of forces hostile to man, for example, axes that could injure their owner, or houses that brought misfortune to their owners. A satisfactory outcome of the tests meant that a new thing had appeared, which, along with the possibility of its practical use, represented a model of the world and was perceived as Living being with its own characteristics, which was reflected in the name given to this thing. This attitude persisted for the longest time in relation to weapons, especially swords. It is not without reason that not only the names of heroes are known in history, but also their weapons (Excalibur - the sword of King Arthur, Durandal - the sword of Roland).

The full value of things in traditional cultures, their belonging simultaneously to two worlds - the profane (ordinary, material) and the sacred (sign, symbolic) - makes it possible to use them in rites and rituals, which are the most important regulators of behavior in traditional societies.

Almost every nation has its own heritage. One of the main tools for its transmission is folk culture (folklore). Later in the article we will consider this concept in more detail, comparing it with modern trends.

general information

In the history of every nation there is also a folk one, and the latter is a more modern phenomenon. An example of popular culture: a group of young people sing songs of some famous performer, walking the streets. The other type has significant differences. Folklore culture consists of studying sources about parables, legends and other works. Based on this, it becomes clear that in the first case we are dealing with modern mores. And folklore - folk culture - describes the life of the last century. All were created a long time ago and today are considered historical heritage. A small part of the works of past centuries has become an integral part of the modern world.

Degrees of development

There are two levels of folk culture - high and low. The first includes fairy tales, legends, ancient dances, epics, etc. Reduced is considered a manifestation of pop culture. Basically, works that have come down to us from time immemorial have anonymous creators. Fairy tales, epics, dances, songs, myths and legends are among the most valuable highly artistic works. They have nothing to do with elitist manifestations. It is generally accepted that folk culture came to the modern world from ancient times. Its subject is the nation as a whole. There are no individual creators and professional craftsmen who are valued separately. Such culture is part of people’s life and work. All works were passed down orally and had several versions. Reproduction of folk culture can be individual (this is a story, a legend), mass (carnivals), group (dance a dance or sing a song).

Audience

Society has always shown interest in folk culture, as is customary in industrial and traditional societies. However, in a post-industrial environment the situation is slightly different. If we talk about the differences between folk and high culture, they are similar to the differences between ethnic and national. What's the difference? National and high culture is transmitted only in written form. At the same time, folk and ethnic - in different ways (oral, written and others). is created by the educated population, and ethnic - by poorly educated citizens. IN Lately modern audiences have become interested in folk culture and traditions.

Aesthetic component

What it is? Folk art culture is that a person who is a master, through his ability to emphasize a certain thing and also to formulate it all into a meaningful fragment, can convey it all in the form of a song, dance or poetry. Thanks to this, the aesthetic development of the individual in particular and society in general occurs. can attract the majority of the population. All works are created by both professionals and amateurs. All works, songs, poems that are worthy of attention are inherited and become art. A person who knows how to convey his thoughts in poetry, songs or dances is spiritually rich, he has open soul and sincerely shares his impressions. Thanks to such artists, people from year to year had the opportunity to enrich their inner world and fill the emptiness of their souls.

Russian folk culture

This phenomenon is studied by many sciences. Each discipline has its own view of the subject and its own methods of research. The volume of updated information is so large that scientists do not have time to follow it and master it for scientific enrichment and personal knowledge. The heritage of folk culture is becoming greater every day. Moreover, each object claims to be the main one, in which the whole meaning of the world is stored. This means that each discipline presents its knowledge as the most extensive in the field of spiritual values: folklore, literary studies, art criticism - from icon painting to musicology and architecture. Every person who is interested in the folk culture of Russia knows about all the successes of the listed cultures, since they are all audible, readable and put on public display. Their number and anonymity speak of the birth of a national element. And in the symbols, which they tirelessly repeat that they have become masterpieces of Russian culture, the Russian people expressed themselves.

Understanding

Exist different views about the term “folk culture” itself. Below are the main points of view:

enlightenment of the lower classes of society;
enlightenment of the “illiterate” society;
a culture that was created by the elite, but was “brought down” down.

Such definitions carry a cognitive intent when viewed in a specific historical passage.

Traditional folk culture of peasants

It was formed on the basis of religious understanding. It was not so much a spiritual foundation as the main filling of spiritual life. Peasant culture had at its disposal different instruments, which made it possible to perceive and see the world correctly, helped to master the perception of the sensual and supersensible. In accordance with the opinion of a number of authors, the concepts of “religiosity” and “folk culture” can be placed on the same level. The development of peasant spirituality is an important source of subsequent progress in society during the Middle Ages. At the same time, the number of cities in Europe is rapidly growing. The most determined people settled in - serfs, feudal lords who wanted to change their lives. New types of activities appeared: crafts, trade.

Chronicles

In ancient times, classical education in Rus' was not very good. Then distrust of “pagan” science triumphed. At the same time, there were a number of most popular destinations. Among them, it is worth noting iconography, church architecture, liturgical singing and chronicle writing. The Russian chronicler could tell his contemporaries the whole meaning of history; he was a historiosophist, philosopher and chronicler. Such “teachings” and “words” were very popular. At that time, the first written code of laws was created. Russian folk culture had all the features of European culture. And subsequently it had practically no difference from Christian folklore.

Religion

Folk religion in Russia had two names in 19th-century church and academic circles. They defined its nature as a synthesis of Christian doctrine and “pagan” beliefs. The first name was “dual faith”, the second was “everyday Orthodoxy”. The first is used in scientific use and in modern world, it is perceived by scientists formally. IN literally this term should be understood to mean the union of two faiths into a folk religion. In numerous studies of the beliefs of the Eastern Slavs (as well as Russians), the main interest of ethnographers is directed towards “pagan experiences”, reconstruction of archaic models and interpretation. In the Middle Ages in Rus' and the West there was a gap between the traditional consciousness of many and the book culture of a smaller number of the population. Intellectuals of Russia who had a desire to speak Greek studied it under Prince Yaroslav the Wise: they had their own translators in Kyiv. A connection arose between the Middle Eastern centers of Christians and Russia, and over time, despite any events, it was no longer interrupted.

Meaning

How did the formation take place? moral values? Mass culture is a spiritual product of art that is created in a wide circulation. It is designed for a large audience, for a significant number of spectators. Its main advantage is that it is not only intended for entertainment. large quantity people, but also enriching their thoughts. The folk tale which is given above is quite relevant in modern society. Today there are few people who are not interested in the spiritual heritage of their ancestors. Folk culture can be recognized by almost anyone of any age and any level of education. Its main feature is simplicity (texts, movements, sounds are easily perceived by people). Culture is for emotional people.

Spiritual development

Any culture is considered in dynamic and static aspects. Undoubtedly, spiritual development is no exception. The formation of culture is a rather complex phenomenon. Statics provides for development in space. The discipline explores cultural typology, morphology and structure. This is a synchronous study of the process. Culture is also usually classified into spiritual, physical, material and artistic. Let's take a closer look at spiritual culture. It is based on a creative type of activity, which is expressed in a subjective form and satisfies the secondary needs of society. Spiritual culture includes: religious (beliefs, modern cults), moral, legal (legislation, executive system), political (ideology), pedagogical (ideals of raising children), intellectual (history, philosophy, science) parts. You need to know that objects of this subject include museums, theaters, libraries, cinemas, educational establishments, concert halls, courts.

The most important property of traditional culture is its syncretism , expressed primarily in the integrity and indivisibility of three forms of existence: culture, society and man. In other words, “I” is completely dissolved in “we”. Man does not separate himself from nature, considering himself the same part of it, endowed with a soul, like plants, animals, mountains, rivers, etc.

The embodiment of this syncretism is mythological thinking and myth- a syncretic formation that perceives the world as a whole and contains in embryo all the spheres of culture that emerged later. In myth there is a coincidence of a sensory image received from certain elements of the external world and a general idea. It exists not in general concepts, but in concrete sensory images, which leads to the identity of the material world and its picture, the spiritual image created by man.

The next feature of traditional culture that logically follows from mythological thinking is its symbolism, iconicity . It was the symbolic values that were more important in these types of cultures. This is evidenced by a paradox well known to historians: economically primitive tribes often had complex social organization, a developed system of rituals, beliefs and myths.

Associated with this feature the idea of the existence of a center and periphery. In the center are sacred elements that determine norms, values, ideas about good and evil in a given culture, as well as knowledge about the necessary actions to maintain harmony and peace. On the cultural periphery - the ordinary, everyday life of people, everyday life, the sphere of the profane (ordinary) turns out to be saturated symbolism, the true meaning of which lies in the realm of the sacred. This is how it is formed mythological model world, and continues to play a vital role in traditional culture.

Since in traditional culture the world is perceived as integrity, all things and phenomena of the world simply cannot perform any one function - they are necessarily multifunctional. There are no things-signs, no things-material objects. Any thing can serve both utilitarian and symbolic purposes at the same time. Therefore, traditional culture uses not only language, myth, ritual, but also utensils, economic and social institutions, kinship systems, housing, food, clothing, and weapons as semiotic (sign) objects. Thus, in traditional society, things are always signs, but signs are always things.

The next essential feature of non-literate cultures is traditionalism . All the features of the structure of life and everyday life, myths and rituals, norms and values of such a society are stable, rigid, indestructible and are passed on from generation to generation as an unwritten law. The power of tradition - this cultural substitute for the genetic method of transmitting behavioral programs lost by humanity - is absolute, consecrated mythological ideas.

Less important parts of traditional culture are regulated by customs- stereotyped forms of behavior associated with activities of practical importance. Customs regulate the actions of members of an ethnic group in specific situations, regulate the behavior of an individual in one or another area of life and activity, requiring the manifestation moral qualities, typical for of this ethnic group. They exist in everyday life, on the cultural periphery. A higher level of regulation is rituals, much more stringent behavioral programs that operate in the sacred center of culture, and from them correct execution The very existence of this culture and people depends.

And although human behavior is subject to the norms developed in society. In reality, these standards are presented in the form of a set of special standard programs - behavioral stereotypes. They usually foresee in advance most of the situations that may arise in front of a person in his daily practice. The justification for this kind of stereotypes is a reference to the law of ancestors - the main way of motivating actions in traditional culture. Thus, it is the past (in the form of the law of ancestors, myth) acts in traditional culture as an explanation of the present and future.

These behavioral stereotypes are based not on rules, as in modern society, but on images, models (originally recorded in myths), and following them becomes a prerequisite for the social life of the team. Such samples have syncretic, undifferentiated character. An important property of traditional behavioral stereotypes is their automation. They are committed unconsciously, since in traditional culture a person’s entire life is predetermined in the only possible way.

Already the first attempts to study traditional cultures different nations led ethnologists to the conviction that their existence is inextricably linked with rituals and ceremonies. Their practical significance is quite wide and varied. Yes, they regulate emotional condition people, form and maintain a sense of community at the level of the ethnic group as a whole, large and small groups, families, allow an individual to feel his ethnic identity, preserve the value orientations of the ethnic group, are an integral part of the mechanism of ethnicization of the individual, etc. Therefore, a number of sciences have studied these phenomena of traditional culture and given them their own interpretation. So, for example, in one case ritual is considered as a standard stable sequence of actions that has a ceremonial character; in another, ritual is usually understood as stereotypical forms of behavior; in everyday understanding, ritual means a formal procedure, a kind of game, the rules of which are accepted by all its participants.

All rituals can be divided into two main categories: negative and positive. First is a system of prohibitions designed to sharply divide the world of the sacred and the ordinary, since it is understood that mixing them can lead to the destruction of the world and innumerable troubles for people. As an example, we can cite numerous taboos among different nations.

Positive rituals and ceremonies (rite is the peak of ritual action), on the contrary, are designed to bring the two worlds closer to each other. Rituals of this type include rituals of intichyuma (ritual joint eating of the body of a totem animal), sacrifices performed in order to win the favor of the deity and ensure the desired unity of the world. The main task of such rituals is to restore the disturbed order of things, contact between worlds, and the original sacred pattern.

It is important to divide rituals into magical and religious. Magic differs from religion in the absence of belief in God or gods, i.e. personification of supernatural forces. Magic rituals pursue immediate, immediate goals and are the business of individual people, while religious rituals are the business of the whole society.

Rituals can also be divided by function. In this case, stand out crisis rituals performed by an individual or group during critical periods of life (for example, a rain dance performed during a period of prolonged drought that threatens the entire tribe with extinction). Eat calendar rituals, performed regularly upon the occurrence of certain natural phenomena(change of seasons, phases of the moon, ripening of crops, etc.). Rituals of intensification carried out in order to counteract the imbalance of life caused by both internal and external reasons, to intensify the interaction between group members and increase their cohesion. Very important in traditional cultures kinship rituals, and they do not relate to kinship by blood or marriage, but to family relationships formed on the basis of functional relationships. These are, for example, the rituals of relationships between family members and godfather or godmother. IN separate group stand out rituals associated with respectful behavior members of society in relation to each other. Very important for culture (especially traditional) are rites of passage. They are associated with the individual’s sequential passage through the stages of his life path: from birth to death.

Rituals can be classified by gender its participants. In this case, stand out male, female and mixed rituals.

Rituals may also vary in terms of mass(by number of participants), according to the characteristics of the group in which they are performed(some rituals are performed only by leaders, or elders, or hunters, etc.).

Another feature (one might say a result) that logically follows from all of the above is special type perception and thinking in traditional culture . The style and way of thinking in traditional culture is no worse than the modern one; it is entirely determined by the sociocultural situation, focused on the objective resolution of life situations and specific problems facing individuals and society.

The peculiarities of world perception and the formation of judgments in traditional culture are determined by the way of teaching in it, which is carried out not by explaining words, but by showing a set of movement stereotypes. The natives are capable of performing all the basic operations that they possess. civilized man. But they do them in a special form.

Summarizing mass experimental psychological interethnic studies of thinking, most anthropologists came to the conclusion that there is no pre-logical type of thinking in traditional society, including when solving formal-abstract problems. They concluded that there is no special primitive logic. There are differences in the perception and knowledge of the world among different ethnic groups. But one cannot draw a conclusion from it about the inferiority of any peoples. We can talk about the equality of Western and non-Western strategies for obtaining objective knowledge about the world around us: both are associated with the ordering, classification and systematization of information. And the discovered diversity in thinking, cognition and perception is explained by different geographical, climatic conditions, as well as different levels complexity of cultural systems.

In general, all these features are very closely related and intertwined. Actually, a special type of thinking and perception in traditional culture is determined by syncretism, symbolism, traditionalism, etc. With the help of all these features, a more or less logical and complete image of traditional culture is built.

Throughout human history and in the modern era, a huge variety of types of cultures have existed and continues to exist in the world as local historical forms of human communities. Each culture is the result of the activity of its creator - an ethnos or ethnic community. The development and functioning of culture is a special way of life of an ethnic group. Therefore, each culture expresses the specifics of the way of life of its creator, his behavior, his special way of perceiving the world in myths, legends, religious beliefs and value orientations that give meaning to human existence.

are still in the hunting and gathering stage. Currently, the Areal Card Index of Human Relations records more than 600 traditional (archaic) cultures.

The embodiment of this syncretism is myth - a syncretic formation that perceives the world as a whole and contains in embryo all the spheres of culture that emerged later. In myth there is a coincidence of a sensory image received from certain elements of the external world and a general idea. It exists not in general concepts, but in concrete sensory images, which leads to the identity of the material world and its picture, the spiritual image created by man. This is not faith or knowledge, but a sensory experience of reality. But most importantly, this way of perceiving and explaining the world determines a person’s place in the world around him and creates a sense of confidence for existence and activity in it. The indivisible holistic thinking that is formed connects, and does not separate, identifies, and does not oppose, various aspects of human life. Therefore, at this stage of the development of consciousness, myth turns out to be many times stronger than analytical thinking.

them, requires from each individual the unconditional acceptance of his system of ideas and feelings and their transmission intact from generation to generation.

These behavioral stereotypes are based not on rules, as in modern society, but on images, models (originally recorded in myths), and following them becomes a prerequisite for the social life of the team. Such samples have a syncretic, undifferentiated character. Later, legal, ethical, religious and other norms will emerge from them, which are still contained in them in the form of embryos.

In traditional culture, the idea of the existence of a center and periphery is structuring. In the center are sacred elements that define norms, values, ideas about good and evil in a given culture, as well as knowledge about the necessary actions to maintain the harmony of the world. On the cultural periphery is the ordinary, everyday life of people. The legacy left from archaic cultures, their syncretism, is the principle of unity

the world, the inseparability of its individual constituent elements. There are no objects or phenomena in the world that are absolutely isolated from others. Each of them is connected with other objects and phenomena by many threads and contains their particles. Everything is in everything. In particular, this means that everyday life, the sphere of the profane (ordinary) turns out to be saturated with symbolism, the true meaning of which lies in the area of the sacred. This is how the mythological model of the world is formed, and in traditional culture it continues to play a vital role. Only later stages of cultural development led to the polarization of these two spheres.

The integrity of this culture, combined with the absence of special means of information circulation, leads to the fact that each element of culture is used much more fully than in modern society.

The fact is that for modern man the entire world around him is divided into two parts: the world of signs and the world of things. There is a specialization of sign systems, according to which all phenomena of the world can be used both as things and as signs. Depending on which of their properties are actualized, thinginess or signification, they take on one or another status. A person is constantly engaged in determining the semiotic status of the things around him. This process is automated and occurs on a subconscious level. Three groups of things can be distinguished: with a constantly high semiotic status - things-signs (amulets, masks, flags, coats of arms), they are important not for their material value, but for their symbolic meaning; things with a constantly low semiotic status - material objects that are used in modern culture and can only satisfy specific practical needs; the main group consists of things that can be both things and signs, have material value, satisfying some practical needs, and carry a certain symbolic load. In fact, only the last group consists of full-fledged things. The problem is that there are not too many such things in our world, and the extreme rationalism of the modern scientific worldview has taught us not only to the firm belief that sign activity is secondary, but also to the fact that a clear separation of the utilitarian and sign aspects has always existed. And we do not see that this statement is incorrect not only for traditional culture, but also for modern one. Indeed, in our culture, many things for utilitarian purposes have an additional aesthetic meaning or indicate a certain social status of their owner. For example, a Rollex watch, a Parker fountain watch, are not just watches and hand-made

coy, but also symbols of belonging to a certain social group, symbols of wealth and respectability.

All these properties of things are much more clearly visible in traditional culture.

Since in traditional culture the world is perceived as a whole, all things and phenomena of the world simply cannot perform any one function - they are necessarily multifunctional. There are no things-signs, no things-material objects. Any thing can serve both utilitarian and symbolic purposes at the same time. Therefore, traditional culture uses not only language, myth, ritual, but also utensils, economic and social institutions, kinship systems, housing, food, clothing, and weapons as semiotic (sign) objects. For example, even in mature Chinese culture, bronze vessels were used not only for their intended purpose: their decorations and reliefs carried a large amount of information about the structure of the world, its value orientations, etc. At the same time, we can rightfully say that the main purpose of these vessels is to serve as a source of information about the world, and the possibility of their utilitarian use is a consequence of their main function. Thus, in traditional society, things are always signs, but signs are always things.

Therefore, if in modern society we can talk about the existence of material and spiritual culture, then in traditional society such a division will give a deliberately distorted picture.