Alien Cultural Innovations in Russia: Alterative Models of National Identity

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
V. Bakulov, L. Polomoshnov
{"title":"Alien Cultural Innovations in Russia: Alterative Models of National Identity","authors":"V. Bakulov, L. Polomoshnov","doi":"10.37816/2073-9567-2023-68-18-29","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study proves that the polemics between liberals and traditionalists about foreign cultural innovations reflects two ways of foreign cultural borrowing: constructive and destructive. Constructive way implies that those foreign cultural forms to be borrowed may be successfully combined with national civilizational forms and traditions. According to this method, innovations are adapted to the local soil. The destructive way of borrowing is based on an attempt to replace national civilizational forms with foreign cultural ones. The study has established that the alternative models of Westerners (liberals) and Slavophiles (traditionalists) represent different ways of reflecting the specific Russian cycle of introducing sociocultural innovations, in which three stages are distinguished. The firs one is the imitation, when they try to introduce alien forms directly, without adaptation, artificially and mechanically, by force. The second is the stage of adaptation of foreign cultural forms through their transformation in accordance with national characteristics. The third is the stage of constructive appropriation, i.e., deep processing and synthesis of foreign cultural forms with national characteristics, transformation of foreign cultural innovation into an original national form. The authors come to the conclusion that with via constructive form of innovation, society effectively goes through all three stages, and with a destructive one society itself deforms along with deforming foreign cultural innovations, without reaching the third stage.","PeriodicalId":41255,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Slavianskikh Kultur-Bulletin of Slavic Cultures-Scientific and Informational Journal","volume":"48 5-6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik Slavianskikh Kultur-Bulletin of Slavic Cultures-Scientific and Informational Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37816/2073-9567-2023-68-18-29","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The study proves that the polemics between liberals and traditionalists about foreign cultural innovations reflects two ways of foreign cultural borrowing: constructive and destructive. Constructive way implies that those foreign cultural forms to be borrowed may be successfully combined with national civilizational forms and traditions. According to this method, innovations are adapted to the local soil. The destructive way of borrowing is based on an attempt to replace national civilizational forms with foreign cultural ones. The study has established that the alternative models of Westerners (liberals) and Slavophiles (traditionalists) represent different ways of reflecting the specific Russian cycle of introducing sociocultural innovations, in which three stages are distinguished. The firs one is the imitation, when they try to introduce alien forms directly, without adaptation, artificially and mechanically, by force. The second is the stage of adaptation of foreign cultural forms through their transformation in accordance with national characteristics. The third is the stage of constructive appropriation, i.e., deep processing and synthesis of foreign cultural forms with national characteristics, transformation of foreign cultural innovation into an original national form. The authors come to the conclusion that with via constructive form of innovation, society effectively goes through all three stages, and with a destructive one society itself deforms along with deforming foreign cultural innovations, without reaching the third stage.
俄罗斯的外来文化创新:国家认同的替代模式
研究证明,自由主义者和传统主义者之间关于外国文化创新的争论反映了外国文化借鉴的两种方式:建设性和破坏性。建设性方式是指所借鉴的外来文化形式能够成功地与本国的文明形式和传统相结合。根据这种方法,创新是适应当地的土壤。这种破坏性的借用方式是建立在试图用外来文化形式取代本国文明形式的基础上的。该研究表明,西方人(自由主义者)和斯拉夫主义者(传统主义者)的替代模式代表了反映俄罗斯引入社会文化创新的特定周期的不同方式,其中分为三个阶段。第一种是模仿,当他们试图直接引入外来的形式,没有适应,人为的和机械的,通过武力。第二阶段是对外来文化形态的适应阶段,即根据民族特点进行文化形态的改造。第三阶段是建构性挪用阶段,即对具有民族特色的外来文化形态进行深度加工和综合,将外来文化创新转化为原生态的民族文化形态。作者认为,通过建设性的创新形式,社会有效地经历了这三个阶段,而在破坏性的创新形式下,社会本身随着外国文化创新的变形而变形,而没有达到第三阶段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信