The transformation of these canons themselves is quite slow. That's the culture 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 like historical memory- 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 conflicting tendencies 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 kinds 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 future fate - is what is observed in modern culture (the flourishing of science, technology, information technologies, 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 technical progress and promotes abundance material goods. 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. TO negative qualities civilization is usually attributed to 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. Indeed, no matter how deeply the human mind penetrates into the secrets of the world, spiritual world the 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 crisis tendencies in 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 spiritual and moral improvement of man, as well as improving his material conditions, then the second way to resolve crisis phenomena involves the return of the human race or 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 the cosmos, 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 the ideas of historical and organic integrity, then new image culture is increasingly associated, on the one hand, with ideas on 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.

Culture in modern society is experiencing a state defined by the vast majority of researchers as “crisis”, “critical”, “borderline”, “threshold” or “interepochal”. Overflow of epistemological space with so many synonyms in modern science testifies to intense attempts to comprehend the sociocultural process in post-Soviet Russia. On the one hand, modern culture is influenced by the socio-political and socio-economic mechanisms that are emerging in society today. On the other hand, culture itself has noticeable influence on them, thereby acting as a kind of catalyst for the social process. A similar situation is considered in modern science as a “transitional type of culture,” when a cultural situation goes beyond the boundaries of the previous qualitative state (“type of culture”), but has not yet reached the integrity of a new type and another system level.

The modern stage of rethinking cultural values And further fate Russian culture largely depends on its spiritual state, social and civic position every Russian, as well as from his mastery of the riches of domestic and world culture. Therefore, the current cultural situation in our country cannot be assessed unambiguously and categorically, since, firstly, it is extremely complex and contradictory, and secondly, the depth and scale of the changes taking place in it are not yet clear enough.

Today, scientists identify the following most obvious problems of culture in modern Russia.

1. The erosion of the spiritual identity of Russian culture, which leads to the unification of customs, traditions and lifestyles (especially of the urban population) according to foreign models. The consequence of the mass replication of the Western way of life and behavior patterns is the standardization of cultural needs, the loss of national and cultural identity and the destruction of cultural individuality.
2. De-ideologization of culture and elimination of the state monopoly on culture. In terms of content, this led, on the one hand, to greater freedom of creativity and freedom of choice in the cultural sphere, and on the other hand, to a loss of control over the quality and level of cultural products offered to consumers. All this ultimately hinders the normal process of interaction between culture and society.
3. Commercialization of culture. Currently, this process is one-sided: rich people in Russia prefer to invest in the entertainment industry (this is still a highly profitable area). At the same time, institutions such as educational institutions, museums, theaters, libraries, classical art are not of commercial interest and are experiencing difficulties due to insufficient funding. This leads to a crisis of these institutions. In this situation, the younger generation, which is increasingly moving away from spiritual culture, is of particular concern, since the discrepancy between the declared priority universal human values And real life leads to the destruction of moral foundations and legal nihilism.

Note!

Nihilism (from lat. nihil- negation) as social phenomenon expresses the negative attitude of a subject (group, class) to certain values, norms, views, ideals, individual, and sometimes all aspects of human existence.

4. Growing interest in national cultures. This leads to the formation of respect for them, but at the same time, increasing attention to national cultures is often used for their own selfish interests political elites, which leads to destabilization of social and government system and order in society.
5. Cultural and communicative apathy of the population, which leads to a weakening of interest in reading in favor of visual, entertainment forms (primarily television), a drop in attendance at theaters, museums, and libraries.
6. The problem of the state of the Russian language, which is considered as an indicator of culture. Scientists note that today negative changes have occurred in the Russian language, leading to a decrease in the level of literacy, to the spread of foreign words, and to the widespread use of foul language in everyday speech.
7. The influence of globalization processes on Russian culture in conditions of economic and political changes in life Russian society. On the one hand, the ego leads to the development of intercultural exchange and interaction, on the other hand, it creates a threat of destruction of national cultures, which causes a response to protect one’s own culture, stimulates interest in the past of culture, its origins, and dominants.

In the modern cultural life of Russia, the younger generation bears the responsibility for the preservation and development of national cultural traditions and values, as well as for the civilized integration of Russia into global community and cultural space. Therefore, the development of a methodology for cultural policy and the development of mechanisms adequate to it that have clearly defined priorities, as well as increased attention to the relevant key problems of the formation of culture in modern Russia, are of particular relevance.

It is worth noting today the positive factors in the development of Russian culture:

1) the number of types and forms of artistic creativity has expanded, and the range of cultural endeavors has been enriched due to the development of various kinds of public associations, movements, clubs and associations;
2) domestic cultural exchange has become richer;
3) the feeling of cultural isolation disappeared;
4) many artistic values that were previously unjustly consigned to oblivion have returned to galleries, museums, and exhibitions;
5) the huge humanitarian potential of Russian culture is in demand and in many ways is being re-mastered - philosophical, cultural, sociological, psychological, economic thought;
6) the use of specific and targeted support for various initiatives, carried out in the form of targeted programs.

Among such programs we can list the following.

1. Targeted programs federal character:
- – “Formation, restoration, preservation and efficient use museum funds";
- – “Support for young talents in the field of culture and art”;
- – “Preservation and development of national cultures of the peoples of Russia, interethnic cultural cooperation.”
2. Targeted programs regional character:
- – for example, “Development of culture and tourism in the Bryansk region” (2014-2020).
3. Targeted programs municipal character:
- – for example, “Development and preservation of culture and art in the city of Bryansk” (2013-2017).

Studying the place and role of culture in public life, the laws of its development are of great practical importance. In modern conditions, it becomes clearly visible: it is impossible to implement economic and political programs without taking into account the cultural level of the population. In other words, raising the cultural level is a necessary prerequisite for socio-economic growth.

Introduction 3

1. General trends and features of the development of modern culture 5

2. Features of the cultural process in modern Russia. 10

Literature 15

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 everything big role in solving the program goals of the social movement, which include the formation and strengthening of civil society, the disclosure of human creative abilities, and the construction of the rule of law. 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 joint activities 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 tendencies 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 - human view addressed to the limits of life, 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, and, on the other hand, of issues of intercultural interaction.

1. General trends and features of the development of modern 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.

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.

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.

2. Features of the cultural process in modern 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 it finds itself. Russian culture by 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 acute crisis. The desire to direct the country towards market development has led to the impossibility of the existence of certain spheres of culture that objectively need state support. 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.

Conclusion

In general, world culture of the 20th century is a process, the complexity and inconsistency of this process is aggravated by the fact that for a significant period of time the world was split into two camps along ideological lines, which introduced new problems and ideas into cultural practice. At the same time, the challenge posed to humanity by global problems applies both to world culture as a whole and to each national culture separately. Here the decisive role belongs to the dialogue of different cultures, the global cultural process.

In this sense, the main task for the culture of modern Russia is to develop a strategic course for the future in a rapidly changing world. The solution to this problem is quite difficult, since it rests on both the need to understand the deep contradictions inherent in our culture throughout its historical development, and a new perception of the achievements of Russian culture.

If the potential of modern Russian culture is seen to be large enough to provide an answer to the challenges modern world, then the current state of culture is far from ideal. There is a need to move away from thinking focused on maximalism, a radical revolution and reorganization of everything and everyone in the shortest possible time and move on to a long, complex, but undoubtedly fruitful consistent development of national culture.

Literature

A.A. Danilov “History of Russia XX century”. M., 2001

Anthology of world philosophy. In 3 volumes. T.2. - M.: Mysl, 1969.

Barulin V.S. Social philosophy. Part 2. - M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1993.- 240 p.

Belova T. Culture and power. - M, 1991.

Culture Russia (3)
Abstract >> Culture and art
Culture Russia- culture Russian people, other peoples and nationalities Russia and states preceding modern Russia and the USSR. Story culture Russia[edit] Ancient...
Culture Russia 19th century (1)
Abstract >> Culture and art
The brightest ups and downs of musical culture Russia, and music and literature are... that the problems modern art and culture in general - this is exclusively... Russian painting from icon painting to modernity Abroad. Near...
Culture Russia 19th century (2)
Abstract >> Culture and art
The very first one gave a description modern nihilism. His characterization of this... the brightest ups of musical culture Russia, and music and literature are... influence on the development of musical culture Russia creativity of the last century...

The processes of cultural development are not interrupted by the collapse of state structures and the fall of political regimes. The culture of new Russia was organically connected with all previous periods of the country's history and at the same time experienced the impact of the new political and economic situation.

The relationship between culture and power has changed dramatically. The state stopped dictating its demands to her, and she lost her “guaranteed customer.” The common core of cultural life - the centralized control system - has disappeared; were destroyed ideological principles, on which a unified cultural policy was based. Defining Paths further development became a matter of society itself and the subject of heated debate. Some perceive the absence of a unifying sociocultural idea as a manifestation of the deep crisis in which Russian culture found itself by the end of the 20th century. Others consider cultural pluralism to be the natural norm of a civilized society.

The collapse of the USSR and the collapse of the communist system led to a disruption of the usual foundations of life for millions of people. Moral guidelines were eroded and moral standards. With the disappearance of official ideology, an ideological vacuum was created. The Russian Orthodox Church has launched active activities in the field of education, upbringing and culture.

State cultural policy in post-Soviet Russia is aimed at solving a national task - preserving and accumulating the country's cultural potential and ensuring the continuity of traditions. The state strives to support the education system, Scientific research, various currents and directions in artistic life cities and villages, center and province, as well as ensure accessibility of educational and cultural institutions. The new concept of cultural policy forms the basis of federal target programs for the preservation and development of culture and art, adopted in 1993 and 1997 and received presidential status. In addition to them, similar regional programs were developed and adopted. In 1996, the Presidential Council for Culture and Art was formed Russian Federation. It was supposed to become an advisory body that would inform the head of state about the state of affairs in the field of culture and art and take part in the discussion of state policy in this area and conduct an examination of draft laws. Throughout the 90s. a new legal framework for activities in the field of culture was created. Federal program “Culture of Russia. 2001-2005." in accordance with the priorities of state policy, it included three subprograms - “Development of culture and preservation of cultural heritage”, “Archives of Russia” and “Cinematography of Russia”. In the Federal program 2006-2011. the task of preserving cultural heritage also came first. Considerable attention was paid to the formation of a single cultural space and the creation of conditions to ensure equal access to cultural values and information resources various groups of citizens. The issue of adapting cultural institutions to market conditions remained acute. It is no coincidence that this task is included in the program as one of the main ones. Even in conditions of political and economic stabilization, less budgetary funds were allocated for culture than was planned in the Federal program. In 2011, the development of a new Federal program “Culture of Russia” for 2012-2016 began.

Average. Federal and regional programs were funded only 65-70% of what was planned, and therefore were not fully implemented. The Presidential Council played the role of a “decorative and advisory” body rather than an advisory one. Gradually its functions were reduced to awarding state awards in the field of literature and art.

The economic reform of 1992, aimed at the transition to a market economy, caused significant damage to the sociocultural sphere. State funding for culture began to decline: from 81% in 1993 to 60% in 1997 of the 1991 level. From 1985 to 1995, budget funding for science decreased by 15-18 times in comparable prices.

A sharp reduction in government funding for science, public education, cultural and educational institutions and, as a result, delays in payments wages led to impoverishment of workers in these industries. The most active part of the specialists changed jobs. By 1996, the number of people employed in research institutes decreased by more than 2 times compared to 1990. The “scientific brain drain” abroad for the year amounted to 3.5 thousand people. In the 1995/96 academic year, Russian schools lacked 13.5 thousand teachers.

Under these conditions, cultural institutions had to look for alternative sources of funding. A system of paid education arose. Funds for financing scientific research were created research projects, state scientific funds have been opened (RFBR, RGNF), as well as Russian branches foreign funds. Sponsorship has appeared - financing by commercial structures of cultural organizations or events. Many cultural institutions themselves have engaged in commercial activities.

Despite the transition to a multi-channel financing system and a reduction in government spending, budget funds continue to remain the main source in the fields of education, science and culture in general. Privatization in the cultural sphere affected, first of all, the production of goods and servants - handicraft enterprises, the printing industry, cultural and leisure centers. At the fastest pace, private enterprise was developing profit-generating areas - show business, gallery business, distribution of audio and video products, publishing.

In difficult material conditions, most scientific institutes, universities, theaters, musical groups managed to survive. Moreover, new scientific institutes, universities, academies, museums, film studios, theaters, concert halls, and orchestras were created. So, in St. Petersburg, to the three existing state symphony orchestras in 1992-1993 six new ones have been added. From 1990 to 1997, more than 500 museums were opened in the country. The number of scientific institutions increased by 40% during this period.

Not all cultural and scientific institutions registered in the first half of the 90s were destined to long life. Many of them were unable to secure sustainable financing and were closed.

There was a sharp decline in film production, especially noticeable after the rise of previous years. If 86 were released in 1985 feature films, then in 1991 - 375, and in 1996 - only 30. The critical state of domestic film production led to the adoption in 1996 of the Law “On state support cinematography." Although the measures he envisaged were not implemented in full, the revival of domestic cinema began.

The decentralization of cultural management has led to the intensification of the cultural life of the Russian province. Many cities have become venues for major scientific conferences, various festivals and folk art events, and fine art exhibitions.

A lot has been done to preserve cultural heritage. The historical names of many Russian cities and streets, renamed during the years of Soviet power, have been returned. New museums of history and local history have been created. A significant contribution to the restoration of monuments of religious architecture is made by the Russian Orthodox Church, into whose jurisdiction previously closed churches and monasteries were transferred. The most valuable objects belonging to the national heritage, such as the cathedrals of the Moscow Kremlin, are used jointly by the state and the church. The most valuable collections of icons remained on display in state museums.

Improvement of the country's economic situation in the 2000s. made it possible to begin work on the restoration of cultural monuments. For the 300th anniversary of St. Petersburg, the city's museum and park complexes were restored. In Moscow, after reconstruction, the Tsaritsyno Museum-Reserve opened in 2007, and in 2011, the Bolshoi Theater and the Great Hall of the Moscow Conservatory.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

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

2. Politicization of culture in Russia

3. Features of the cultural process in modern Russia

Conclusion

Literature

Introduction

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 the rule of law. 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 to 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 change further affirm the importance, on the one hand, of issues of cultural identity, on the other hand, of issues of intercultural interaction

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

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 crisis tendencies in 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 spiritual and moral improvement of man, as well as improving 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 feeling of unity with nature and the cosmos, the forms of human existence free from the power of technology.

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.

2. Politicization of culture in Russia

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 new system public 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,” i.e. culture was supposed 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 educated people from the country caused irreparable damage to the 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. The new revolutionary symbolism was seen as required condition 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 all artistic culture of the past. culture civilization politicization Russia

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, philosophers who adhered to own views on what is happening inside the country (L. Karsavin, I. Ilyin, P. Sorokin, I. Lapshin and others). We found ourselves outside of Russia famous writers, scientists, artists, artists, musicians, whose names have rightfully become the property of world culture. 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, the Soviet national culture by the mid-thirties it had developed into a rigid system with its own sociocultural values: in philosophy, aesthetics, morality, language, everyday life, science.

· approval of normative cultural patterns in various types creativity;

following dogma and manipulation 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 creative activity social order.

The values of official culture were dominated by selfless loyalty to the cause of the party and government, patriotism, hatred of class enemies, cult love for the leaders of the proletariat, labor discipline, law-abidingness and internationalism.

Since 1934, the process of unification begins creative unions- unified, unique, and in this sense, absolutely state-controlled unions of writers, artists, composers, etc. are formed. A new stage is beginning in the development of artistic culture. The relative pluralism of previous times was over. All literary and artistic figures were united into single unified unions. The only one established artistic method socialist realism. Socialist realism was recognized once and for all as the given, the only true and most perfect creative method. This definition of socialist realism was based on Stalin’s definition of writers as “engineers” human souls". Thus, artistic culture and art were given an instrumental character, that is, they were assigned the role of an instrument for the formation of a “new man.” After the establishment of Stalin’s personality cult, pressure on culture and the persecution of dissidents intensified. Literature and art were put at the service of communist ideology and propaganda. Characteristic features The arts of this time became ostentatious, pompous, monumental, and glorifying leaders, which reflected the regime’s desire for self-affirmation and self-aggrandizement.

In order to encourage artists who glorify in their works the activities of the party and its leaders, showing the labor enthusiasm of the people and the advantages of socialism over capitalism, they were established in 1940 Stalin Prizes. After Stalin's death, these prizes were renamed State Prizes. Socialist realism is gradually being introduced into theatrical practice, especially in the Moscow Art Theater, the Maly Theater and other groups in the country. This process is more complex in music, but even here the Central Committee is not asleep, branding avant-garde art with the labels of formalism and naturalism.

In the post-war period, hopes for the liberation of culture from the pressure of official politics and ideology were not destined to come true. Literature and art were still seen as means of educating the masses. In art there was a focus on masterpieces. Art museums Only the highest examples of Russian art were to be exhibited. In cinema, this policy has led to a sharp reduction in the number of new films. Theaters find themselves in a difficult situation. The sold-out crowds of the war years gave way to half-empty halls. In most theaters the stage was dominated by everyday genre. Mass ideological campaigns had a huge negative impact on the development of the entire national culture of the post-war period. A typical phenomenon of the late 40s was development campaigns in scientific, university and creative teams, which created a nervous environment, the campaign against formalism and cosmopolitanism took on a wide scale.

The reforms that began after Stalin's death created more favorable conditions for the development of culture. The exposure of the cult of personality at the 20th Party Congress in 1956, the return from prison and exile of hundreds of thousands of repressed people, including representatives of the creative intelligentsia, the weakening of the censorship press, the development of ties with foreign countries - all this expanded the spectrum of freedom, caused the population, especially young people, to utopian dreams of a better life.

N. Khrushchev clearly formulated the task and role of the intelligentsia in public life: to reflect the growing importance of the party in communist construction and to be its “machine gunners.” Control over the activities of the artistic intelligentsia was carried out through “orientation” meetings of the country’s leaders with leading cultural figures. However, it is clear that these leaders were unable to make an adequate judgment regarding the works being criticized. This created a nervous atmosphere among creative workers and contributed to the growth of distrust in the party’s policy in the field of culture. The time of Khrushchev's "thaw" directly and indirectly divided and disoriented the creative intelligentsia. In general, the “thaw” turned out to be not only short-lived, but also quite superficial, and did not create guarantees against a return to Stalinist practices. The warming was not sustainable, ideological relaxations were replaced by crude administrative interference, and by the mid-60s the “thaw” had faded away.

The next change of political leadership only accelerated the process of disengagement of the intelligentsia. Outwardly, democratic forms of cultural management could not obscure the true state of affairs. During these years, congresses of teachers, higher education workers, creative intelligentsia, and conferences of social scientists regularly gathered. However, they gradually turned into ceremonial events held according to a pre-agreed scenario. Political unreliability was a sufficient reason for a scientist, writer or artist to be deprived of the opportunity to engage in creativity.

This state of affairs led to the fact that some creative figures left their homeland due to unbearable working conditions. The names of forced emigrants were erased from Soviet culture, their books were confiscated from libraries. Unspoken prohibitions have become the norm. In order to regulate the topic works of art Since the mid-70s, a system of state orders was introduced, primarily in the field of cinematography. The influence of the censorship press has increased. The same practice extended to the organization of art exhibitions, theatrical performances, and the performance of musical works.

These, in general, are the historical grounds for the politicization of the cultural space of Russia.

3. Features of the cultural process in modern Russia

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, the difficult transition to market relations increased the danger of commercialization of culture and 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 unfolded 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.

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.

Conclusion

If the potential of modern Russian culture is seen as great enough to respond to the challenges of the modern world, then the current state of culture is far from ideal. There is a need to move away from thinking focused on maximalism, a radical revolution and reorganization of everything and everyone in the shortest possible time and move on to a long, complex, but undoubtedly fruitful consistent development of national culture.

Literature

1. A.A. Danilov “History of Russia XX century”. M., 2001

2. Anthology of world philosophy. In 3 volumes. T.2. - M.: Mysl, 1969.

3. Barulin V.S. Social philosophy. Part 2. - M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1993.- 240 p.

4. Belova T. Culture and power. - M, 1991.

5. Berdyaev N. “Self-knowledge”, M., 1990.

6. Voslensky M.S. Nomenclature: The ruling class of the Soviet Union. - M., 1991.

7. Zezina M.R., Koshman L.V., Shulgin V.S. History of Russian culture. - M., 1990.

8. Ilyina T.V. History of art. Domestic art. - M., 1994.

9. Kiselev G.S. The tragedy of society and man. An attempt to comprehend experience Soviet history. - M., 1992.

10. Kondakov I.V. Introduction to the history of Russian culture. - M., 1997.

11. Culture: theories and problems. - M., 1995.

12. Cultural studies. Ed. G.V. Dracha. - Rostov-on-Don, 2000.

13. Culturology: Textbook. aid for students And students of colleges and lyceums / Author. Team of Yuzhakov L.V. and others - Ryazan: Russian Word, 1999.

14. Paths of Eurasia: Russian intelligentsia and the fate of Russia. - M., 1992.

15. Rozin V.M. Introduction to cultural studies - M.: International Pedagogical Academy, 1994.- 104 p.

16. Semennikova L.I. Russia in the world community of civilizations. - M., 1994.

17. Sidorov E.Yu. Culture of the world and culture of Russia // Polis, 1998. No. 5.

18. Skvortsova E.M. Theory and history of culture. - M., 1999.

19. Three centuries of Russian poetry, M., 1968

20. Fromm E. Psychoanalysis and ethics - M.: Respublika, 1993.- 415 p.

Posted on Allbest.ru

...

General trends and features of the development of modern culture. Modern culture of Russia - abstract

Introduction

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

2. Features of the cultural process in modern Russia.

Literature

Culture Russia (3)

Culture Russia 19th century (1)

Culture Russia 19th century (2)

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Introduction

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

2. Politicization of culture in Russia

3. Features of the cultural process in modern Russia

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.

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.

Conclusion

Literature

1. A.A. Danilov “History of Russia XX century”. M., 2001

2. Anthology of world philosophy. In 3 volumes. T.2. - M.: Mysl, 1969.

3. Barulin V.S. Social philosophy. Part 2. - M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1993.- 240 p.

4. Belova T. Culture and power. - M, 1991.

5. Berdyaev N. “Self-knowledge”, M., 1990.

6. Voslensky M.S. Nomenclature: The ruling class of the Soviet Union. - M., 1991.

7. Zezina M.R., Koshman L.V., Shulgin V.S. History of Russian culture. - M., 1990.

8. Ilyina T.V. History of art. Domestic art. - M., 1994.

9. Kiselev G.S. The tragedy of society and man. An attempt to comprehend experience Soviet history. - M., 1992.

10. Kondakov I.V. Introduction to the history of Russian culture. - M., 1997.

11. Culture: theories and problems. - M., 1995.

12. Cultural studies. Ed. G.V. Dracha. - Rostov-on-Don, 2000.

13. Culturology: Textbook. aid for students And students of colleges and lyceums / Author. Team of Yuzhakov L.V. and others - Ryazan: Russian Word, 1999.

14. Paths of Eurasia: Russian intelligentsia and the fate of Russia. - M., 1992.

15. Rozin V.M. Introduction to cultural studies - M.: International Pedagogical Academy, 1994.- 104 p.

16. Semennikova L.I. Russia in the world community of civilizations. - M., 1994.

17. Sidorov E.Yu. Culture of the world and culture of Russia // Polis, 1998. No. 5.

18. Skvortsova E.M. Theory and history of culture. - M., 1999.

19. Three centuries of Russian poetry, M., 1968

20. Fromm E. Psychoanalysis and ethics - M.: Respublika, 1993.- 415 p.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

General trends and features of the development of modern culture. Modern culture of Russia - abstract

Introduction

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

2. Features of the cultural process in modern Russia.

Literature

Culture Russia (3)

Culture Russia 19th century (1)

Culture Russia 19th century (2)

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Introduction

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

2. Politicization of culture in Russia

3. Features of the cultural process in modern Russia

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.

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.

Conclusion

Literature

1. A.A. Danilov “History of Russia XX century”. M., 2001

2. Anthology of world philosophy. In 3 volumes. T.2. - M.: Mysl, 1969.

3. Barulin V.S. Social philosophy. Part 2. - M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1993.- 240 p.

4. Belova T. Culture and power. - M, 1991.

5. Berdyaev N. “Self-knowledge”, M., 1990.

6. Voslensky M.S. Nomenclature: The ruling class of the Soviet Union. - M., 1991.

7. Zezina M.R., Koshman L.V., Shulgin V.S. History of Russian culture. - M., 1990.

8. Ilyina T.V. History of art. Domestic art. - M., 1994.

9. Kiselev G.S. The tragedy of society and man. An attempt to comprehend experience Soviet history. - M., 1992.

10. Kondakov I.V. Introduction to the history of Russian culture. - M., 1997.

11. Culture: theories and problems. - M., 1995.

12. Cultural studies. Ed. G.V. Dracha. - Rostov-on-Don, 2000.

13. Culturology: Textbook. aid for students And students of colleges and lyceums / Author. Team of Yuzhakov L.V. and others - Ryazan: Russian Word, 1999.

14. Paths of Eurasia: Russian intelligentsia and the fate of Russia. - M., 1992.

15. Rozin V.M. Introduction to cultural studies - M.: International Pedagogical Academy, 1994.- 104 p.

16. Semennikova L.I. Russia in the world community of civilizations. - M., 1994.

17. Sidorov E.Yu. Culture of the world and culture of Russia // Polis, 1998. No. 5.

18. Skvortsova E.M. Theory and history of culture. - M., 1999.

19. Three centuries of Russian poetry, M., 1968

20. Fromm E. Psychoanalysis and ethics - M.: Respublika, 1993.- 415 p.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

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.