DEVELOPMENT OF CULTURE IN V-VII centuries. The heterogeneity and specific features of the culture of various regions of Taurica can be judged by the objects of decoration from the necropolises of the Bosporus, Gorzuvit, Chersonesos and other places in the region. Antiquity left a wonderful legacy here - quite

"The first carriers of culture and spiritual tradition in Ancient Russia there were monks and scribes. They were close to the people, but, according to the profound remark of the philosopher G.P. Fedotov, too much close.

Between the life of the people and the life of the monasteries there did not arise that tension, which is given by distance and which alone is capable of causing the movement of culture. Christianity, asserting itself in the space of the Russian state, included Russia in the family of other peoples, determined both the direction of the historical process and the striving for a common ideal instead of the vicious circle of polytheism. Man received the freedom of choice, as it were, an ethical program of life-building. Creativity becomes relevant and culturally significant. From this moment begins the history of the culture of Russia as an independent phenomenon, isolated from the daily flow of life. And in parallel with this - the evolution of individual creativity, the history of accumulation in creativity of the positive energy of society, its preservation and transmission.

From here, the conclusion is obvious: the appearance of the first major creative personalities in Russia is associated with the spread and strengthening of the Christian religion (namely, creative personalities, we note, and not military or state ones). Of course, the emergence of individual creativity is not limited to reasons of a religious nature. Many other factors are also significant. First of all, the establishment of the social division of labor, which contributed to the formation of various human talents, including creative professions. […]

The formation and evolution of a creative person in the history of culture (including Russian) went through several stages.

The first is an unnamed culture merged with the flow Everyday life, not separated from it. The "life of the individual" also had no value in itself, with the exception of the "life of the family." Man, by expression Marx, has not yet come off the "umbilical cord of its kind." Creativity can be spoken of as a ritual or a spontaneous reflection of immediate circumstances.

Second stage - intermediate culture , that is, the emergence of areas of activity, representatives of which, with a sufficient degree of conditionality, can be attributed to creative ones: saints, ascetics of the faith, monks, shamans, folk healers and craftsmen. These are already personal phenomena that have a historical perspective of becoming an independent creative person in culture.

However, as already noted, the first such phenomena were not yet distanced from the mass of others. Personalities related to the creative sphere in this period of culture did not fall into encyclopedic or any other sources.

The third stage is personalized culture. If we talk about professional culture in its modern sense, then it begins with the separation of the creative sphere from all other types of activity. And in the lower layers folk culture(folklore, festive celebrations, rituals) retained a syncretic, undifferentiated character. Professional culture based, by definition Berdyaev, “on the aristocratic principle”, has a clear differentiation, a hierarchy of values, a “core” and a “periphery”. Personality through creativity and through creativity, creating unique cultural values, acquires a name and enters the history of its people.

Within the framework of the third period of culture, the culture of the modern look and structure, the most important sign of its development is the presence of creative geniuses and talents. Here, any particular form of culture - philosophy, science, art - declares itself with the names of its geniuses, "whom you can look up to" in the words D. Likhachev. The subject of creativity is of wide public interest, his activities, deeds, thoughts attract attention, increasing the "distance" between him and the mass, the crowd. The value of personality, reflected in the product of creativity, rises and creates a distance between it and the event that served as the reason for its creation. Both these "distances" in Russian culture, according to the academician D. Likhachev developed before the 17th century.

The emergence of an individual creative personality is a grandiose leap in the history of world culture. And for its appearance, a combination of many circumstances is required. A great personality is born by an epoch, by all the potential power of the people. “People spend a lot of energy in order to create a talented spokesman for their feelings, thoughts, their soul,” wrote bitter, reflecting on the origins of the birth of a major personality. Rublev, Lomonosov, Pushkin, Tolstoy or any other Russian genius is a concentrated expression of the spiritual potential of the people, their highest abilities and quests. There is also a natural component here, which also cannot be ignored. It is known that "in the world of animals and plants" the interests of the genus make their way "at the expense of the interests of special individuals." This is what happens “in the world of people”, emphasizes Marx. The interests of the human race make their way at the expense of the interests of a number of individuals, and this happens, he wrote, "because the interest of the species coincides with the interests of special individuals, which is the strength of the latter, their advantages."

Time erases random features and leaves only the highest tensions of the spirit of the people in the person of its great representatives. In Russia, throughout its historical path, great revelations and insights were made, suffered by domestic geniuses, the most spiritually mature and gifted people. Domestic cultural wealth must be mastered by the people, because "there are examples that you can follow" ( D. Likhachev)».

Ovchinnikov V.F., The phenomenon of talent in Russian culture, Kaliningrad, "Amber Tale", 1999, p. 88-91.

Revolution and culture. The revolution of 1917 divided the artistic intelligentsia of Russia into two parts. One of them, although not accepting everything in the Council of Deputies (as many then called the country of the Soviets), believed in the renewal of Russia and devoted her strength to serving the revolutionary cause; the other, negatively and contemptuously, treated the Bolshevik government and in different forms supported her opponents.
In October 1917, V. V. Mayakovsky, in his original literary autobiography “I Myself,” described his position as follows: “To accept or not to accept? There was no such question for me (and for other Muscovites-futurists). My revolution. During the Civil War, the poet worked in the so-called "Windows of Satire ROSTA" (ROSTA - Russian Telegraph Agency), where satirical posters, cartoons, popular prints with short poetic texts were created. They ridiculed the enemies of the Soviet government - generals, landlords, capitalists, foreign interventionists, spoke about the tasks of economic construction. Future Soviet writers served in the Red Army: for example, D. A. Furmanov was the commissar of the division commanded by Chapaev; I. E. Babel was a fighter of the famous 1st Cavalry Army; A.P. Gaidar at the age of sixteen commanded a youth detachment in Khakassia.
Future emigrant writers participated in the white movement: R. B. Gul fought as part of the Volunteer Army, which made the famous “Ice Campaign” from the Don to the Kuban, G. I. Gazdanov, after graduating from the 7th grade of the gymnasium, volunteered for the Wrangel army. I. A. Bunin called his diaries of the period of the civil war “Cursed Days”. M. I. Tsvetaeva wrote a cycle of poems under the meaningful title "Swan Camp" - filled with religious images lament for white Russia. The theme of the perniciousness of the civil war for human nature was permeated by the works of émigré writers M. A. Aldanov (“Suicide”), M. A. Osorgin (“Witness of History”), I. S. Shmelev (“ sun of the dead»).
Subsequently, Russian culture developed in two streams: in the Soviet country and in emigration. Writers and poets I. A. Bunin, awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1933, D. S. Merezhkovsky and Z. N. Gippius, the leading authors of the anti-Soviet program book “The Kingdom of the Antichrist”, worked in a foreign land. Some writers, such as V. V. Nabokov, entered literature already in exile. It was abroad that the artists V. Kandinsky, O. Zadkine, M. Chagall gained world fame.
If the works of émigré writers (M. Aldanov, I. Shmelev, and others) were permeated with the theme of the perniciousness of the revolution and civil war, the works of Soviet writers breathed revolutionary pathos.
From artistic pluralism to socialist realism. In the first post-revolutionary decade, the development of culture in Russia was characterized by experimentation, the search for new artistic forms and means - a revolutionary artistic spirit. The culture of this decade, on the one hand, was rooted in " silver Age”, and on the other hand, it adopted from the revolution a tendency to renounce the classical aesthetic canons, to thematic and plot novelty. Many writers saw it as their duty to serve the ideals of the revolution. This was manifested in the politicization of Mayakovsky’s poetic work, in the creation of the “Theatrical October” movement by Meyerhold, in the formation of the Association of Artists of Revolutionary Russia (AHRR), etc.
The poets S. A. Yesenin, A. A. Akhmatova, O. E. Mandelstam, B. L. Pasternak, who began their poetic path at the beginning of the century, continued to create. A new word in literature was said by the generation that came to it already in Soviet times - M. A. Bulgakov, M. A. Sholokhov, V. P. Kataev, A. A. Fadeev, M. M. Zoshchenko.
If in the 20s literature and fine arts were exceptionally diverse, then in the 30s, under the conditions of ideological dictate, the so-called socialist realism was imposed on writers and artists. According to its canons, the reflection of reality in works of literature and art had to be subordinated to the tasks of socialist education. Gradually, instead of critical realism and various avant-garde trends in artistic culture, pseudo-realism was established, i.e. idealized image of Soviet reality and Soviet people.
Artistic culture was under the control of the Communist Party. In the early 30s. Numerous associations of art workers were liquidated. Instead, united unions of Soviet writers, artists, cinematographers, artists, and composers were created. Although formally they were independent public organizations, creative intelligentsia had to be completely subordinate to the authorities. At the same time, the unions, having at their disposal funds and houses of creativity, created certain conditions for the work of the artistic intelligentsia. The state maintained theaters, financed the shooting of films, provided artists with studios, etc. The only thing required of artists was to faithfully serve the communist party. Writers, artists and musicians who deviated from the canons imposed by the authorities were expected to be “elaborated” and repressed (O. E. Mandelstam, V. E. Meyerhold, B. A. Pilnyak and many others died in the Stalinist dungeons).
A significant place in Soviet artistic culture was occupied by historical and revolutionary themes. The tragedy of the revolution and civil war was reflected in the books of M. A. Sholokhov (“ Quiet Don”), A. N. Tolstoy (“Walking through the torments”), I. E. Babel (collection of stories “Konarmiya”), paintings by M. B. Grekov (“Tachanka”), A. A. Deineki (“ Defense of Petrograd). In cinematography, films dedicated to the revolution and civil war. The most famous among them were "Chapaev", a film trilogy about Maxim, "We are from Kronstadt." The glorified theme did not leave the capital and
from provincial theater scenes. A characteristic symbol of Soviet fine art was the sculpture by V. I. Mukhina “Worker and Collective Farm Woman”, which adorned the Soviet pavilion at the World Exhibition in Paris in 1937. Famous and little-known artists created pompous group portraits with Lenin and Stalin. At the same time, outstanding success in portraiture and landscape painting reached M. V. Nesterov, P. D. Korin, P. P. Konchalovsky and others talented artists.
Prominent positions in the world art of the 20-30s. occupied by the Soviet cinema. It featured such directors as SM. Eisenstein (“The Battleship Potemkin”, “Alexander Nevsky”, etc.), the founder of the Soviet musical-eccentric comedy G. V. Aleksandrov (“Merry Fellows”, “Volga-Volga”, etc.), the founder of Ukrainian cinema A. P. Dovzhenko (Arsenal, Shchors, etc.). The stars of the Soviet sound cinema shone in the artistic sky: L. P. Orlova, V. V. Serova, N. K. Cherkasov, B. P. Chirkov and others.
The Great Patriotic War and the artistic intelligentsia. Not even a week had passed since the day of the Nazi attack on the USSR, when “Windows TASS” (TASS - Telegraph Agency of the Soviet Union) appeared in the center of Moscow, continuing the traditions of the propaganda and political posters and cartoons “Windows ROSTA”. During the war, 130 artists and 80 poets took part in the work of Okon TASS, which published over 1 million posters and cartoons. In the first days of the war, the famous posters "The Motherland Calls!" (I. M. Toidze), “Our cause is just, victory will be ours” (V. A. Serov), “Warrior of the Red Army, save!” (V. B. Koretsky). In Leningrad, the association of artists "Fighting Pencil" launched the production of posters-leaflets in a small format.
During the years of the Great Patriotic War many writers turned to the genre of journalism. Newspapers published military essays, articles, and poems. The most famous publicist was I. G. Ehrenburg. Poem
A. T. Tvardovsky "Vasily Terkin", front-line poems by K. M. Simonov ("Wait for me") embodied the feelings of the people. A realistic reflection of the fate of people was reflected in the military prose of A. A. Bek (“Volokolamsk highway”), V. S. Grossman (“The people are immortal”),
V. A. Nekrasov (“In the trenches of Stalingrad”), K. M. Simonov (“Days and nights”). Performances about front-line life appeared in the repertoire of theaters. It is significant that the plays by A. E. Korneichuk "The Front" and K. M. Simonov "Russian People" were published in newspapers along with reports from the Soviet Form Bureau on the situation on the fronts.
Front-line concerts and meetings of artists with the wounded in hospitals became the most important part of the artistic life of the war years. Russians were very popular folk songs performed by L. A. Ruslanova, pop - performed by K. I. Shulzhenko and L. O. Utesov. The lyrical songs of K. Ya. Listov ("In the dugout"), N. V. Bogoslovsky ("Dark Night"), M. I. Blanter ("In the forest near the front"), which appeared during the war years, were widely used at the front and in the rear. , V. P. Solovyov-Sedogo ("Nightingales").
War chronicles were shown in all cinemas. Filming was carried out by operators in front-line conditions, with great danger to life. The first full-length documentary film was dedicated to the defeat of the Nazi troops near Moscow. Then the films "Leningrad on Fire", "Stalingrad", "People's Avengers" and a number of others were created. Some of these films were shown after the war at the Nuremberg trials as documentary evidence of Nazi crimes.
Artistic culture of the second half of the XX century. After the Great Patriotic War, new names appeared in Soviet art, and from the turn of the 50s and 60s. new thematic directions began to form. In connection with the exposure of Stalin's personality cult, overcoming the frankly "varnishing" art, which was especially characteristic of the 30s and 40s, took place.
Since the mid 50s. Literature and art began to play the same educational role in Soviet society as they played in Russia XIX- the beginning of the XX century. The extreme ideological (and censorship) tightness of socio-political thought contributed to the fact that the discussion of many issues of concern to society was transferred to the sphere of literature and literary criticism. The most significant new development was the critical reflection of the realities of Stalin's time. Publications in the early 60s became a sensation. works by A. I. Solzhenitsyn (“One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich”, stories) and A. T. Tvardovsky (“Terkin in the Other World”). Together with Solzhenitsyn entered the literature camp theme, and Tvardovsky's poem (along with the poems of the young E. A. Yevtushenko) marked the beginning of an artistic attack on Stalin's personality cult. In the mid 60s. In the 18th century, M. A. Bulgakov’s novel The Master and Margarita, written before the war, was published for the first time, with its religious and mystical symbolism, which is not characteristic of Soviet literature. However, the artistic intelligentsia still experienced the ideological dictates of the party. So, B. Pasternak, who received the Nobel Prize for the novel Doctor Zhivago declared anti-Soviet, was forced to refuse it.
Poetry has always played an important role in the cultural life of Soviet society. In the 60s. poets of a new generation - B. A. Akhmadulina,
A. A. Voznesensky, E. A. Yevtushenko, R. I. Rozhdestvensky - with their citizenship and journalistic orientation, the lyrics became idols of the reading public. Poetic evenings in the Moscow Polytechnical Museum, sports palaces, and higher educational institutions were a huge success.
In the 60-70s. military prose of a “new model” appeared - books by V. P. Astafiev (“Starfall”), G. Ya. Baklanov (“The Dead Have No Shame”), Yu. V. Bondarev (“Hot Snow”), B. L. Vasilyeva (“The Dawns Here Are Quiet...”), K.D. Vorobyeva (“Killed near Moscow”), V.L. Kondratiev (“Sashka”). They reproduced the autobiographical experience of writers who went through the crucible of the Great Patriotic War, conveyed the merciless cruelty of the war they felt, analyzed its moral lessons. At the same time, the direction of the so-called village prose was formed in Soviet literature. It was represented by the works of F. A. Abramov (the trilogy "Pryasliny"), V. I. Belov ("Carpenter's stories"), B. A. Mozhaev ("Men and women"), V. G. Rasputin ("Live and remember", "Farewell to Matera"), V. M. Shukshin (stories "Villagers"). The books of these writers reflected labor asceticism in the difficult war and post-war years, the processes of peasantization, the loss of traditional spiritual and moral values, the complex adaptation of yesterday's rural dweller to urban life.
In contrast to the literature of the 1930s and 1940s, the best works of prose of the second half of the century were distinguished by a complex psychological pattern, the desire of writers to penetrate into the innermost depths human soul. Such, for example, are the "Moscow" stories of Yu. V. Trifonov ("Exchange", "Another Life", "House on the Embankment").
Since the 60s. on the theater scenes performances based on action-packed plays by Soviet playwrights (A. M. Volodin, A. I. Gelman, M. F. Shatrov) appeared, and the classical repertoire in the interpretation of innovative directors acquired an actual sound. Such were, for example, the productions of the new Sovremennik theaters (directed by O. N. Efremov, then G. B. Volchek), the Taganka Drama and Comedy Theater (Yu. P. Lyubimov).

The main trends in the development of post-Soviet culture. One of the features of the development of Russian culture at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. is its de-ideologization and pluralism of creative search. In the elite fiction and fine arts In post-Soviet Russia, works of the avant-garde direction came to the fore. These include, for example, books by V. Pelevin, T. Tolstoy, L. Ulitskaya and other authors. Avant-gardism is the predominant trend in painting as well. In the modern domestic theater, the productions of director R. G. Viktyuk are imbued with the symbolism of the irrational principle in a person.
Since the period of "perestroika" began to overcome the isolation of Russian culture from the cultural life of foreign countries. Residents of the USSR, and later Russian Federation were able to read books, see films that were previously inaccessible to them for ideological reasons. Many writers who had been deprived of citizenship by the Soviet authorities returned to their homeland. A single space of Russian culture emerged, uniting writers, artists, musicians, directors and actors, regardless of their place of residence. So, for example, sculptors E. I. Neizvestny (a tomb monument to N. S. Khrushchev, a monument to the victims of Stalinist repressions in Vorkuta) and M. M. Shemyakin (a monument to Peter I in St. Petersburg) live in the USA. And the sculptures of V. A. Sidur, who lived in Moscow (“To those who died from violence”, etc.), were installed in the cities of Germany. Directors N. S. Mikhalkov and A. S. Konchalovsky make films both at home and abroad.
The radical breakdown of the political and economic system led not only to the liberation of culture from ideological fetters, but also made it necessary to adapt to the reduction, and sometimes even to the complete elimination of state funding. The commercialization of literature and art has led to the proliferation of works that do not have high artistic merit. On the other hand, even in the new conditions, the best representatives of culture turn to the analysis of the most acute social problems, looking for ways of spiritual improvement of man. Such works include, in particular, the works of film directors V. Yu. Abdrashitov (“Dancer’s Time”), N. S. Mikhalkov (“Burnt by the Sun”, “The Barber of Siberia”), V. P. Todorovsky (“Country of the Deaf”) , S. A. Solovieva ("Tender age").
Musical art. Representatives of Russia made a major contribution to the world musical culture XX century. The greatest composers, whose works have been repeatedly performed in concert halls and opera houses many countries of the world, were S. S. Prokofiev (symphonic works, the opera "War and Peace", the ballets "Cinderella", "Romeo and Juliet"), D. D. Shostakovich (6th symphony, opera "Lady Macbeth Mtsensk district”), A. G. Schnittke (3rd symphony, Requiem). Opera and ballet productions were world famous Bolshoi Theater in Moscow. On its stage, there were both works of the classical repertoire and the works of composers of the Soviet period - T. N. Khrennikov, R. K. Shchedrin, A. Ya. Eshpay.
A whole constellation of talented performing musicians and opera singers who gained worldwide fame worked in the country (pianists E. G. Gilels, S. T. Richter, violinist D. F. Oistrakh, singers S. Ya. Lemeshev, E. V. Obraztsova) . Some of them could not come to terms with the harsh ideological pressure and were forced to leave their homeland (singer G. P. Vishnevskaya, cellist M. L. Rostropovich).
The musicians who played jazz music also experienced constant pressure - they were criticized as followers of the "bourgeois" culture. Nevertheless, jazz orchestras led by the singer L. O. Utyosov, the conductor O. L. Lundstrem, and the brilliant improviser-trumpeter E. I. Rozner won immense popularity in the Soviet Union.
The most common musical genre was a pop song. The works of the most talented authors, who managed to overcome momentary opportunism in their work, eventually became an integral part of the culture of the people. These include, in particular, “Katyusha” by M. I. Blanter, “The Volga Flows” by M. G. Fradkin, “Hope” by A. N. Pakhmutova and many other songs.
In the 60s. In the cultural life of Soviet society, the author's song entered, in which professional and amateur beginnings closed. The work of bards, who performed, as a rule, in an informal setting, was not controlled by cultural institutions. In the songs performed with the guitar by B. Sh. Okudzhava, A. A. Galich, Yu. The creative work of V. S. Vysotsky, who combined the talents of a poet, actor and singer, was filled with powerful civic pathos and a wide variety of genres.
It received even deeper social content in the 70-80s. Soviet rock music. Its representatives - A. V. Makarevich (group "Time Machine"), K. N. Nikolsky, A. D. Romanov ("Resurrection"), B. B. Grebenshchikov ("Aquarium") - managed to move from imitating Western musicians To independent works, which, along with the songs of bards, was the folklore of the urban era.
Architecture. In the 20-30s. the minds of architects were occupied with the idea of ​​the socialist transformation of cities. So, the first plan of this kind - "New Moscow" - was developed in the early 1920s. A. V. Shchusev and V. V. Zholtovsky. Projects were created for new types of housing - communal houses with socialized consumer services, public buildings - workers' clubs and palaces of culture. dominant architectural style there was constructivism, which provided for the functional expediency of planning, a combination of various, clearly geometrically defined shapes and details, external simplicity, and the absence of decorations. The creative searches of the Soviet architect K. S. Melnikov (club named after I. V. Rusakov, his own house in Moscow) gained worldwide fame.
In the mid 30s. In the 1990s, the General Plan for the Reconstruction of Moscow was adopted (redevelopment of the central part of the city, laying of highways, construction of the subway), similar plans were developed for other large cities. At the same time, the freedom of creativity of architects was limited by the instructions of the “leader of the peoples”. The construction of pompous structures began, reflecting, in his opinion, the idea of ​​​​the power of the USSR. Appearance buildings changed - constructivism was gradually replaced by "Stalinist" neoclassicism. Elements of classicism architecture are clearly seen, for example, in the appearance of the Central Theater of the Red Army, Moscow metro stations.
Grandiose construction unfolded in the postwar years. New residential areas arose in old cities. The image of Moscow has been updated due to the "skyscrapers" built in the area of ​​the Garden Ring, as well as the new building of the University on the Lenin (Sparrow) Hills. Since the mid 50s. The main direction of residential construction has become mass panel housing construction. Urban new buildings, having got rid of "architectural excesses", acquired a dull monotonous look. In the 60-70s. new administrative buildings appeared in the republican and regional centers, among which the regional committees of the CPSU stood out with their grandiosity. On the territory of the Moscow Kremlin, the Palace of Congresses was built, the architectural motifs of which sound dissonant against the backdrop of historical development.
Great opportunities for creative work architects opened in last decade XX century. Private capital, along with the state, began to act as a customer during construction. Developing projects for buildings of hotels, banks, shopping malls, sports facilities, Russian architects creatively interpret the legacy of classicism, modernity, and constructivism. The construction of mansions and cottages has again come into practice, many of which are built according to individual projects.

Two opposite tendencies were observed in Soviet culture: politicized art, varnishing reality, and art, formally socialist, but, in essence, critically reflecting reality (due to the conscious position of the artist or talent, overcoming censorship obstacles). It is the latter direction (along with the best works created in exile) gave samples that were included in the golden fund of world culture.

O.V. Volobuev "Russia and the world".

sociocultural organization creative activity

Culture is the soil in which creativity grows. At the same time, culture is a product of creativity. The development of culture is a consequence of the multitude of creative acts performed in the history of mankind. Creative activity is the source of all innovations that arise in culture and change it (with the exception of random "mutations" in its content). In this sense, creativity is the driving force behind the development of culture, the most important factor her dynamics.

Emphasizing the role of creativity in culture, one cannot at the same time underestimate the importance of reproductive, reproducing activity. It is necessary to maintain the life of human society and preserve the experience it has accumulated. It saves the cultural heritage from the destructive effects of time.

However, without creative activity, not only change, but also the preservation of culture would not always be possible. When the creative activity of people freezes in a society (and this happens in history), its ability to adapt to changes in the environment decreases. Traditions that have lost their meaning in the new conditions become dead weight, only burdening life, and are gradually destroyed, and new, more effective forms of behavior do not replace them. This leads to the degradation of culture and the primitivization of the way of life. Knowledge and skills are forgotten, which turn out to be “superfluous”, although with a creative approach to their use they could be useful. Structures, works of art, manuscripts, books are being eroded and perishing - material embodiments of the culture of the past, for the preservation and restoration of which there is neither strength nor desire, and there is no opportunity, since for this it would be necessary to invent new means and new technology.

Tatyana Tolstaya's novel "Kys" paints a fantastic picture of people's lives after a nuclear disaster. They still have some traces of a lost culture - household items, books, separate scraps of knowledge and customs. They even managed to somehow adapt to the changes caused by radiation in nature and in their own bodies. But they have lost the ability to be creative. And even the reading and correspondence of the surviving "old printed" books turns into a meaningless mechanical procedure that in no way contributes to intellectual development and spiritual improvement. It does not come to understanding their content: after all, creative efforts are needed to “discover meaning”. Cultural life is dying out, and society is in a dead end, the way out of which is not visible.

Creativity is a mechanism not only for creating the new, but also for keeping the old in a “workable state”. Creating the new, it does not simply reject the old, but transforms it, unfolds the potentialities inherent in it. In a creative dialogue, along with the voice of the new, the voice of the old also sounds.

Indeed, let's listen more carefully to the search dialogue. The voice of one of its participants - the "organ of generation" - breathes optimism and hope. He is sure that he does his job well if the ideas he proposes are new: after all, his purpose is to create something new. The voice of the other participant - the "selection body" - is much less optimistic. Arguing that the new does not always deserve approval, he continually interferes in the work of the interlocutor, criticizes its results, persuades him to comply with certain "technological standards", throw some blanks into the landfill and take up others. He sees his goal in isolating among the numerous ideas those and only those that are significant for solving the creative task, and he constructs filters from the standards at his disposal through which only significant ideas can break through.

Thus, the "organ of generation" is responsible for novelty, and the "selection organ" - for significance creative search results. The voice of the first is the voice of novelty, and the second is the voice of significance. But novelty and relevance are the defining characteristics of creativity (§1.1). Generation and selection turn out to be the processes by which the products of creativity acquire these qualities. The significance of the products of creativity is ensured by the conservatism and caution of the “selection body”, its skeptical attitude towards the new and taking into account the experience accumulated earlier. The novelty of the products of creativity is associated with a radical rejection of outdated attitudes and the desire to reject the experience of the past for the sake of a better future. Therefore, the dialogue between novelty and significance contains a deeper semantic layer, in which there is a dialogue between the “voice of the past' and 'voice future».

In fact, creativity turns out to be a link that connects today's culture with tomorrow's culture, the dialogical interaction of the "maternal" culture with the "daughter" culture that arises in its bosom. In the search dialogue, today's culture generates tomorrow's culture. Thus, the creative process that takes place in the head of an individual, by its deepest nature social- it is not just an internal matter of the subject of creativity, but a form of development of human culture.

RUSSIAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY

SECTION "THEORY AND METHODOLOGY OF CREATIVITY"

DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCE

AND CREATIVITY

Monograph

Moscow 2002

Development of science and creativity. Monograph. Ed. A.N. Loshchilina, N.P. French. M.: RFO RAN, 2002.

Under the general editorship

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor A.N. Loshchilina,

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor N.P. French

The collective monograph "The Development of Science and Creativity" is the fourth collective work, which is devoted to a systematic generalization, presentation of the ideas and experience of members of the section "Theory and Methodology of Creativity" at the Presidium of the Russian Philosophical Society. If the first monograph "Philosophy of Creativity" was devoted to the theoretical and methodological problems of creativity, the second and third "Creativity and the development of culture", "Creativity in the space and time of culture" - to the analysis of the role of creativity in the development of culture, then this monograph examines the methodological problems of the development of science and scientific creativity.

The work can be useful for researchers of creative issues, for those interested in the problems of creativity, for students and graduate students, as well as for the preparation of courses and special courses on the philosophy of culture, the philosophy of creativity.

Reviewers:

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor V.A. Titov,

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor V.A. Vasiliev

Ph.D. Aleshnya S.V. , Ph.D., Assoc. Grishunin S.I. (1.3.), Ph.D., prof. Ignatiev V.A. (1.8.), Candidate of Philological Sciences, Assoc. Kataeva O.V. (2.11.), Candidate of Philological Sciences, Assoc. Kononova L.I. (2.9.), Kapitonova T.A. (1.9.), Koroleva S.A. (2.4.), Ph.D., prof. Loshchilin A.N. (2.9.), Loshchilina M.A. (2.6., 2.7., 2.8., 2.9.), Ph.D., Lyubimova T.B. (2.5.), Ph.D. - MD, Assoc. Mikhailova E.M. (1.5.), Ph.D. Markelov V.E., Ph.D., prof. Metlenkov N.F.1.6.), Ph.D., Assoc. Nedzvetskaya E.A., Svetlov S.V. (1.7.), Ph.D., prof. Surkova L.V. (2.1.), Tikhomirova E.A. (2.9.), Ph.D., prof. Frantsuzova N.P. (1.1.), Ph.D., Assoc. Chelyshev P.V. (1.4.), Ph.D., prof. Yakovlev V.A. (1.2.), Ph.D., prof. Yatsenko L.V. (2.2.).

Ó Russian Academy of Sciences,

Russian Philosophical Society,

Section "Theory and methodology of creativity"

FOREWORD

In this collective monograph "Development of Science and Creativity", the work on summarizing the experience of previous studies of members of the section "Theory and Methodology of Creativity" is continued. The leadership of the section set the task of summing up some results of scientific research that was carried out by members of the section in the 80-90s of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century on the problems of the development of science and scientific creativity, in order to summarize the experience and formulate the main tasks of further research within the framework of the section "Theory and Methodology Creativity” at the Presidium of the Russian Philosophical Society for the coming years.

This collective monograph is a continuation of the work that was carried out in previous collective monographs: "Philosophy of Creativity". M., 2002., "Creativity and development of culture." M., 2002., "Creativity in the space and time of culture." M., 2002. If the first three monographs were devoted to the philosophical problems of creativity, the role of creativity in the development of culture, then this work is devoted to the problems of the development of science, scientific creativity, methodological problems of creative activity.

In the 20th century, especially in its second half, in-depth research was carried out on the problems of scientific creativity. This is due, on the one hand, to the rapid development of science, as well as in connection with the fundamental works of K. Popper, T. Kuhn, P. Feyerabend, L.A. Mikeshina, A.T. Shumilina, I.S. Ladenko, N.P. Frantsuzova, M.S. Kagan, Ya.A. Ponomareva, B.Ya. Pakhomov, S.N. Semenov and many other foreign and domestic researchers of the development of science and scientific creativity. Fundamental works on the problems of the development of science made it possible in many respects to consider in a new way the process and essence of the activities of scientists as a scientific community, evolutionary and revolutionary changes in the development of science, the role of a paradigmatic vision of the world, the formation of a scientific picture of the world, the role of the collective principle in the development of science, and many others. aspects of. But at the same time, many factors of internal and external determination of scientific creativity, the essence and role of creative inclinations and creative abilities, ways of their formation and development, remained aloof from a comprehensive consideration. There is no doubt that the development of science is carried out by the scientific community. But any scientific community consists of scientific teams, specific people with certain abilities, needs and interests. And, as Altshuller noted, even if a thousand diggers dig one ditch, then everyone digs it in their own way. In this regard, the task of studying the essence and specifics of not only collective, but also individual creativity arises.

The members of the editorial board were far from being biased in their assessment of certain ideas, theoretical provisions, which were reflected in certain sections of this collective monograph, although the points of view of the authors largely differ on some issues.

This collective monograph does not pretend to be a comprehensive and exhaustive answer to all the problems of science, and it is impossible to do so in principle. The authors tried to reveal only those aspects of the task that are currently the most relevant. We hope to continue our work in the future.

CREATIVITY AND DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCE.