For example, we study the ancient Egyptian civilization at the time of the construction of the pyramids, based on the study of the structure of the pyramids themselves, on the reconstruction of the technology of their construction, as well as information about the purpose of these buildings. But, in addition, we are interested in how the ancient Egyptians concentrated the efforts of a large number of people to perform these laborious works: was it the work of slaves or free people, was it exclusively forced labor, or was participation in the construction of the pyramids considered sacred? Our understanding of the essence of ancient Egyptian civilization and, in general, ancient Eastern cultures largely depends on knowledge of this kind.

Another example. In medieval civilization, the most important of the industries was agriculture. Therefore, when studying the Middle Ages, scientists strive to obtain the most reliable data possible about the productivity of agriculture at that time: what was grown, in what ways and how the products were used. But besides this, in order to understand medieval culture, it is necessary to know about the more or less standard for that time ways of interacting people in this area. In particular, one must understand the traditional rules of communal land tenure, the rules of vassal land holding, etc., in which medieval culture reveals itself.

These or other stable forms of interaction between people pursuing common goals are facts on the basis of which civilizations can be studied, and, at the same time, signs that allow them to be distinguished. For example, the stock exchange is a sign of the capitalist civilization of modern times. Before that, there were no markets. And the theaters were, but different. Under the same name "theater" are hidden dissimilar, specific to different civilizations, forms of interaction between people both on the stage and between the stage and the audience: the ancient Greek theater was organized quite differently from the Italian La commedia dell'arte renaissance or repertory theater XIX century. Armies, too - in different eras, these were military organizations organized in completely different ways. The same can be said about medieval, classical and modern universities. Reliable knowledge about the peculiarities of the organization of university life in different civilizations - from the rules of admission and teaching methods to the conditions of the graduation test - can tell a lot about the characteristics of the respective cultures.

Social (or socio-cultural) institutions are called stable social structures that regulate the interaction of people united for the joint performance of one or another socially significant function. Stable (rather than random) we will call such a structure that is repeatedly reproduced and does not depend on the specific composition of the participants. School, shop, ministry, court, etc. remain themselves, regardless of who exactly acts in them as students, teachers, sellers, buyers, employees, judges, etc.

“Sociocultural institution” is a theoretical concept denoting a model (conceivable structure), which in practice usually corresponds to a set of similarly organized stable human communities. In the above examples, we raised questions about socio-cultural institutions characteristic of different cultures: about institutional supportabout the construction of the pyramids in Ancient Egypt, about the institutions of medieval management, about the stock exchange as an institution of the capitalist economy, about institutionally differently organized armies, and finally, about the “theater” as a whole series of sociocultural institutions of the same name - similar, but different in historically different cultures.

An example of a modern socio-cultural institution is the "football club". Football clubs are voluntary associations of people (football players, fans, managers, etc.) whose goal is to contribute to the stable and successful participation of their team in competitions. Thanks to the club, a professional football team is a stable association; it does not fall apart when its players change. "Football Club" is an example of a socio-cultural institution in the sense of the organizational model that has developed in the era of Modernity, namely, a repeatedly reproduced model of the corresponding public organization.

Along with clubs and professional club teams, you can also find amateur teams (for example, from housemates, employees, veterans, etc.), which extrainstitutional. Sometimes they gather for one game, often their fate is connected with one person - a leader or sponsor, or some other special short-term circumstances.

The transition of the international football movement from the competition of various amateur teams to the tournaments of professional teams within the framework of typical football clubs, which took place in its time, should therefore be called institutionalization football.

The concept of an institution It was originally developed in legal science, where it denotes a certain set of legal norms that support the stability of certain socio-legal relations that are important for society. Such relations include, for example, the “institution of inheritance”, “the institution of marriage”, “the institution of elections” or even the “institution of mitigating circumstances” (it consists of a set of principles and circumstances under which a person found guilty of a crime may be more lenient punishment). In all these and other cases, we mean a set of legal relations and actions that form a given procedure. For example, the institution of inheritance is a set of legal relations and procedures that the legislator requires to be performed in order for the fact of inheritance to be recognized as valid.

Outside of jurisprudence, the concept of an institution acquires a broader regulatory framework: in addition to legal ones, it can also be formed by ethical regulators (for example, the institute of charity), aesthetic ones (for example, the institute of art competitions), but more often sociocultural institutions are formed by a wide range of regulators of various nature. For example, the institution of paternity is formed by a system of relations, some of which are legally fixed, the rest lie in the sphere of morality traditional for a given society and accepted aesthetic ideas (about the beautiful and the ugly, etc.).

In sociology, institutions are commonly referred to as social, because they are studied as facts of public life (the institution of the state, the institutions of private property, health care, education, etc.). From the point of view of cultural studies, these institutions are considered as sociocultural, because they are studied as structures predetermined by culture and emerged in order to embody the ideas inherent in a given society about the world and man in it. As an example of one of the socio-cultural institutions of the New Age, one can cite the “museum”. A classical museum is a public repository of authentic monuments of civilization (paintings and sculptures, books, technical devices, folk crafts, etc.), organized by thematic or chronological principle and intended to educate contemporaries. It received a civilizational embodiment crystallized in XIX century, the idea of ​​the connectedness of the historical process and the value of the past as the historical "homeland" of the present.

The construction of a civilization includes the creation of its own socio-cultural institutions, designed to organize the joint efforts of people in accordance with the ideas inherent in a given culture. Historically, all socio-cultural institutions take shape, operate and fall apart. Most often, cultural historians study already established, stable institutions that functioned within the framework of certain long-existing civilizational and cultural forms (they are called cultural and historical epochs). Less attention has so far been paid to crisis phases rise and fall of institutions.

Typically, the destruction of sociocultural institutions occurs when changes in culture change ideas about the goals for which institutions were formed. For example, the product of feudal culture - the institution of knightly troops - with the onset of the era of absolutism lost its significance, experienced a decline and gave way to the institution of a mercenary army.

When at a certain historical moment we observe the destruction of many socio-cultural institutions at once, we must conclude that this form of civilization is in crisis and that a borderline (transitional) era has begun. The moment of the onset of numerous institutional changes should be called institutional crisis of civilization, including in this concept both the collapse of the old ones and the search for new institutional forms in periods of transitional epochs.

The unity of a social institution with the culture that generates it makes it possible to explore a civilization/culture based on observation of its socio-cultural institutions. Let's take a look at modern media – mass media (media).

The Modern Media Institute is the collective name for sustainable organizational structures that govern the collaboration of journalists, technicians and managers in the editorial offices of numerous newspapers, radio and TV channels. Editorial offices of media outlets are organized associations (“teams”) of people who perform official functions (roles) predetermined by the structure of the editorial office. Through their roles, they are included in the joint achievement of culturally significant goals.

A study of modern media shows that their goal is not to obtain and disseminate reliable and verifiable information, as is often declared. The modern socio-cultural institution of the media pursues a different goal. Editorial offices produce and sell a special - information "media environment" (Eng. mass-media ), which consists of a continuous stream of various judgments and information, where the reliable and the unreliable are indistinguishably merged.

Such an action of modern media is in agreement with the basic values ​​of the Mass Culture that gives rise to them. In her authenticity knowledge is neither a generally accepted condition for its value, nor the main criterion for the quality of information, and where, on the contrary, fictitious or false information and judgments often acquire high social value, based either on random signs (“sensational” rumors, gossip, versions, forecasts etc.), or on ideas about the usefulness or expediency of certain statements, views, reports of events (propaganda). Thus, institutionally - in terms of goals, methods of work, selection of specialists, the way they interact with each other, etc. - the media institute meets the requirements of modern culture, and in terms of structure it is a typical institution of modern civilization.

Scientific and technological progress, institutional rebirth in the twentieth century and new humanitarian problems. Central to the culturological understanding of the era of Modernity is the question of the meaning of the historical processes of the past twentieth century, during which Modernity took shape, became the dominant form of culture in the world (the latest cultural and historical era). It should be borne in mind that just at that time there were two world wars and a world economic crisis between them, as well as the so-called. "Cold War" between the USSR and the USA with their allies in 1950-80. The two approaches to understanding the events of the 20th century seem to be independent of each other.

The first is focused mainly on scientific and technological progress. Its supporters usually point to the unprecedented growth of energy (nuclear and non-nuclear) technologies, international financial and corporate systems, the quantitative and qualitative development of transport and communications, which ultimately ensured the availability of comfort, health care, education, etc. to an unprecedented number in history. people in different countries peace. All these are brilliant achievements of the human mind, which has consistently served the improvement of life for several centuries. From this point of view, the civilization of the New Age, which took shape even before the twentieth century, proved its viability and success, while the cataclysms of the twentieth century from this position can be presented as terrible misunderstandings into which the deceived masses of people were drawn into the evil will of some rulers, among which are the names Hitler and Stalin are the most famous today. Consequently, the task is to expose the established usurpers and to prevent in the future the possibility of such "evil geniuses" coming to power anywhere in the world. The new time continues. And in this sense, we can assume that we live in an era when the “end of history” has come (according to F. Fukuyama) .

A different view is an understanding of the history of the twentieth century as a period of global crisis of the civilization of the New Age and the formation of modern Mass Culture with its own new civilization, the formation of which continues before our eyes. From this point of view, the cataclysms of the 20th century were generated by the emergence of new social and economic conditions created by the successes of science and production, and, at the same time, by the inability of people to realize their radical novelty in a timely manner and find goals and methods of activity adequate to the new conditions. From this second point of view, the historically new social conditions of the 20th century were predetermined by the introduction of new technologies, the growth of production, and communications.

Among the new circumstances created by scientific and technological progress in the twentieth century were not only increased comfort, health and longevity (first in the richest countries). For the first time, conditions and needs for collective actions of unprecedented power (organization of large-scale production and mass demand) and unprecedented scale of impact on human collectives (totalitarian regimes and their propaganda, commercial advertising, economic crises, etc.) have developed, including the possibility of self-destruction that has arisen for the first time humanity - military, environmental, narcotic, etc. New global threats have emerged, some of which have been averted (for example, the threat of nuclear war), and some threats are continuously being implemented where they are not yet able to effectively counter them (for example, the spread of AIDS, industrial pollution).

As you can see, both of these views are not completely contradictory: the progress of mankind in the field of scientific and technical capabilities is obvious, but it is these achievements of the human mind that have created new problems. Moreover, not only scientific and technical, but also humanitarian problems - social, economic, managerial, environmental, transport and various others.

Here are some examples of the new social problems generated by the technical improvements of our time.

One of the new sources of risk was the unprecedented power supply, economic and informational equipment of an ordinary private person, which turned his will into a factor of high unpredictability for himself and those around him. How to prevent catastrophes caused by mistakes or the will of an ordinary person, if he has a service weapon, maintains millions of bank accounts in his service, flies a civil aircraft? How can he avoid the consequences of not being good enough at repairing a tank in a chemical plant or inattentively inspecting products in a baby food factory?

Social problems are becoming a direct consequence of the introduced technological advances.

Mass computerization of banking, insurance, medical and other services facilitates and speeds up all forms of their work with a mass clientele, but creates risks of violating the confidentiality of private information in case of loss of databases.

The growing energy intensity of the world economy economically justifies the use of nuclear fuel. Nuclear power plants provide cheap electricity, but at the same time create problems. They consume a lot of water50 m 3 /s at one NPP with a capacity of 1000 MW, i.е. as much as a city of 5 million people consumes), carry the risk of radioactive contamination of the environment due to the transportation of waste, reactor accidents, etc.

Advances in genetic research open up the possibility of deliberate insertion into the genetic codes of living organisms. The results of such an introduction can be beneficial: genetically modified plants give an incomparably higher and more stable yield, medical genetics promises to cope with hereditary diseases. On the other hand, the genetic constancy of wildlife and man is the deep foundation of social stability. The social experience of interaction with wildlife and human nature has a duration of many thousands of years, it is expressed by numerous, often unconscious adaptive (adaptive) skills - food, emotional, family and household and other strategies. Genetic engineering, which will be able to create essentially new types of living organisms, including humans with new properties, will no doubt give rise to the problem of their mutual adaptation.

The new situation will inevitably present unprecedented demands for the creation of new strategies and new forms of human interaction. For example, “personality” may seem in the new conditions to be a too conservative way of organizing the human Self, while impersonal people - with a short social memory and simplified signs of self-identity - may turn out to be much more socially adaptive and even the only ones suitable for life in a new high-tech type of civilization.

All these and other modern problems are of an institutional nature, although, as it may seem at first glance, only new purely technical problems arise in various segments of society. For example, countering terrorism, in this technocratic perspective, comes down to building more advanced surveillance devices.

Consider, for example, the institutional problems that have arisen in the course of computerization in various industries.

At the first stage, the use of computers made it possible only to replace paper passportization (of bank accounts, polyclinic cards, museum exhibits, goods and other accounting groups) with electronic one. But later, work with the emerging databases opened up new goals, required a new organization and approaches - from setting new tasks and appropriate personnel to changing the rules for the functioning of these institutions. From the side of visitors, a hospital, a museum or a bank may look the same, but institutionally these institutions have been transformed due to computerization: new departments have been created, the duties of employees have been partially changed, etc.

For example, theoretically, a resident of any city in Ukraine can transfer money from his account in a local bank to a large banking system with a branch in South Africa with an order to purchase shares for him there of a campaign that announced a promising project on the African continent. The whole transaction may take, probably, five banking days. It is clear, however, that the feasibility of this scheme depends not only on the technical quality of communication and the existence of legal conditions, but also on the work of the local bank. Is there a group in its composition that is able to keep the world business in sight, able to offer investors attractive investments in such distant lands, aiming to include its bank in the broad context of the global economy through such operations? This, therefore, is about the institutional restructuring of the work of a local bank, taking into account the requirements of the global economy.

Similarly, a museum, if it seeks to enter the international system of museum research, must not only receive technical support, but also train researchers in foreign languages, computer technologies and change the organization of their work to achieve other goals arising in connection with the international division of labor. in the museum research field. But computer technologies make it possible to set completely new tasks in the field of museum activity itself: this is the so-called "virtual museum". Technical and substantive (content) support for such a museum requires the creation of a completely new institutional structure. Thus, the common name - museum - can only hide the difference between these two institutions of real and virtual ways of preserving public memory.

Concert. Performing songs in a hall in front of an audience of 500 people and performing songs in a stadium in front of an audience of, say, 50,000 listeners are different events. Despite the fact that they are called the same - "concert", institutionally they have more differences between them than similar features. Compare the repertoire, stage style, musical and technical means, financial support, security, prevailing tastes, expectations and behavior of the public in both cases, etc., typical for both cases, etc.

When we talk about the crisis of the usual established goals and forms of their achievement, about the overdue institutional reform at the same time in different areas activities (the above are examples from various fields: computer science, finance, biology, museum work, art), about the formation of new structures of human interactions suitable for achieving new goals, we are talking about obvious, observable signs of a change in the type of civilization. In this case, in the 20th century, it is about the change of the civilization of the New Age by the civilization of Modern mass culture. The peak of this shift, apparently, was passed back in the 1970s. Today, this new civilization everywhere - on a global scale - establishes its own institutions, goals and rules of activity, new meanings of human existence.

"Additions". The correspondence of civilization and its institutions can be traced by comparing similar socio-cultural institutions in the contexts of different cultural and historical eras.

Supplement 1 to this chapter contains an outline of the history of the library,which shows how in different civilizations the “library” function of storing and disseminating socially valuable information was institutionalized. The second deals with the institutional crisis of art that occurred at the same time. The third of the essays "Supplement 3" is devoted to the institutional crisis of science in the twentieth century.

Supplement 3 . Science as an institution and the institutional crisis of science in the 20th century

The concept of "science" means both the process and the result. In the first sense, "science" is a special (research) activity to identify the permanent properties of the world around us. In the second, "science" is the body of knowledge thus obtained. Scientific knowledge is formalized in the form of "laws" and their consequences - in a certain way verified and practically reliable statements about stable relationships in the world around us.

Science is not the only way to create and store knowledge. To a large extent, knowledge about the permanent properties of the world is available to people before and outside of any science, through the accumulation of ordinary life experience. For example, domestic livestock keeping has been practiced by mankind for many millennia and requires considerable knowledge, which was formed and preserved in the very activities of pastoralists. (Agricultural science appeared only at the end XIX century, but since then it has been difficult to do without it). Religious truths, mystical beliefs, artistic images, craft skills (for example, the ability of a carpenter to take into account the properties of different types of wood) are also not scientific knowledge. Nevertheless, this is positive knowledge that can be relied upon in one or another human activity. Their truth is justified by the evidence that is generated within the corresponding experience of individuals and groups. And evidence is the source of local knowledge. It is enough to be outside the relevant practice, and the evidence of these truths may seem doubtful. That is why non-scientific knowledge is not universal. Invite a skilled carpenter to give a scientific lecture on the properties of wood. He, perhaps, will not be ready to do this, although he practically knows about these properties .. Another example. The reality of the country of Castalia is obvious to the reader of The Glass Bead Game by G. Hesse, but there is no such country outside this novel.

Scientific knowledge expressed by judgments such as “action is equal to reaction”, “the Sun is the closest star to the Earth in the Universe”, “the function of the lungs is gas exchange”, “the growth of a market (capitalist) economy goes through its periodic recessions”, “the drama of the era of classicism subject to the requirement of "three unities", etc. are considered fair (true), because they reflect facts and relations, the knowledge of which no longer depends on practical evidence: they are discovered and proven by scientific methods.

Scientific activity (in our time it is called "classical science") was formed in a meaningful and institutional way in the era of modern times, in XVII - XIX centuries Discoveries of scientists in the field of natural ratios up to the end XIX centuries had, first of all, the meaning of philosophical proofs - one or another principle of the world order, the cognitive power of the human mind, etc. At first, scientists managed to identify stable relationships in the field of motion of mechanical bodies and formulate them quantitatively, i.e. by means of mathematics. Later, scientific research extended to the history of the Earth, animal world and a person. AT XVII century, the search for the "laws of nature" was a completely new thing, the importance of which, over time, became more and more generally recognized. Scholars enjoyed the public support of the so-called "enlightened" classes because educated people saw in their activities, not a narrowly scientific, but a general cultural meaning. The discovery of simple and understandable rules that inevitably operate throughout the Universe anew, after the fall of religious culture in the Renaissance, substantiated the consciousness of the unity of the world, its orderliness and justice (first of all, this is the mechanics of Copernicus-Galileo-Newton and taxonomy, for example, the taxonomy of plants J. B. Lamarck (1744 – 1829) and animals by C. Linnaeus 1707 – 1778).

A scientist needed a laboratory and a library to work, and he could have them because early classical science was part of the lifestyle of high society. No wonder the era was called the "Enlightenment". Scientists and their discoveries enjoyed the material and moral support of the royal court and aristocratic salons (in France), or involvement in university life, where scientists combined research and teaching (in Germany), or private contributions to the organization of laboratories and wide public attention (in England) , or state recognition (in Russia), etc. All these social conditions, without which scientists could not work and publish their results, gaining recognition, must be included in the concept of the institution of classical science - a complex system of laboratories, libraries, publishing houses, amateur scientific societies and professional academies, universities and specialized higher schools, used for the production and storage of scientific knowledge and its application in creating a "scientific picture of the world".

It should be borne in mind that throughout almost the entire New Age, technology developed independently of science. . Separate facts of the organization of production on the basis of scientific discovery, as exceptions, appeared only from the second half of theXIX century. Science becomes an integral part of production and economic activity only by the middle of the 20th century.

Despite the quantitative growth in the number of scientists and their discoveries, before the First World War, the essence of science remained within the semantic limits set by the New Age. A scientist is first and foremost a natural scientist. An outstanding scientist is a master of experiment and its interpretation, a virtuoso of the knowledge of Nature. He himself determines the direction of his research, the scientific fields (mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) are still very wide, the scientist has at his disposal a laboratory and one or two assistants, literature and collegiate contacts by correspondence and thanks to trips for work to other laboratories and universities (lectures and research). Only in the middle XIX century, international organizations of scientists began to appear and international congresses were held in some areas of science. The basic model of the work of a master scientist, a lone occupied with the study of essential phenomena and connections in the surrounding world and the world order hidden behind them, remained unchanged until the First World War. An example of a discovery, to a large extent "threshold" in the history of physics, the discovery of " X -rays ”(in Russian,“ X-ray ”), which was made in the fall of 1895 by the Würzburg physicist Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen ( Röntgen ) can illustrate the institutional principles of contemporary science.

Like many of his contemporaries, Roentgen was a lone researcher. He even personified this type in its extreme form. He almost always worked without assistants, and usually until late at night, when he could carry out his experiments completely without interference, using the instruments that were available at that time in the laboratory of any institute. The scientist drew attention to the glow in the dark of a fluorescent screen, which could not be caused by reasons known to him. So, by chance, Roentgen discovered radiation that could penetrate many opaque substances, cause blackening of a photographic plate wrapped in black paper or even placed in a metal case. Having come across an unknown phenomenon, the scientist worked all alone for seven weeks in one of the rooms of his laboratory, studying the properties of radiation, which in Germany and Russia are called "X-rays". He ordered that food be brought to the university and that a bed be placed there in order to avoid any significant breaks in work. Roentgen's thirty-page report was entitled "On a New Kind of Rays. Preliminary Communication." Soon the work of the scientist was published and translated into many European languages.New rays began to be investigated all over the world, in just one year over a thousand papers were published on this topic. W. Roentgen - Nobel Prize in Physics for 1901.

One more example. The outstanding German theoretical physicist Max Born (1882-1970) in the book "My Life and Views" (1968) recalls those scientists who influenced his professional development. The following passage gives an idea of ​​the almost private nature of communication in the scientific circles of Europe at the beginning of the 20th century, as if it were not about the training of a scientist, but, say, an artist or musician. (By the way, Born was a skilled enough pianist to play violin sonatas with Albert Einstein.) “In order to study the fundamental problems of physics more deeply, I went to Cambridge. There I became a graduate student at the College of Gonville and Caius and attended experimental courses and lectures. I realized that Larmor's treatment of electromagnetism was hardly new to me compared to what I had learned from Minkowski. But J. J. Thomson's demonstrations were brilliant and inspiring. However, the dearest experiences of that time were, of course, human feelings, which aroused in me the kindness and hospitality of the English, life among students, the beauty of colleges and countryside landscapes. Six months later, I returned to my native Breslau and tried to improve my experimental skills there. At that time there were two professors of physics, Lummer and Pringsheim, who gained fame for their measurements of black-body radiation. . In 1919, Born came to Frankfurt, where he had working conditions reminiscent of Roentgen's laboratory. “There I was given a small institute equipped with equipment, and I also used the help of a mechanic. My first assistant (assistant) was Otto Stern, who immediately found a use for our experimental equipment. He developed a method that made it possible to use atomic beams to study the properties of atoms. .

This style of modest scientific life, combining teaching, experiments, informal communication with close students, colleagues and like-minded people, Born supported in subsequent years in Germany and in exile in Scotland. But there is in his memoirs one episode from the First World War, which can serve as an example of a new approach to the organization of science. In 1915, Max Born was drafted into the army. “After a short stay in the radio units of the Air Force, at the request of my friend Ladenburg, I was transferred to the artillery research organization, where I was assigned to a unit engaged in sound location - determining the location of guns based on the results of measurements of the time of arrival of shot sounds at various points. Many physicists gathered under one roof, and we soon, when time allowed, began to engage in real science.(highlighted by me - M.N.) " .

In this passage, Born describes the early experiences of a new approach to the organization of scientific research. The belligerent state gathers specialists, bears the costs, and, through the mouth of the military, sets research tasks for them, expecting applied ones, i.e. practically applicable, results - not in the form of articles and theories, but in the form of effective methods and devices. For the first time, science is no longer viewed as a way to “seek the truth without prejudice and prejudice,” and they begin to set tasks for it arising from military (later industrial) practice. “According to the results of the First World War, it became clear that without using the results of science it is impossible to count on victory. All world powers began to finance scientific research focused on the creation of new types of weapons and the development of means of protection against them. Technological science was formed as a result of these organizing efforts of states and became their necessary component” .

The military experience of the relationship between the state and science, acquired during the First World War, was then repeatedly used, it formed the basis for the organization of scientific research for the entire subsequent twentieth century - within the framework of a new, Mass Civilization.

Of course, individual scientific research was not immediately supplanted. Not only Max Born recalled physical experiments in semi-basement rooms and informal friendly seminars among physicists. But the main path of institutionalization of science in the "era of the masses" was defined as the transition to "Big Science". New institutions implied scientific research, which required huge labor and material resources. In each case, public or private (in countries with a market economy) funding of scientific research in the field of nuclear energy, genetics, space exploration, artificial materials, etc. must be motivated by practical results in the form of products suitable for use either in the military or in the civil sphere. It is even better to have so-called "dual-use" products, such as aircraft that can be used to carry both military cargo and, with a little modification, passengers, or devices designed to monitor the health of astronauts that can be used in hospitals. This means that the concept of "pure" science - science for the sake of truth, which characterized the understanding of this activity in the culture of the New Age, lost its meaning with the advent of the era of Modernity. In a mass society, a scientist is no longer expected to confirm or discover such facts and patterns that would have an impact on collective ideas about the world and the person in it. All science, regardless of the nature of the actual research, in modern culture has acquired the meaning of "applied" - science for the sake of practice.

“Big science” has become no longer a science proper, but a special industry in which scientists become partners in production. For example, in the Soviet Union, in the implementation of the space, or rather, the military space program, dozens of scientific institutes were created, and nuclear scientists, materials scientists, rocket scientists, mathematicians, ballistics scientists, cybernetics, physicians, and many others worked in them. In order to achieve the necessary secrecy of research and concentration of resources, closed from outside world cities, "science cities" , "special", i.e. secret, research institutes and experimental plants, testing grounds and so on. Millions of people took part in these works. In the USSR, a special ministry was created to coordinate the military-industrial complex, with a strange name for such a case, the “Ministry of Medium Machine Building”. In the United States, the functions of the "military space ministry" are performed by "NASA » – National Aeronautics and Space Administration. In modern Russia, an analogue NASA - RSC (Rocket and Space Corporation) Energia.

Due to the new state of science, discoveries made by scientists as part of major projects are part of a collective effort and usually remain anonymous. In the history of pharmacology, the name of the English biologist who discovered the antibiotic "penicillin" (1929) - Alexander Fleming, has been preserved. But modern man is unlikely to become interested in the names of the creators of new, much more effective drugs: such a question in the culture of Modernity, in essence, does not make sense.

The transition across the line of cultural epochs - from the New Age to Modernity, which science experienced in the 20th century, can be seen by observing how the public perception of scientific discoveries that are recognized as outstanding, for example, awarded the Nobel Prize, has changed. The discovery of X-rays was a common cultural fact, as well as the discovery of radioactivity by A. Becquerel and the study of this phenomenon by the spouses Pierre and Marie Curie (Nobel Prize for 1903), the teaching of reflexes by Ivan Pavlov (award for 1904), the theory of relativity by A. Einstein (1921 ). Scientists, creators of quantum theory, in which the "inevitability of a strange world" of microparticles was theoretically substantiated - Nobel laureates Max Planck (1918), Niels Bohr (1922), Werner Heisenberg (1932), Max Born (1954). However, let's try to remember the names of physicists who received Nobel Prize in physics in the late 1990s, for example, in 1995 "for the discovery of the tau lepton", (M. Pearl ), "for the detection of neutrinos" (F. Reines ), in 1996 "For the discovery of the superfluidity of helium-3" (D. Lee, D. Osheroff and R. Richardson), in 1997 "For the development of methods for cooling and trapping atoms with a laser beam" ( S. Chu, K. Cohen-Tannoji and V. Phillips), etc. In the second half of the twentieth century, among the discoveries in natural science, none had the power to directly influence people's worldview. The results of the work and the names of the largest scientists began to be perceived as having significance only within the science itself.

At the same time, the era of the mass scientific and technological industry of Modernity gave rise to the phenomenon of scientific "celebrities", whose fame is based not so much on their scientific achievements, but on their "popularity" created by their frequent appearance in radio and television space in order to promote research industries close to them. By analogy with the stars of show business, professor from the Higher School of Economics, sociologist S. Kordonsky called them "pop scientists" . “Pop scientists imitate the possession of knowledge and sell advertising slogans to the state and corporations,” writes this author. – An academic scientist, frightening with ozone holes, meteor attack or global warming, was bred in corporations involved in the development of new “high-tech” products, and gradually became an element of the standard media, and therefore political space. /…/ Pop scientists explain why it is necessary to give money, for example, for astrophysical or genetic research. And the outstanding representatives of technologized astrophysics and genetics rely on their demands to allocate money from the budget for the public speeches of these representative academics.” "Public Relations" or "Departments"public relations » are important subdivisions in the structure of all major scientific or research and production institutions of Modernity.

"Big science" has similar features in all countries where mass civilizations have managed to take shape. The work on the creation of the atomic bomb in the United States "Project" Manhattan "was carried out by the same gigantic corporate institution as the work on the creation of the atomic bomb in the USSR. On the other hand, industrial giants, in order to create their engineering products, are conducting such a large-scale research work that they can also be considered scientific superinstitutions (for example, the Aircraft Corporation " Boeing "(Boeing) and its European competitor, the aircraft manufacturer" Airbus"(Airbus). In our time, any branch of science, in order for the results of their research to be of public importance, must be built according to the model of scientific and production "Big Science" - with the participation of large state or corporate interests. . And although the data on the organization of nuclear research in China, Pakistan, India, Iran or the DPRK are difficult to obtain, there is no doubt that they are organized everywhere according to the institutional scheme of "Big Science", which corresponds to the goals and values ​​of modern Mass Culture.

Here is another extended definition.

INSTITUTION ) This term is widely used to describe regular and long-term social practices that are sanctioned and maintained by social norms and are important in the structure of society. Just like ‘role’ , 'institution' means established patterns of behavior, but it is seen as a higher order unit, more general, including many roles. Thus, the school as a social institution includes the roles of student and teacher (which usually implies the roles of "junior", "senior" and "leading" teachers) and also, depending on the degree of autonomy of different schools in relation to external structures, the role of parents and the role of managers, inspectors associated with the relevant governing bodies in the field of education. The institution of the school as a whole covers all these roles in all the schools that form the school system of education in a given society.

Usually, there are five main sets of institutions (1) economic institutions that serve for the production and distribution of goods and services; (2) political institutions regulating the exercise of power and access to it; (3) institutions of stratification that determine the placement of positions and resources; (4) kinship institutions associated with marriage, family and socialization youth; (5) cultural institutions associated with religious, scientific and artistic activities. (Sociological Dictionary / Translated from English. Edited by S.A. Erofeev. - Kazan, 1997)

Fukuyama, Francis (b. 1952) - American political philosopher, author of The End of History and last man» ("The End of History and the Last Man"). Internet page dedicated to the work of F. Fukuyama (in Russian) -

During the first 20 years of its activity, the European aircraft manufacturing concern Airbus was almost 100% financed by the budgets of European countries. More hidden government support in the US: it is carried out through government orders. After the September 11, 2001 attacks, when the industry was on the verge of a crisis, the US government helped Boeing Corporation with several large contracts.

Introduction

In modern conditions of social change, there is a rethinking of the role of culture, renewal of its forms and functions. On the one hand, culture still reproduces traditional attitudes and patterns of behavior that largely determine the behavior and thinking of people. On the other hand, modern media forms (television, cinema, print, advertising) are widely spread, which enhances the formation of ideological and moral stereotypes of mass culture, modern style life.

In this context, the defining role of culture in the overall process of Russia's modernization is to shape the personality as an active subject of economic life and social self-organization. All projects of socio-economic development should include a humanitarian component, promote the development of spiritual strength and human health, and awareness of the high meaning of their existence.

In 1928, the TsPKiO was founded in Moscow, thus, the foundation was laid for the creation of new cultural institutions - parks of Culture and Recreation. After the Second World War, PKiO, like other cultural institutions, significantly expanded the scope of their activities, increasingly being involved in holding mass holidays.

In modern conditions, the role of parks as a traditional democratic place for mass recreation will increase. For many residents of the city, recreation in the parks often becomes the only available opportunity to spend time in nature and take part in mass entertainment. In order to improve the activities of parks of culture and recreation, it is necessary to carry out a phased modernization of the outdated park facilities, equipping them with modern amusement equipment, connecting all engineering networks to communications. In the new conditions, the traditional activities of parks should be reconsidered.

The purpose of this work is to consider parks as socio-cultural institutions.

The following tasks follow from this goal:

1. consider the essence and typology of socio-cultural institutions;

2. consider the socio-cultural activities of national and natural parks;

3. consider the activities of parks of culture and recreation;

4. draw conclusions on the research topic.

The object of the research is socio-cultural institutions. The subject of research is the activity of parks.

Socio-cultural institutions - concept and typology

The essence of socio-cultural institutions

Socio-cultural institutions - one of the key concepts of socio-cultural activities (SKD). In the broadest sense, it extends to the spheres of social and socio-cultural practice, and also applies to any of the many subjects interacting with each other in the socio-cultural sphere.

Socio-cultural institutions are characterized by a certain direction of their social practice and social relations, a characteristic mutually agreed system of expediently oriented standards of activity, communication and behavior. Their emergence and grouping into a system depend on the content of the tasks solved by each individual socio-cultural institution.

Among economic, political, household and other social institutions differing from each other in the content of activity and functional qualities, the category of socio-cultural institutions has a number of specific features.

First of all, it is necessary to emphasize the wide range of the term "socio-cultural institution". It covers a numerous network of social institutions that provide cultural activities, the processes of preservation, creation, dissemination and development of cultural values, as well as the inclusion of people in a certain subculture that is adequate for them.

In modern literature, there are various approaches to the construction of a typology of socio-cultural institutions. The problem is to choose the correct criterion for their classification, depending on the intended purpose, nature and content of their activities. As such, the functional-target orientation of socio-cultural institutions, the predominant nature of the content of their work, their structure in the system of social relations can appear.

From the point of view of the functional-target orientation, Kiseleva and Krasilnikov single out two levels of understanding the essence of socio-cultural institutions [ Kiseleva T.G., Krasilnikov Yu.D. Fundamentals of socio-cultural activities: Proc. allowance. - M.: MGUK, 1995, p. 294 - 295]. Accordingly, we are dealing with two of their major varieties.

The first level is normative. In this case, a socio-cultural institution is considered as a normative phenomenon, as a set of certain cultural, moral, ethical, aesthetic, leisure and other norms, customs, traditions that have been historically established in society, uniting around some main, main goal, value, need.

It is legitimate to refer to socio-cultural institutions of the normative type, first of all, the institution of the family, language, religion, education, folklore, science, literature, art and other institutions that are not limited to the development and subsequent reproduction of cultural and social values ​​or the inclusion of a person in a certain subculture . In relation to the individual and individual communities, they perform a number of extremely significant functions: socializing (socialization of a child, adolescent, adult), orienting (assertion of imperative universal values ​​through special codes and ethics of behavior), sanctioning (social regulation of behavior and protection of certain norms and values ​​based on legal and administrative acts, rules and regulations), ceremonial and situational (regulation of the order and methods of mutual behavior, transmission and exchange of information, greetings, appeals, regulation of meetings, meetings, conferences, activities of associations, etc.).

The second level is institutional. Socio-cultural institutions of an institutional type include a numerous network of services, departmental structures and organizations directly or indirectly involved in the socio-cultural sphere and having a specific administrative, social status and a certain public purpose in their industry. This group includes cultural and educational institutions directly , arts, leisure, sports (socio-cultural, leisure services for the population); industrial and economic enterprises and organizations (material and technical support of the socio-cultural sphere); administrative and management bodies and structures in the field of culture, including legislative and executive authorities; research and scientific-methodical institutions of the industry.

So, state and municipal (local), regional authorities occupy one of the leading places in the structure of socio-cultural institutions. They act as authorized subjects for the development and implementation of national and regional socio-cultural policies, effective programs for the socio-cultural development of individual republics, territories and regions.

In a broad sense, a socio-cultural institution is an actively operating subject of a normative or institutional type that has certain formal or informal powers, specific resources and means (financial, material, personnel, etc.) and performs an appropriate socio-cultural function in society.

Any socio-cultural institution should be considered from two sides - external (status) and internal (substantive). From an external (status) point of view, each such institution is characterized as a subject of socio-cultural activity, possessing a set of legal, human, financial, and material resources necessary to perform the functions assigned to it by society. From an internal (substantive) point of view, a socio-cultural institution is a set of expediently oriented standard patterns of activity, communication and behavior of specific individuals in specific socio-cultural situations.

For example, such a socio-cultural institution of a normative type as art, from an external (status) point of view, can be characterized as a set of persons, institutions and material means that carry out the creative process of creating artistic values. At the same time, in its internal (substantial) nature, art is a creative process that provides one of the most important social functions in society. The standards of activity, communication and behavior of creative people, their roles and functions are determined and specified depending on the genre of art.

Socio-cultural institutions give the activities of people a qualitative certainty, significance, both for the individual and for social, age, professional, ethnic, confessional groups, for society as a whole. It should be borne in mind that any of these institutions is not only a valuable and self-sufficient subject, but, above all, a subject of upbringing and education of a person.

Each of the socio-cultural institutions performs primarily its own, most characteristic substantive function, aimed at satisfying those socio-cultural needs for the sake of which it was formed and exists.

The role of social institutions in culture. Social institutions of culture - a set of social structures and public institutions within which culture develops. The concept of a social institution was borrowed by cultural studies from sociology and jurisprudence and largely retains the semantic coloring associated with the norms of the regulatory activity of a person and society, however, it has acquired much more broad interpretation which allows approaching the phenomena of culture from the side of their social establishment.

In the broadest sense of the word, social institutions should be understood as specific socio-cultural formations, historically determined ways of organizing, regulating and projecting various forms of social, including cultural, activity. From the point of view of sociology, the most fundamental social institutions present in most sociocultural formations include property, state, family, production cells of society, science, system of communication means(acting both inside and outside society), upbringing and education, law, etc.

The formation of an appropriate social institution of culture depends on the epoch and the nature of the culture. Before a socio-cultural institution emerges as an independent structure, the culture must be well aware of the need for this kind of cultural activity. Far from always people went to exhibitions, theaters, spent their leisure time at stadiums and discos. There were no institutions corresponding to these needs. For entire epochs there were no archives, no concert halls, no museums, no universities. Some needs in the process of development arose, took shape as socially significant, while others, on the contrary, died off. If today for the majority of Russians the lack of desire to visit the temple on a weekly basis is understandable, then a century and a half ago such a thing was unthinkable. In the process of the emergence of needs, it is necessary that goals are formulated in one way or another. For example, why is it necessary to go to museums, restaurants, stadiums, theaters, visit thermae? The goals must also become socially significant.

In general, it is customary to single out some main types of social institutions to support spiritual production, as well as artistic culture, existing in different eras:

• 1) state, subordinate to the centralized apparatus of power;
• 2) ecclesiastical, based on the support of a religious institution;
• 3) patronage, or patronage, in which the nobility and the rich supported and gave gifts to poets, writers, musicians and architects;
• 4) handicraft, when an object of applied or monumental art is made for the local market or to order;
• 5) commercial, which arose already in pre-industrial society and is associated with market relations;
• 6) self-sufficiency of culture through independent institutions (church, education, creative organizations, cultural industry).

The process of institutionalization is inseparable from the emergence of special norms and rules, which at first can be spontaneous, chaotic, bringing not so much benefit as harm to this type of cultural activity. As a result of such “unorganized” cultural interaction, special procedures, norms, regulations, rules, etc. gradually appear. They are fixed in the form of a social cultural institution, designed to fix the most optimal ways of organizing this form of cultural activity.

The formation of a social institution ends with the creation of a system of statuses and roles, the development of standards covering all aspects of cultural activity without exception. The end of the institutionalization process can be considered the creation, in accordance with the norms and rules, of a fairly clear status-role structure, socially approved by the majority or at least politically supported by the authorities. without institutionalization, no modern culture can exist without social institutions.

Social institutions of culture carry out a number of functions. Among the most important are the following:

• 1. Regulation of the activities of members of society within the prescribed social relations. Cultural activity is regulated, and it is thanks to social institutions that the relevant regulatory regulations are “developed”. Each institution has a system of rules and norms that consolidate and standardize cultural interaction, making it both predictable and communicatively possible; appropriate socio-cultural control provides the order and framework in which the cultural activity of each individual individual takes place.
• 2. Creation of opportunities for cultural activities of one kind or another. In order for specific cultural projects to be implemented within the community, it is necessary that the appropriate conditions be created - this is directly involved in social institutions.
• 3. Enculturation and socialization individuals. Social institutions are designed to provide an opportunity to enter a culture, to become familiar with its values, norms and rules, to teach common cultural behavioral models, and also to introduce a person to a symbolic order. ** This will be discussed in chapter 12.
• 4. Ensuring cultural integration, sustainability of the entire socio-cultural organism. This function ensures the process of interaction, interdependence and mutual responsibility of members of the social group, occurring under the influence of institutional regulations. Integrity, carried out through institutions, is necessary for coordinating activities inside and outside the socio-cultural ensemble; it is one of the conditions for its survival.
• 5. Providing and establishing communications. The communication capabilities of social institutions of culture are not the same: some are specifically designed to transmit information (for example, modern mass media), others have very limited capabilities, for this or are primarily called upon to perform other functions (for example, archives, political organizations, educational institutions ); -- conservation of culturally significant regulations, phenomena, forms of cultural activity, their preservation and reproduction. Culture could not develop if it did not have the ability to store and transmit the accumulated experience - thereby ensuring continuity in the development of cultural traditions.

From birth to the end of his life, a person is not only immersed in culture, but is also “supervised” by it through appropriate more or less institutionalized cultural forms of influence. Culture is, among other things, an extensive system of mechanisms by which control over a person is carried out, his discipline. This control can be harsh and punitive, aimed at suppressing any unrewarded spontaneity. It can also act as "soft" recommendations, allowing a fairly wide range of unregulated manifestations of the individual. However, a person never remains completely “uncontrolled”: one or another cultural institution “supervises” him. Even alone with ourselves, in the absence of a seemingly direct threat of coercion, we carry within ourselves, on a subconscious or mechanical level, directive indications of cultural instances.

State and culture. Consider such a social institution as the state. The state also plays an important role for culture. Already by virtue of the provision of general social functions by the state (maintaining order, protecting the population), it is the most important prerequisite for culture, without which society is at the mercy of local forces and local interests. The state also acts as an important "customer" and "sponsor", supporting cultural activities financially or through the granting of privileges. On the other hand, neither the essence, nor the dynamics of culture, nor the fate of the state coincide directly with the dynamics of culture, frictions and conflicts are common between them, in which the state may temporarily gain the upper hand, but, having its own potentialities, culture is for the most part more durable.

Regarding the question of the management of culture by the state, there is an opinion that culture is less amenable to institutional ordering than other areas. Due to the special role of creativity in culture, it is associated with the individual activity of artists and thinkers, which does not fit into attempts to regulate it. Can culture be controlled? There are long and sometimes irreconcilable disputes between the two sides on this issue. Thus, cultural figures mainly reject state intervention in such a “creative and subtle” matter as cultural creation. Nevertheless, the intervention of government organizations in the work of cultural organizations and groups is often simply necessary, since without government support they may not be able to withstand difficulties of various kinds (not only financial, but also legal, political, etc.) and cease to exist. At the same time, state intervention is fraught with dependence on the authorities, the ruling circles and the deformation of cultural life as a whole.

If you go back centuries, you can find a lot of evidence of when the state or the church, on the one hand, were the main institutions that supported art, literature and science, and on the other hand, they also banned those areas or denied patronage to those artists, thinkers and inventors who either contradicted social norms or harmed the state or the church. Later, these regulatory functions increasingly began to be intercepted by the market, although legal principles invariably corrected the market element. And in addition to them, various bodies, institutions and forms of regulation of cultural life and activities (foundations, sponsorship, patronage, academies, titles, etc.) have been formed.

State cultural policy. Cultural policy is a product of state power. It is she who formulates it and ultimately implements it. The diversity of the relationship between the state and culture once again emphasizes that culture is a special phenomenon, and therefore its management is distinguished by the complexity and variety of forms that are in constant dynamics. It can be said that the culture management system is open and dynamic in nature, just like culture itself. Along with content-conceptual issues of a value nature, economic and legal components play a special role here. They are the main mechanism for the implementation of cultural policy.

The state is the main external institution that regulates cultural activities in modern society. However, the involvement of the state in cultural policy in developed and developing countries is not the same. In the first place, it is more moderate due to the well-established system of regulation of cultural activities on the part of business and public organizations. There the state have the following cultural policy objectives:

• - support for creativity and creation of conditions for creative freedom;
• - protection of national culture and language in the world of expanding international communications and contacts;
• - creating opportunities for involving various segments of the population, especially children and youth, in a creatively active life, depending on their abilities and inclinations;
• - confronting the negative impact of commercialization in the field of culture;
• - promoting the development of regional cultures and local centers;
• - ensuring the preservation of the culture of the past;
• - promoting innovation and cultural renewal;
• - facilitating the establishment of interaction and mutual understanding between various cultural groups within the country and interstate interaction.

In various historical periods of the development of the statehood of specific countries, the interaction between culture and power developed in different ways. The tasks of cultural policy in a democratic society have been discussed above. Totalitarian power encourages an egalitarian, one-dimensional, conformist culture. The values ​​declared by the dominant ideology acquire the phenomenon of an “icon” that requires unconditional reverence. Active rejection of these values ​​is manifested in various forms of dissent, persecuted by the authorities.

For cultural management each country has administrative structures designed to promote cultural development. In the 1960s - 1970s. in many countries ministries of culture appeared, the scope of which was mostly limited to only a few areas.

The broad understanding of culture adopted by many governments includes education, mass communication, social services, youth education. Obviously, the management of such diverse and wide areas is carried out by different departments. Therefore, to coordinate their activities, committees for communication between government departments or parliamentary commissions are created.

A significant place in cultural life is occupied by non-governmental organizations - national and international - associations, writers' and journalistic organizations, various creative teams, private publishing houses, film studios, museums, etc. All of them create a wide network that ensures the cultural activities of the country.

Culture is managed through planning and funding. cultural planning usually included in general social development planning or linked to education and media planning. A serious obstacle in its organization is the lack of substantiated indicators of cultural development and the incompleteness of statistical data. Cultural statistics are usually limited to only a few indicators (number of libraries, museums, newspapers, etc.), there is no information on cultural needs and demands of different population groups, analysis various kinds cultural activities, cultural spending and budgets.

Volume Funding for culture in individual countries may vary. Rich countries can afford to spend heavily on formally subsidized education, networking of cultural centers, and so on. Countries that are deprived of large incomes rely more often on the participation of public organizations, foreign aid, the assistance of cultural agencies and various missions from other countries. However, these sources are clearly not enough.

I. Weber's statement is known that "the most difficult art is the art of managing", and it is especially difficult to manage culture and art.

Difficulties in the cultural policy of Russia at the turn of the millennium are not only financial and legal, but also conceptual. At the beginning of the reforms, we announced that Russia was integrating into the global cultural space, and, consequently, it recognized the priority of universal human spiritual values, which are actualized through the national mentality. This concept turned out to be an unbearable burden for politicians, as well as for some members of society. The idea that our salvation lies in a national idea has begun to be quite actively put forward. Many, in particular, D.S. Likhachev, reacted sharply to such a formulation of the question: “The nationwide idea as a panacea for all ills is not just stupidity, it is extremely dangerous stupidity ... Life according to the national idea will inevitably lead first to restrictions , and then there will be intolerance... Intolerance will surely lead to terror. Unanimity is an artificiality. Naturally - many-thinking, many-ideas. And further: "Our future is in openness to the world and enlightenment."

Our difficulties with cultural policy are obvious. Conceptually, the priority of the spirit and the freedom of the individual are declared, but practically not implemented, since the legal and economic aspects are not provided.

Culture and market. Another important institution that has a significant impact on culture in developed countries is business.. With significant funds and a functional interest in the field of culture, he turns out to be the most important "cultural politician" and "cultural organizer".

In societies with commercial circulation, cultural works become, to one degree or another, an object of sale and purchase, and the very existence of an artist or thinker is somehow connected with commercial factors. Producing for the market means that an art object becomes a commodity, whether it has a unique meaning or exists in multiple copies. Accordingly, the success of the artist is determined by the demand for his products in the market. Under capitalism, the market becomes the main form of material support for cultural activities, although the market existed before, and remains to some extent under socialism. The artist and writer must create a picture, a book that meets the needs of other people and can be bought by them. Naturally, the wealthy part of the population is able to order and buy works of art, thereby exerting commercial pressure on the artist, who is forced to earn his living. Under these conditions, a difficult dilemma arose between creative freedom and the artist's dependence on commercial success.

The market price of a work of art and any substantive embodiment of spiritual culture (an artistic canvas, a novel, a scientific discovery) is not directly related to its spiritual value. From the life history of such major writers of the 19th century as Balzac, Pushkin, Dostoevsky, it is known how unstable their life turned out to be. financial position. Disputes between the artist and the seller continue to this day, and few cultural figures could achieve material success or even relative prosperity if they relied only on the market. It is also well known that the creators of products that are far from the best, which appealed to the general public, may turn out to be successful in the market. So, the great Dutch painter Vincent van Gogh died in poverty, unrecognized by anyone, and later his paintings broke all records on the market and were sold for millions of dollars.

In the conditions of transition to the market, domestic culture has experienced very difficult trials. But, despite all the difficulties, the cultural processes proceed, of course, with varying degrees of intensity - sometimes with positive, and sometimes with negative results.

The main result is the existence of still few market forms of existence of culture. Today it is no longer a state monopoly. Cultural institutions are not only his prerogative. Culture has acquired new forms of ownership, including private and joint stock.

Domestic show business is actively working in market conditions. This is primarily due to the breadth of the market segment, its scale, special demand, and as a result - getting their own tangible finances plus attracting sponsorship funds. The concert and philharmonic market is also reviving today. There are examples here, not only related to the actions of the capital, but also regional ones. Thus, in particular, one can note the activities of the cultural and organizational structure "Premier" in Krasnodar. Several interesting projects have recently been implemented in this city. The world-famous choreographer Y. Grigorovich staged the ballets Raymonda, Don Quixote, Spartacus in a city that never had a ballet troupe, a jazz band was created under the patronage of the famous musician G. Garanyan, a chamber and large symphony orchestras, which was not previously, although the city has an excellent music school named after. Rimsky-Korsakov, Krasnodar State University culture and arts, the newly created choreographic school. These processes are very symptomatic and require theoretical understanding, on the one hand, and their real support, on the other.

The market, with its freedom, provides a certain kind of advantage. But are these actions possible without the organizational-coordinating, managerial principle, the intermediary function of a talented manager? Of course not.

The advantages of the market can also turn into a shadow side. In the absence of a strict legal framework, when intellectual property rights are not yet fully protected, there is an exploitation of the creator by a resourceful manager. There is a well-known scandal with the touring version of The Maids directed by R. Viktyuk, an endlessly lasting conflict between the TAMP production group and the creative team of the film directed by V. Karra over the rights to the film The Master and Margarita ... In this regard, the words become especially relevant T. Jefferson: "The whole art of management consists in the art of being honest."

This is one aspect. The other has to do with the attempt to maximize profits from the exploitation of a cultural good or service. Freeing the artist from the dictatorship of the state or church, the market at the same time makes him highly dependent on commercial demand. There is often a contradiction between commercial benefit and quality. In this respect a prime example can serve our domestic television, both state and non-state. Violent competition forces channels to satisfy the interests of the audience, as a rule, focusing on a large part of them. It is no coincidence that the ether today is divided mainly between information programs, games of all stripes, variety and entertainment products and the demonstration of films of a certain genre orientation: detective, thriller, action movie or soap opera. The share of intellectual, educational programs has been reduced to a minimum, with the exception of the Culture channel. The lion's share of airtime is taken by advertising, since it is it that gives an impressive part of the profit. And the rest of the airtime is divided in accordance with the rating of viewer preferences. We can observe similar phenomena in show business. For example, the unfortunate impresario organizes tours of doubles of famous pop-star groups, fortunately, the expanses of our country are so vast that it is difficult to identify false stars before they fail on stage. Accompanying this process is the fact that some performers very often use a phonogram. It is no secret that commercial viability today often comes into conflict with the quality of cultural products. But this does not mean that there can be no harmonic unity between them. We are seeing growing pains caused by the commercialization of art and culture.

But let us turn to the practice of one of the European countries, where the cultural sector traditionally plays a significant role. Great Britain can rightly be considered such a country. Promotion of culture by the private sector in England is a tradition encouraged by the state (Department of National Heritage, renamed in 1997 to the Department of Culture, Sports and Media). By the end of the 70s. major cultural institutions such as the Arts Council have introduced some financial research mechanisms and programs. In this mature market, partners work together in perfect harmony, with the expectation that this best practice will soon be adopted by the rest of Europe.

More than half of large commercial companies help culture.

Of the 100 most significant British companies, 60% are somehow involved in the development of culture. Small and medium-sized companies, the number of which is increasing every year, are beginning to realize their benefits from this kind of activity.

A special place in the development of various types of artistic culture is occupied by patrons who have their predecessors back in ancient history many countries. In our country, the names of such patrons of the arts as P. Tretyakov and S. Morozov are well known.

There are certain contradictions between the participants of the state and big business in maintaining culture, arising from the fact that the state nevertheless reflects broader public interest than individual layers and business groups, and therefore may act to the detriment of individual layers and groups. However, there are also positive examples. So the English opera receives about 11% of the total sponsorship; basically these funds go to technical (functional) expenses, rather than to support creative activity. As far as ballet and dance are concerned, they are the main beneficiaries... (15% of the total), etc. Of the total amount of the commercial sector, 54% is actually sponsorship, and only 6.3% is gratuitous corporate donations. Special mention should be made of the National Lottery, which provides financial support to cultural projects in the country.

The income of the National Lottery is 1 billion pounds. Art. annually; part of this income goes to the culture and heritage sectors. The lottery is privately owned. Lottery operators, the consortium have 72% of the income for administrative expenses and prizes; 28% are intended to support culture, sports, charitable and other social needs. Between March 1995 and February 1998, the National Lottery supported 38,518 projects worth £4.7 billion. Art. (of which 8737 cultural projects worth £1.1 billion).

The lottery never fully finances the project, so project managers are required to find the missing amounts: from the state, local city committees and sponsors (donors). One of the conditions under which the Arts Committee allocates funds to cultural organizations is the availability of 10 to 15% of funds received from the private sector.

Family as a social institution of culture. The social institutions of culture regulate cultural activity, and as we know, it includes a complex process of symbolization, which involves not mechanically following established behavioral rules, but giving them meaning; ensuring the entry of the individual into the symbolic order of culture and the possibility of being in it. In principle, a disciplinary space is any form of social institutionalization - religious, political, professional, economic, etc. Such spaces are most often not separated by an impenetrable line, but are intertwined, overlap each other, interact.

On the one hand, the boundaries and conditions of competence of the disciplinary-symbolic spaces of culture are not always strictly regulated: they have a clear list of variations “for all occasions”, allowing for greater freedom of the individual. In the theatre, in a museum, at a party, in private life, we feel less embarrassed than at work and in court. On the other hand, due to the fact that the symbolic order is not limited by working time and official duties, they are relentless, effective even in situations where we are apparently spared direct control from the corresponding cultural institution. In the theater we behave appropriately, at the station - in a different way, at home we show third qualities. At the same time, in all cases, we are forced to obey both the overt and unspoken rules of the cultural community, to be guided by a symbolic value-semantic scale. Even without realizing it, we know how we should be located in this particular cultural space, what is allowed for us, and what, on the contrary, is forbidden to desire and manifest. Such "intuitive knowledge" is the result of previous experience, experience inculturation and socialization, the acquisition of which does not stop for a minute throughout a person's life.

Speaking about the social institutions of culture, one should first of all point to such a disciplinary-symbolic space as a family. It has always performed a number of functions in society. From the point of view of cultural studies, the most important function should be recognized as the translation of cultural stereotypes - values ​​and norms of the broadest nature. It is in the family that a person receives the first experience of inculturation and socialization. Thanks to direct contact with parents, as a result of imitating the habits of household members, the intonation of speech, gestures and actions, the reactions of others to a particular phenomenon of reality, and finally, due to the purposeful influence on the part of others on his own actions, words, actions, efforts and efforts, a person learns culture. Sometimes we may not even be aware of how this directly happens. They do not necessarily explain to us why we should act in this way and not in another way, we are forced to do something or persuaded. It enters us through the impulsive rhythm of everyday life, predetermining the character of many, if not most, of our own words and deeds in later life.

None of the cultures, both in the past and in the present, left the institution of the family unattended. Depending on what type of personality was most in demand for a particular period of time, the corresponding norms of family and marriage relations were also built. The family, therefore, is both a mechanism for transmitting tradition from generation to generation, and a way to implement current cultural innovation programs, and a tool for maintaining the regulations of a symbolic order. The family not only forms the basis of a person's future individual life, determines the possible directions of his cultural activity, but also lays the foundation for the whole culture.

Education and culture. No matter how great the impact of the home and family on a person, it is still not enough for successful socialization, because the family is at best a “cell of society”, an adequate model for it. The family and the school collectively perform an educational function.

Education can be defined as a process that ensures the assimilation of knowledge, orientations and experience accumulated in society. The education system, being one of the subsystems of society, reflects both its specific features and problems. Of course, the content and state of education largely depend on the socio-economic state of society. However, socio-cultural factors also constitute its most important dominant. That is why education is able to involve directly or indirectly all classes and social groups into its orbit, to have a significant impact on all aspects of spiritual life. Mainly through the education system, scientific theories and artistic values ​​penetrate the consciousness of the masses. On the other hand, the impact of mass consciousness on high culture is the more effective, the more enlightened the masses, the more elements of the scientific worldview entered into their everyday consciousness. Thus, educational institutions (school, home education, university, vocational education, etc.) form a channel for the transmission of social experience and knowledge, and also represent the main link between different levels of the spiritual life of society.

The state of education more directly than other spheres of culture depends on the socio-political system of a given country, on the policy of the ruling class, on the balance of class forces. Around the problems of organizing school affairs, such as the role of the state in the creation and financing of educational institutions, the obligation of education up to a certain age, the relationship between school and church, the training of teachers, etc., there was an almost constant struggle between representatives of various classes and parties. It clearly outlined the various ideological positions - both of the extremely conservative, liberal and radical sections of the bourgeoisie, and of the workers' fund. An even sharper struggle was waged over the content of education, its ideological orientation, the range of knowledge that should be mastered by students, and the very methodology of teaching.

For all distinctive features education systems in different countries, it has both common roots and common problems. Modern education is a product of the Enlightenment and grew out of the outstanding discoveries of the first phase of the scientific revolution. The sharply increased division of labor led to the differentiation of both activities and knowledge, which in the education system is reflected in the training of a predominantly narrow specialist. Education is no longer understood as "cultivation", that is, the "doing" of a person in terms of culture, and is increasingly interpreted only as "pumping information". The basis of the educational system in our country was the principle of polytechnic education, the essence of which is to train personnel for production. In this system of education, the student is considered as an object of pedagogical influence, a kind of “tabula rasa” (from Latin - a blank slate). Thus, we can talk about the monologue nature of the pedagogical process. At the same time, the concept of "educated person" is perceived as "informed person", and this, as you know, does not guarantee that he has the ability to reproduce culture, and even more so - to generate cultural innovations.

The scientism inherent in the culture of modern times determined the entire structure of education. The educational process develops with the obvious dominance of a number of disciplines of the natural science cycle and the displacement of other areas of knowledge to the periphery. The orientation of the education system towards solving utilitarian problems leads to the separation of the learning process from education, displacing the latter into extracurricular time. The system of education that took shape in modern times met the needs of society and was highly effective, as evidenced by the scientific and technological progress of society. culturology culture social institution

In the context of a change in the cultural paradigm, it begins to reveal its weaknesses. By the end of the 20th century, science made a sharp leap and radically changed, recognizing the plurality of truth, seeing chance in necessity, and necessity in chance. Having abandoned universal claims, science has now turned to moral quests, and the system of "school" disciplines cannot yet get out of the blinkers. pictures of the world XIX century.

On the other hand, the sharply reduced period of technological renewal excludes the possibility of obtaining knowledge and a profession “for life”. Ecological crisis and others global problems societies require non-standard solutions.

conclusions

• 1. Social institutions of culture- specific socio-cultural formations that have a fairly clear status-role structure, to maintain spiritual production, as well as artistic culture,
• 2. Social institutions ensure the functioning of the social mechanism, carry out processes inculturation and socialization individuals, ensure the continuity of generations, transfer skills, values ​​and norms of social behavior.
• 3. The effectiveness of the activity of social institutions depends on how close the hierarchy of values ​​accepted in society is to the general cultural one. The state cultural policy contains conceptual issues of a value nature, as well as economic and legal components. Culture is managed through planning and funding; its tasks may differ in countries with different political regimes.
• 4. In modern society, the market is becoming increasingly important in maintaining culture. His role is ambiguous. The market, with its freedom, provides a certain kind of advantage. Entrepreneurship and sponsorship expands the scope and geography of culture. However, the market places culture in the strongest dependence on commercial demand.
• 5. The family is the most important mechanism for transmitting tradition from generation to generation, a way to implement current cultural innovation programs, a tool for maintaining symbolic space. It forms the basis of the future individual life of a person, determines the possible directions of his cultural activity, and lays the foundation for all culture.
• 6. The family and the school together, mutually complementing each other, perform an educational function. The education system (like the family) is a channel for the transmission of social experience and knowledge, as well as the main link between the various levels of the spiritual life of society. However, modern education in many ways no longer meets these challenges.

Review questions

• 1. What is the role of social institutions in the development of culture? What types of social institutions do you know?
• 2. What determines the formation and nature of various social institutions of culture? What functions do social institutions of culture perform in society?
• 3. What is cultural policy? What are the contradictions of state regulation of the sphere of culture?
• 4. Name the most important tasks of the state cultural policy.
• 5. What cultural management methods do you know? What are the difficulties in the cultural policy of Russia at the present stage?
• 6. How do market relations affect the management system in culture? Determine the positive and negative aspects of the influence of the market on culture.
• 7. What is the peculiarity of the influence of the family institution in culture? What functions does it perform?
• 8. What role does the education system play in culture? Why education depends on the political system of the country?