View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Siberian Federal University Digital Repository Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences 4 (2015 8) 735-749 ~ ~ ~ УДК 304.444; 72.01 Architectural Space as a Factor of Regional Cultural Identity Anastasia V. Kistova* and Anastasia N. Tamarovskaya Siberian Federal University 79 Svobodny, Krasnoyarsk, 660041, Russia Received 20.09.2014, received in revised form 09.11.2014, accepted 20.12.2014 The provisions stated in the paper are based on findings of modern cultural and art studies related to the ability of architectural spaces to form a concept of oneself, of a society, of the world for a human being, who is interacting with these spaces. Only true architectural masterpieces of the state-of-art type are able to produce a positive impact on the cultural identity of a person when forming the architectural artistic image. The article also contains the results of research of Krasnoyarsk Church of the Miracle of the Archangel Michael at Chonae as an example of church architecture of regional importance, able to form a positive cultural identity, and the results of practical research of the peculiarities of perception of the architecture by children in primary and secondary school. The research was conducted by Anastasia Tamarovskaya, a fourth-year student majoring in “history of arts” at the Institute for Humanities of Siberian Federal University. Keywords: Regional cultural identity, architectural space, piece of architecture, architectural artistic image, perception of architecture by children, Krasnoyarsk architecture, Church of the Miracle of the Archangel Michael at Chonae (Colossae). Research area: culture studies, art history. Introduction 2013; J. Shannon., 2012; G.M. Thomas, 2009; The relevance of the impact of architectural O.N. Astafieva, 2010; D.S. Gavrikov, 2012; spaces and forms on a person’s cultural identity A.Yi. Gromnuk, 2012; O.E. Zhelezniak, is increasingly mentioned in the articles of G.Yi. Okhrimenko, 2009; D.A. Leontiev, 2009 modern architecture researchers (K. Higa, et all), who seem to be working in different 2013; K.M. Kuenzli, 2012; P. Schumacher, areas, but come to general conclusions about the 2009; C. Whiting, 2011; S.T. Agisheva, significance of the impact of architectural forms F.D. Mubarakshina, 2013; S.Yu. Alexeev, and spaces for the formation of the picture of the N.N. Alexeeva, 2013; T.Yu. Bistrova, 2010; world for a man, as well as the opposite impact of E.Yu. Vituk, 2012; Yi.A. Ibragimov, 2009; human outlook on the emergence and development V.O. Karovsky, 2012; K. Kelly, 2011 et all.) and of architectural works and architectural cultural identity researchers (C.M.S.Johns, environment. Architecture, considered at the 2004; J.V. Maciuika, 2005; M.M. Reeve, intersection of cultural studies, aesthetics, © Siberian Federal University. All rights reserved * Corresponding author E-mail address: [email protected] – 735 – Anastasia V. Kistova and Anastasia N. Tamarovskaya. Architectural Space as a Factor of Regional Cultural Identity philosophy, sociology and psychology, begins observing ideological and value principles can to be understood as human living space, formed destructively affect the general cultural climate by human and forming human: “The presence of the society. of the designer`s perceived philosophical and Secondly, not every person is able to ideological basis not only ensures the integrity consciously perceive the architectural structure of the architectural and urban solutions, but and understand its impact on himself (herself). also the intensity of exposure on the perceiver. Most often, the architecture is perceived by Setting definite visual and behavioral scenarios, an ordinary man in the street as something the decision slowly and constantly moves human taken for granted, as space of everyday life and closer to cultural traditions, contributing to nothing more. This does not mean that from socialization and reflection. Perceiving the this architecture has less effect on humans, but objects as our “own”, we may not think about the effect may be much higher, if this effect is their semantics and focus, but we feel our unity realized by people: “The first thing you must or diversity with them” (T.Yu. Bistrova, 2010, mention is aesthetic, more precisely ethical & 129-130). aesthetic conditionality of any architectural Such a representation of the architecture solution, including educational space. Valuable in its symbiotic relationship with the man is determinants not only play an important explained by researchers as “re-estimation of role, but are woven of many elements that values in the structure of modern society, where have appeared at different times and formed the priority is given to the notion of personal space, an organic integrity, often consequential freedom of choice and access to information” of each other. Being inside of it since one`s (N.A. Mityashina). Such a formulation of the birth, man is able to identify without further problem involves a high degree of awareness in reflection its phenomena as “their”, “close”, the design of architectural works and spaces, as “understandable”. Human does not have to well as raises the question about their perception articulate them, whereas for a representative by people living and working in these spaces of another social and cultural environment (V.Yi. Vetoshkin, 2010; N.V. Lamekhova, they need to be deciphered, compared with the 2009; A.V. Lobanov, 2008; T.P. Nesterova, already known information (in the spirit of “it’s 2010; Yi.E. Nikitina, L.A. Shtompel, 2011; like ...”), etc.” (T.Yu. Bistrova, 2010, 130). A.B. Permilovskaya, 2011; M.V. Puchkov, 2013; A.S. Tokarev, 2006 et all). Methods This means, first, that not every Methodological core of the present study architectural structure really is able to form are the modern cultural and sociological ideas a coherent and harmonious image of a man about the nature and methods of forming inscribed in the cultural traditions of society cultural identities represented in the works of and able to perceive ideals respectful of other F.J. Schwartz, K.M. Kuenzli, E.G. Grossman, cultures. Only those facilities which according C.M.S. Johns, O.N. Afanasieva, T.Yu. Bistrova, to the tradition usually called masterpieces Yu.R. Gorelovoi, O.Е. Zhelezniak, G.Yi. of art fully have the property of forming the Okhrimenko, O.A. Zhukova, D.А. Leontiev, cultural identity. Facilities which were created A.A. Nikonova, M.V. Puchkov and modern excluding this impact on human architectural works on the essence of cultural identities of the forms, as well as an integrated system without regional level as well (N.A. Galaktionova, 2010; – 736 – Anastasia V. Kistova and Anastasia N. Tamarovskaya. Architectural Space as a Factor of Regional Cultural Identity E.V. Golovneva, 2013; E.E. Dutchak, E.L. Lvov, comfort for human use in accordance with the 2012; G.S. Korepanov, 2009; D.S. Kotelnikov natural conditions, constructive techniques and 2009; V. Sukhanov, 2009; K.E. Tumakova, functions of the masterpiece-substance. 2010). Cultural studies revealed the potential of The architect is the creator of the architectural works of architecture based on the methods of work, a person who by the transformation the modern theory of fine arts by V.I. Zhukovsky through natural space creates sensuously given (V.I. Zhukovsky, 2011; V.I. Zhukovsky, phenomena-venue for a meeting between man N.P. Koptseva, 2010), as well as on the basis of and infinity in its various aspects and models methodological developments of employees of the in a material way to the spatial composition of Department of Cultural Studies at the Institute this meeting, in this way, solves the extremely of Humanities, Siberian Federal University in important task. Required distinctive qualities of the study of the regional cultural identity in the an architect: visual spatial thinking, rational logic material of the analysis of cultural and artistic combination of building techniques and intuitive artifacts (Yu.S. Zamaraeva, 2010; N.P. Koptseva, artistic thinking, possession of knowledge of N.N. Nevolko, 2012; N.M. Libakova, 2011; many industries (civil engineering, history of art, V.S. Luzan, 2013; K.V. Reznikova, 2013; math, physics, composition, psychology), artistic A.A. Semenova, 2012; E.A. Sertakova, 2010, taste and talent to create works of architecture 2013). like the demiurgic act of creation of the world (the building as a universe). Basic Concepts The architectural work-substance is a material Based on the guidelines described in the cover of the architectural masterpiece, it exists introduction we can stipulate the following at the interface of natural and artificial: is being qualitative properties of a piece of architecture, created by the architect from natural materials in understood as the space of the viewer interaction the environment, but by the man and for the man. and architectural material, i.e. the space of Distinctive features of the architectural work- an architectural art image, according to the substances are as follows: quality functionality, modern cultural and semiotic theory of art spatial volume, reality of mass volumes, surfaces by V.I. Zhukovsky (V.I. Zhukovsky, 2011; and rhythms of light and shade, strength, spatial V.I. Zhukovsky, N.P. Koptseva, 2010). extent, the importance of interaction with the Architectural artistic image is an artistic environment, the interaction of exterior and image, which is being created and developed interior, structural and compositional integrity during the time of relationship of the viewer and similar to human body, ordering, the availability the architectural work-substance. Its specific of force fields to lead the viewer, suggesting a qualities come from the special qualities of all its dynamic dialogue, the ability to really plunge the “parents”: art material, architect, work-item, and viewer into the artistic space. viewer. The viewer of an architectural work is Architectural art material i.e.