Institute of culture, its meaning and functions. Social institutions of the spiritual sphere and their role in society

In a broad sense, culture is usually understood as everything that relates to the specifics of a person’s being as a conscious being (as opposed to purely natural forces): the results of his material and spiritual activities (the culture of work, life, leisure, communication, production and consumption, urban, rural, technical, physical, psychological, etc.). In a narrower sense, the term "culture" defines the sphere of people's spiritual life. It is the socio-psychological problems of spiritual culture, and above all artistic culture, that are considered in this paragraph.

From a socio-psychological point of view, the main elements of spiritual culture are beliefs, beliefs, ideals, values, as well as their corresponding customs, norms of communication, activities, behavior of people, which are expressed and fixed in signs, symbols, images, and above all in language (in written, printed, iconographic, video and audio documents). Moreover, these elements of spiritual culture can be considered at the universal level, the level of a particular society, ethnic group, nation, class, at the level of other, smaller large groups, as well as small groups (group morality, group aesthetic taste, etc.) and personality (individual culture). Within the framework of the culture of this or that society, various private, group subcultures are formed (for example, youth, national minorities, regional, etc.). Of particular importance in the socio-psychological sense is the process of socialization, through which new generations become familiar with the culture of their society, people, and group.

The origins of spiritual culture can be traced in myths, folklore, beliefs, religions of peoples. In the history of the spiritual culture of mankind, an important place is occupied by religions, which are powerful exponents of certain systems of values ​​and norms (prescriptions, rules of conduct).

Even in Russia, despite seventy-five years of state atheism, the culture and way of life are permeated with the spirit of Orthodox Christianity. Suffice it to recall the architecture of white-stone Russian churches, the spiritual and secular music of Bortnyansky, Mussorgsky, Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninov, the traditions of choral singing and bell ringing, icon painting and painting, great Russian literature. Orthodox motifs are also present in modern Russian art (A. Solzhenitsyn, V. Astafiev, I. Glazunov, Yu. Kuznetsov and others), including in the works of young painters, poets, and musicians. To this day, icons in village houses have not disappeared, Orthodox religious holidays are celebrated nationwide (especially Easter, Trinity).

If by the beginning of the XX century. in most European societies, artistic culture existed in the forms of high elitist (fine arts, classical music, literature) and folk culture (folklore, songs, dances, fairy tales), then later in connection with the development of mass media (cinema, recording, radio, television etc.) in the West, a so-called mass standardized culture arose, which, in the end, blurred the boundaries between elite and popular culture.

However, the concept of "mass culture" requires a clearer explanation. The content of this term is clarified through synonymous and close concepts: semi-culture, ersatz culture, pop culture, lumpen culture, entertainment art, commercial art. Characteristic features of mass culture: commercial success and popularity at any cost; entertainment and entertainment by any means; exploitation of people's instincts and superstitions (aggressiveness, sex, fear, mysticism, etc.), the cult of hedonism and consumerism; schematization, stereotyping, simplification of all phenomena of life; bad taste, the reduction of art to a vulgar spectacle; often a mismatch between content and form. All this is typical for tabloid novels, detective stories, all kinds of spectacle shows, pop music, action films, erotic magazines, etc. Gradually, especially from the late 60s - early 70s, mass culture merges with modernism in the West. (avant-garde), which complements it with such qualities as dehumanization, belittling of traditional human values, rude irony and parody, "black humor", illogicality, irreality, narcotic suggestion, shocking and provoking the audience, which finds expression in rock music (metal rock , punk rock, etc.), various areas of fine arts (pop art, photorealism, social art, etc.), in cinema (horror films, mystical fiction, parody films), in illogical shocking fashion, etc. .

In our country, mass culture in the Western version began to noticeably manifest itself approximately from the second half of the 70s (pop music, Western films, pop art, fiction, youth fashion, etc.).

If we consider the history of culture in a broad perspective, we can identify some universal patterns. Thus, the largest Russian-American sociologist Pitirim Sorokin, based on the analysis of vast historical material, developed an original concept of sociocultural dynamics, in the light of which, over the course of human history, there is a gradual change of three main culture systems: first, based on the principle of supersensibility and superreason of God as the only values ​​and realities (Greek culture of the 8th-6th centuries BC; medieval Western European culture, etc.); secondly, proceeding from the fact that objective reality is partially supersensible (Greek culture of the 5th-4th centuries BC; culture of the 13th-14th centuries in Western Europe), and, thirdly, secular, based on the principle of sensory objective reality and its meaning (Western culture from the 16th century to the present day). P. Sorokin believed that in the XX century. a crisis of sensory culture and society as a whole began: “The crisis is extraordinary in the sense that, like its predecessors, it is marked by an extraordinary explosion of wars, revolutions, anarchy and bloodshed; social, moral, economic and intellectual chaos; the revival of disgusting cruelty, the temporary destruction of the great and small values ​​of humanity; poverty and suffering of millions. However, in general, the scientist expressed an optimistic view of the history of mankind: “Fortunately, culture and civilization are infinitely stronger than the clowns of the political circus assure us. Political, and not only political, parties, factions, factions and armies come and go, but culture remains despite their funeral speeches.

In line with the concept of P. Sorokin, what is happening now in the world, and in particular Russian, culture, looks quite natural.

The new social political situation that has developed in our country since the second half of the 1980s, the development of democracy, glasnost and pluralism made it possible to overcome many bureaucratic and authoritarian traditions in the aesthetic education and functioning of culture and art, which were created during the years of the personality cult and stagnation. Positive trends were manifested in the restoration of the rights to access to the entire world culture, to the free development of various aesthetic approaches, artistic trends and schools (from realistic to experimental), including those associated with Russian spiritual culture, philosophy and aesthetics of the late XIX - early XX centuries. However, the new conditions have also given rise to new serious moral, socio-psychological and aesthetic problems in artistic culture, which require their own scientific understanding.

First, from the end of the 1980s, a sharp decline in the values ​​of spiritual culture among Russians began. Secondly, at present, in the public aesthetic consciousness, there are tendencies towards a kind of relativistic mosaicism, towards a conglomeration of folk, religious, classical, social realist, mass culture and modernist aesthetics, which is caused by the transitional nature of the period experienced by society.

The authoritarian-centralized regulation of artistic values, genres, names, and works was replaced by a similar group regulation, as a result of which particular group aesthetic values ​​(for example, certain groups of the artistic intelligentsia, the youth of the capital) sometimes receive a disproportionate representation in the public consciousness compared to the universal one.

Thus, the expansive and entertaining trend, which grew during the years of stagnation, turns into the widest cultivation of mass culture on the stage and in the theater, in music and cinema, in the visual arts and design (especially associated with youth fashion in clothing, accessories, emblems, etc.). P.). Replicated by television and radio, video and audio recordings, illustrated magazines, mass culture blurs the criteria of artistic taste, vulgarizes and, in fact, destroys it.

There are tendencies of dehumanization and demoralization in the content of art, which is manifested primarily in the humiliation, deformation and destruction of the image of a person. In particular, this is recorded in the abundance of scenes and episodes of violence, cruelty, in strengthening their naturalism (cinema, theater, rock music, literature, fine arts), which contradicts traditional folk morality and has a negative impact on the youth audience.

Since the end of the 80s, the situation in our mass art, especially in its screen forms (cinema, video, television), began to change, acquiring a negative character. In the cinema, on the television screen, violence and eroticism are shown, especially in connection with the spread of cable television, which usually shows Western films of little art.

From a socio-psychological point of view, there is no doubt that on-screen violence and aggressive erotica contribute to the criminalization of modern life, especially affecting children, adolescents and young people. As you know, crime among them continues to grow steadily. It is no coincidence that in developed Western countries, the public has created organizations such as the International Coalition Against Violence in Entertainment Events or the National Coalition Against Television Violence (USA). In Russian society, only a few spiritually sensitive and highly cultured people have so far opposed such negative phenomena.

Analyzing modern mass culture, it is impossible to ignore such a variety of it as rock music, which was tabooed (forbidden) at the official level until the end of the 80s, and later, with the same immoderation and bias, was extolled and idealized as a kind of progressive and revolutionary phenomenon. . Of course, one should not deny rock music as a genre, especially its varieties associated with folk traditions (folk rock), political and author's song. However, an objective analysis of foreign and domestic production of various areas of this music is needed (for example, the so-called "heavy metal" and punk rock are undeniably countercultural aggressively vandalistic in nature).

Observations show that in the general trend of rock-pop music becomes dehumanized, losing the image of a person and turning him into a demonic character in metal rock, into a robot or puppet in breakdance, into a thing among many other things in commercial-consumer songs. The loss of humanistic content in rock music also occurs through the distortion of the natural human voice with all possible wheezing and squeals, deliberately broken, mocking intonations (inadequate expression of irony), the substitution of male voices for effeminate ones and vice versa, as well as with the help of various electronic and technical effects that machine the voice .

Psychophysiological studies of Western and domestic experts testify to the negative effects of modern rock-pop music (especially its constant excessive listening) on ​​young people, similar to the effects of narcotic and psychotropic drugs. Thus, the American psychiatrist J. Diamond studied the influence of various types and genres of music on people. If classical and folk music, traditional jazz and early (dance) rock and roll had a positive psychophysiological effect on the subjects, then "hard rock" and "metal rock" caused a violation of the normal psychophysiological rhythm of the body, contributed to the manifestation of aggressiveness and other negative emotions. Diamond, with the help of musicians, identified in such rock music that appeared in the second half of the 60s, a certain structural element, which he called "intermittent anapestbeat", which showed a disorganizing psychophysiological effect.

As a result of the development of modern mass media, the musical environment has acquired (at least for young people) ecological significance. Therefore, its positive or negative nature has a special deep meaning for the emotional world of a person, for his attitude and mood.

At the same time, at present, folk, spiritual-classical and modern academic art (including literature), being deprived of state support, is becoming more and more elitist, its audience is narrowing. As a result, the normal hierarchy of varieties, genres and qualities of art is violated, the spirit and heart of true culture is destroyed, and most importantly, the culture of new generations.

The history of Russian literature and art really knows periods marked by the highest ups and downs of spirituality and artistic skill.

Such periods in the development of art can be called cathartic; associated with the effect of catharsis (the term of Aristotle, interpreted as a kind of spiritual and emotional purification in the process of perceiving an ancient tragedy, and more broadly - any work of art). Allocate emotional, aesthetic and ethical aspects of catharsis.

The emotional aspect of catharsis is expressed in a state of relief, liberation (including tears and laughter) from heavy, gloomy experiences, in positive enlightened feelings. The aesthetic aspect of catharsis is the feelings of harmony, order, beauty in their complex dialectical expression. Finally, in ethical terms, catharsis evokes humane feelings, feelings of guilt, repentance, “reverence for life” (A. Schweitzer). These emotional-psychological, aesthetic and ethical characteristics are clearly seen in great works of art (remember, for example, "Trinity" by A. Rublev, "Requiem" by W. Mozart, "Crime and Punishment" by F. Dostoevsky, etc.), which ultimately account contribute to the worldview and worldview of a good person.

In the socio-psychological interpretation, catharsis acts as an intense emotional state that unites a real audience (theatrical, concert, etc.) or an individual (reading a poem or a story, watching video films, etc.) in empathy with a tragic (tragocomic) hero (content ) a work of art that enlightens, elevates, ennobles the inner world of a person (his feelings, thoughts, will), reveals his universal spiritual essence. In a broad socio-psychological understanding, catharsis is the overcoming of loneliness and alienation, the achievement of human solidarity, a qualitative leap in the process of socialization, the formation of a humanistic worldview, familiarization with the highest spiritual values ​​of mankind, which are the works of great creators.

It is clear that the state of catharsis is not so easily achieved. The works must contain powerful suggestive impulses expressing the sincere faith and intentions of the artist. In a real audience (at a concert, in a theater, etc.), the mechanisms of mental infection and imitation are also activated, which enhance the cathartic effect.

A systematic socio-psychological approach to the phenomenon of catharsis, to the impact of art in general, requires taking into account not only the characteristics of a work of art, but also the personal characteristics of the artist behind the work, as well as the audience that perceives the work (and, with a more in-depth approach, all other participants in artistic communication, e.g. editor, distributor of a work, critic, etc.). This raises a problem that can be called the problem of personal compatibility of the artist (and his work) with the audience.

Certain aspects of the problem of compatibility-incompatibility of certain types of art and recipients endowed with certain psychological characteristics were studied by psychologists, in particular G. Eysenck and I. Child (for example, data on various types of painting preferred by introverts and extroverts, etc. .).

Works of art have not only a positive impact on people. Another pole of emotional impact is a negative state, which can be called "anti-catharsis".

This is a state of oppression, humiliation, fear or hatred, aggressiveness. In the aesthetic aspect, anti-catharsis expresses a sense of disharmony, chaos, and ugliness. In ethical terms, anti-catharsis gives rise to inhumane feelings, alienation, immorality, and contempt for life. Similar feelings and emotions are produced by many works of modernist and mass culture art of the 20th century. However, the survival and revival of any society and art are connected, in particular, with the cultivation of eternal human values ​​- truth, goodness and beauty, faith, hope and love, responsibility, work and creativity.

100 r first order bonus

Choose the type of work Graduation work Term paper Abstract Master's thesis Report on practice Article Report Review Test work Monograph Problem solving Business plan Answers to questions Creative work Essay Drawing Compositions Translation Presentations Typing Other Increasing the uniqueness of the text Candidate's thesis Laboratory work Help on-line

Ask for a price

The concept of a social institution

The culture of a society is a complex system, the main block of which is a social institution. The concept of a social institution in its modern meaning, as well as the concept of culture as a whole, was introduced by B. Malinovsky.

A social institution is an organized system of social ties and norms designed to satisfy the basic needs of society and its constituent individuals. Institutions create sustainable forms of joint activity of people in the use of public resources in order to satisfy one or more social needs.

Thus, institutions perform two main functions in society:

1) increasing the efficiency of meeting a given need or group of needs;

2) maintaining public order, preventing chaos and uncontrolled competition between groups and individuals in the process of satisfying needs.

Institute includes:

A social group (or groups) that fulfills this need. A variety of such groups are social organizations designed to satisfy these needs;

A stable set of norms, values, patterns of behavior, technological methods that ensure the satisfaction of needs, as well as a system of symbols that regulate relations in this field of activity (trademark, flag, wedding rings, etc.);

The ideological substantiation of the institute's activities, fixed in the public consciousness, which Malinovsky himself called the charter. A charter can be drawn up as a special document (for example, a program of a political party, a charter and constituent documents of a company), or it can exist in an oral tradition (for example, a system of myths that justify enmity, or vice versa - friendship between neighboring tribes);

Social resources (buildings, money, equipment, etc.) used in the activities of the institute. Each stage of the development of society has its own set of institutions.

The main institutions of modern societies are: economy, politics, education, law, religion, family, etc. In the early stages of the development of human societies, many of today's institutions did not exist. Their functions were performed by other institutions. Thus, the institution of education arises only with the appearance of groups of people whose main occupation is the professional and social training of a significant part of the population, i.e. when the very process of social and professional training is separated from the process of education. In Europe, this moment is usually attributed to the emergence and development of a system of public schools and vocational schools (XVII-XVIII centuries). At earlier stages, the preparation of young people for life was carried out within the framework of other social institutions - the family, clan, workshop, church. Many researchers believe that in pre-industrial societies there was no independent institution of the economy, and the processes of production and exchange were regulated by other social institutions (clan, family, institutions of ritual exchange).

On the other hand, many institutions that existed in the societies of the past and determined relations in them have either disappeared altogether in modern societies or have lost their former significance (for example, the institution of the clan, the institution of blood feud, etc.).

Institutions and society

Social institutions arise along with the emergence of society. The number of social institutions is not limited to any rigid list; however, in every society there are basic institutions that determine the functioning of this society and its culture. There are social institutions of different levels - most of them are part of larger institutions. For example, the stock exchange is a social institution that is part of the economy.

Many modern institutions did not exist in the societies of the past, although the corresponding needs were met (eg, the economy, the state, the couple family, etc.).

The same institutions in different societies are arranged differently, it is inexpedient and impossible to automatically copy the ways of functioning of the institutions of even the most developed societies in other conditions. Each specific need in one society can be simultaneously satisfied by several social institutions. Each institution can satisfy several social needs, but among them there are always one or two that are central to it. The same institution in a particular society can noticeably change its functions over time.

The same needs in societies of different types, or even in different societies of the same type, can be satisfied by different institutions.

Family as a social institution

According to the definition adopted in social statistics, and shared by most sociologists, a family is a large or medium social group that has three main properties:

1) all its members are connected by relations of kinship and / or property;

2) they all live in the same room, or, more precisely, in a building, which in a given society is considered to be a single room (place of residence);

3) they run a joint household, that is, they are engaged in activities that provide them with the basic means of subsistence.

In modern society, family members, as a rule, are not bound by participation in joint production. Each family member has his own source of income, his occupation in one of the branches of the public economy. Therefore, the most important features of the family are: a joint budget, covering a significant part of personal income; joint cooking; a joint decision regarding the largest acquisitions (real estate, car, durable goods, etc.).

Maintaining a so-called "personal subsidiary plot" (dacha or garden plot) becomes an essential feature of the family if the income (or natural products) received from this plot is an important element of the family's livelihood. Millions of urban families do not have summer cottages and garden plots, and yet they are full-fledged families.

Functions and dysfunctions of social institutions.

A social institution is a specific entity that performs socially significant functions and ensures the achievement of goals. Function is the benefit that a social institution brings to society. It is characterized by two points: consciously formulated goals and objective consequences of the activities of this institution, i.e. function as a task and as a real result. In many cases, there is a discrepancy between the declared goals and the objective consequences of the corresponding actions.

Institutions differ from each other in their functional qualities, but in real life these functions are so closely intertwined that it is extremely difficult to draw any line between them. Fundamental institutions, with a strict need to perform primarily their specific functions, are involved to varying degrees in solving the following tasks:

1. Economic and social institutions - property, exchange, money, banks, business associations.

2. Political institutions - the state, parties, trade unions and other kinds of public organizations pursuing political goals aimed at establishing and maintaining a certain form of political power.

3. Family, education, religion - development, subsequent reproduction and protection of social and cultural values ​​and norms.

4. Family, religion - mechanisms of moral and ethical orientation and regulation of the behavior of individuals. They give behavior and motivation a moral argument and an ethical basis.

5. Political, economic - social and social regulation of behavior on the basis of norms, rules and regulations enshrined in legal and administrative acts. The obligatory nature of the norms is ensured by compulsory sanction.

6. Political institutions, economic, education, family - are based on a more or less long-term adoption of contractual norms, their official and unofficial consolidation. These norms regulate everyday contacts, various acts of group and intergroup behavior (methods of transmitting information, greetings, rules of meetings, activities of associations, etc.).

But at the same time, each institution performs its social function. Their totality constitutes the general social functions of institutions as elements of certain social systems. A similar example is the functions of the family:

• Reproductive, or the reproduction of the human race.
• Socialization, or the transfer to new members of society of the necessary skills, moral values ​​and norms.
• Recreational, or protecting family members from the effects of the outside world.
• Control and regulation of sexual life.
• Household.

Each of the listed functions serves as a fundamental one - maintaining the life of society through the renewability of generations that have assimilated the basic norms and values ​​of this society.

So, each social institution is characterized by the presence

• goals of their activities
• specific functions to achieve this goal
• a set of social positions and roles typical for a given institution

Cultural identity- this is the ability of people to relate themselves to a given culture, to its stereotypes and symbols.

Through identity, culture is capable of self-development. The process of cultural identification is inseparable from the process of human self-identification.

A person needs to be socially in demand and approved by the society surrounding him.

Self-identification is the awareness at the rational level of the unity of a given group of people on one or another basis (ethnic, religious, political, etc.). The development of common cultural features (mores, customs, language) presupposes the collective solidarity of people. Identification of oneself with a particular group helps a person in orientation in the socio-cultural space. Social discipline, political loyalty and cultural competence (possession of socio-cultural norms and socially accepted languages ​​of communication) are required from the individual.

What makes a person involved in any culture is a set of:

1) learned elements of consciousness, behavior;

2) tastes and habits;

3) languages ​​and other means of communication.

The problem of the cultural identity of a person lies in the following parameters adopted by it:

1) cultural norms;

2) patterns of behavior and consciousness;

3) systems of values ​​and language.

Cultural self-identity is manifested in:

1) awareness of one's "I" from the standpoint of cultural traditions in a given society and in the manifestation of loyalty to them;

2) self-identification with these cultural patterns.

8.3. Social institutions of culture

Continuity in culture, the preservation of the created, the creation and dissemination of new values, their functioning - all this is supported and regulated with the help of social institutions of culture. In this section, we will consider their essence, structure and functions.

Turning to the study of culture and the cultural life of society, it is impossible to ignore such a phenomenon as social institutions of culture (or cultural institutions). The term "cultural institution" is now more and more widely used in scientific circulation. It is widely used in various contexts by representatives of the social and human sciences. As a rule, it is used to refer to various and numerous cultural phenomena. However, domestic and foreign researchers of culture do not yet have a single interpretation of it, just as there is currently no developed holistic concept covering the essence, structure and functions of a social institution of culture, or a cultural institution.

The concepts of "institution", "institutionalization" (from lat. institution- establishment, establishment) are traditionally used in social, political, legal sciences. An institution in the context of the social sciences appears as a component of the social life of society, existing in the form of organizations, institutions, associations (for example, the institution of the church); in another, broader sense, the concept of "institution" is interpreted as a set of stable norms, principles and rules in some the sphere of social life (the institution of property, the institution of marriage, etc.). Thus, the social sciences associate the concept of "institution" with highly organized and systemic social formations that are distinguished by a stable structure.

The origins of the institutional understanding of culture go back to the works of a prominent American social anthropologist, culturologist B. Malinovsky. In the article "Culture" (1931), B. Malinovsky notes:

The real constituents of culture, which have a considerable degree of permanence, universality, and independence, are the organized systems of human activity called institutions. Each institution is built around one or another fundamental need, permanently unites a group of people on the basis of some common task and has its own special doctrine and special technique.

The institutional approach has found further development in modern domestic cultural studies. Currently, domestic cultural studies interprets the concept of "cultural institution" in two senses - direct and expansive.

A cultural institution in the literal sense most often correlates with various organizations and institutions that directly, directly carry out the functions of preserving, transmitting, developing, studying culture and culturally significant phenomena. These include, for example, libraries, museums, theaters, philharmonic societies, creative unions, societies for the protection of cultural heritage, etc.

Along with the concept of a cultural institution, various publications often use the traditional concept cultural institution, and in theoretical cultural studies - cultural form: a club as a cultural institution, a library, a museum as cultural forms.

Educational institutions such as schools, universities, we can also correlate with the concept of a cultural institution. Among them are educational institutions directly related to the sphere of culture: music and art schools, theater universities, conservatories, institutes of culture and arts.

The social institution of culture in a broad sense is a historically established and functioning order, a norm (institution) for the implementation of any cultural function, as a rule, generated spontaneously and not specially regulated with the help of some institution or organization. These include various rituals, cultural norms, philosophical schools and artistic styles, salons, circles and much more.

The concept of the institution of culture covers not only a group of people engaged in one or another type of cultural activity, but also process creation of cultural values ​​and procedures for the implementation of cultural norms (the institution of authorship in art, the institution of worship, the institution of initiation, the institution of funerals, etc.).

Obviously, regardless of the choice of the aspect of interpretation - direct or broad - the cultural institution is the most important tool for collective activity in the creation, preservation and transmission of cultural products, cultural values ​​and norms.

It is possible to find approaches to revealing the essence of the phenomenon of a cultural institution based on the system-functional and activity approach to culture proposed by M. S. Kagan.

Cultural institutions are stable (and at the same time historically changeable) formations, norms that have arisen as a result of human activities. As components of the morphological structure of human activity, M. S. Kagan identified the following: transformation, communication, cognition and value consciousness. Based on this model, we can identify the main areas of activity of cultural institutions:

? culture-generating, stimulating the process of production of cultural values;

? culturally preserving, organizing the process of preservation and accumulation of cultural values, social and cultural norms;

? culturally broadcasting, regulating processes of knowledge and education, transfer of cultural experience;

? cultural organizing, regulating and formalizing the processes of dissemination and consumption of cultural values.

Creating a typology and classification of cultural institutions is a difficult task. This is due, firstly, to the huge variety and number of cultural institutions themselves and, secondly, to the diversity of their functions.

One and the same social institution of culture can perform several functions. So, for example, the museum performs the function of preserving and broadcasting cultural heritage and is also a scientific and educational institution. At the same time, in terms of the broad understanding of institutionalization, the museum in modern culture is one of the most significant, inherently complex and multifunctional cultural institutions. If we consider the most important functions of the museum in culture, it can be represented by:

? as a communicative system (D. Cameron);

? as a "cultural form" (T. P. Kalugina);

? as a specific relationship of a person to reality, carried out by endowing objects of the real world with the quality of "museum quality" (Z. Stransky, A. Gregorova);

? as a research institution and an educational institution (J. Benes, I. Neuspupny);

? as a mechanism of cultural inheritance (M. S. Kagan, Z. A. Bonami, V. Yu. Dukelsky);

? as a recreational institution (D. A. Ravikovich, K. Hudson, J. Romeder).

The scatter of the proposed models is obvious - from narrowly institutional to raising the museum to the level of a factor that determines the development of culture, the preservation of cultural diversity. Moreover, among researchers there is no consensus on which of the functions of the museum should be considered the main one. Some, such as J. Benes, put forward the social significance of the museum, its role in the development of society, in the first place. In this regard, it is assumed that the main task of museums is to develop and educate visitors, and all other functions, for example, aesthetic, should be subordinated to it. Others, in particular I. Neuspupny, consider the museum, first of all, as a research institution, emphasizing the need for museum workers to conduct fundamental research. The functions of collecting, storing and popularizing collections are secondary and must be subject to the requirements of research work, which must use the full potential of scientific knowledge accumulated in this area, and not be limited to existing collections. One way or another, the museum is one of the most significant, multifunctional cultural institutions.

A number of functions within the framework of the activities of the cultural institute are of an indirect, applied nature, going beyond the main mission. Thus, many museums and museum-reserves carry out relaxation and hedonistic functions within the framework of tourism programs.

Various cultural institutions can comprehensively solve a common problem, for example, the educational function is carried out by the vast majority of them: museums, libraries, philharmonic societies, universities and many others.

Some functions are provided simultaneously by different institutions: museums, libraries, societies for the protection of monuments, international organizations (UNESCO) are engaged in the preservation of cultural heritage.

The main (leading) functions of cultural institutions ultimately determine their specificity in the overall system. Among these functions are the following:

? protection, restoration, accumulation and preservation, protection of cultural values;

? providing access for studying by specialists and for educating the general public to monuments of world and domestic cultural heritage: artifacts of historical and artistic value, books, archival documents, ethnographic and archaeological materials, as well as protected areas.

Such functions are performed by museums, libraries, archives, museum-reserves, societies for the protection of monuments, etc.

There are a number of functions of social institutions of culture:

? state and public support for the functioning and development of artistic life in the country;

? facilitating the creation, demonstration and sale of works of art, their purchases by museums and private collectors;

? holding competitions, festivals and specialized exhibitions;

? organization of professional art education, participation in programs of aesthetic education of children, development of art sciences, professional art criticism and journalism;

? publication of specialized, fundamental educational and periodical literature of an artistic profile;

? material assistance to artistic groups and associations, personal social security for artists, assistance in updating the funds and tools for artistic activity, etc.

The institutions dealing with the development of artistic activity include art schools and music schools, creative unions and associations, competitions, festivals, exhibitions and galleries, architectural, art and restoration workshops, film studios and film distribution institutions, theaters (dramatic and musical), concert structures , circuses, as well as book publishing and bookselling institutions, secondary and higher educational institutions of an artistic profile, etc.

Cultural institutions embody the persistence of cultural forms, but they exist in historical dynamics.

For example, the library as a cultural institution has existed for many centuries, changing and transforming externally and internally. Its main function was the preservation and dissemination of knowledge. To this were added various aspects of the existential content and differences in understanding the essence of the library in a particular period of the history and culture of society.

Today, there is an opinion that the traditional library is becoming obsolete, that it has partly lost its true purpose and no longer meets the requirements that modern society makes of it, and therefore it will soon be replaced by a “virtual library”. Modern researchers talk about the need to comprehend and evaluate the changes taking place with modern libraries. Libraries, while maintaining their status as a repository of intellectual values, are becoming more democratic, equipped with electronic information carriers, and connected to the World Wide Web. At the same time, dangerous consequences are already visible. Displaying information on monitors, access to the Internet will radically transform not only the library, but also the writer and reader. In modern information systems, the distinction between author and reader almost disappears. There remains the one who sends and the one who receives the information.

In addition, in the past, the library was predominantly a state institution and pursued the policy of the state in the spiritual life of society. The library as a cultural institution established certain cultural norms and rules, and in this sense it was a "disciplinary space". But at the same time, it was a kind of space of freedom precisely because personal choice (as well as personal libraries) made it possible to overcome something forbidden, regulated from above.

Cultural institutions can be divided into state, public and private. The interaction of cultural institutions and the state is an important problem.

Some cultural institutions are directly related to the system of state management of cultural life and the cultural policy of the state. This includes the Ministry of Culture, various state institutions, academies, organizations that issue awards - state awards, honorary titles in the field of culture and the arts.

The main bodies planning and making decisions on cultural policy issues are state authorities. In a democratic state, as a rule, experts and the general public are involved in decision-making. The bodies implementing the cultural policy of the state are cultural institutions. Patronized by the state, included in its cultural policy, they, in turn, are called upon to carry out the function of translating samples of social adequacy of people into samples of social prestige, i.e., promoting the norms of social adequacy as the most prestigious forms of social life, as ways to public status. For example, the assignment of state prizes, academic titles (“artist of the imperial theaters”, “academician of painting”, “people's artist”, etc.) and state awards.

The most important cultural institutions, as a rule, are in the sphere of the cultural policy of the state. For example, the state provides patronage to outstanding museums, theaters, symphony orchestras and protection of cultural monuments, etc. For example, in the UK there is a powerful system of state support for culture. In the Soviet Union, the state fully funded culture and passed its ideology through cultural institutions.

A certain role in the implementation of state policy in the field of culture is played by research and educational institutions of culture and arts.

Cultural institutions participate in the international activities of the state, for example, make mandatory contributions to the UNESCO fund.

At present, many cultural institutions are moving from the state department to the sphere of private enterprise and public organizations. Thus, the film distribution network in modern Russia has freed itself from the ideological and financial tutelage of the state. Private museums, theatrical enterprises, etc., appeared.

Public cultural institutions are various creative unions: the Union of Cultural Workers, the Union of Artists, the Union of Writers, the Society of Lovers of the Russian Manor, the Society for the Protection of Cultural Monuments, clubs, tourist organizations, etc.

Private cultural institutions are organized on the initiative of individuals. This includes, for example, literary circles, salons.

In the past, the characteristic feature of the salons, which distinguished them from other cultural institutions, such as, for example, male literary circles and clubs, was the dominance of women. Receptions in the salons (drawing rooms) gradually turned into a special kind of public gatherings, organized by the hostess of the house, who always led the intellectual discussions. At the same time, she created a fashion for guests (for the public), their ideas, their works (often literary and musical; in later salons, also scientific and political). The following key features of the salon as a cultural institution can be distinguished:

? the presence of a unifying factor (common interest);

? intimacy;

? game behavior of participants;

? "the spirit of romantic intimacy";

? improvisation;

? no random people.

Thus, with all the variety of cultural institutions, the main thing is that they are the most important tools for collective, to some extent planned activities for the production, use, storage, broadcasting of cultural products, which radically distinguishes them from activities carried out individually. The variety of functions of cultural institutions can be conditionally represented as culture-generating (innovative), culture-organizational, culture-preserving and culture-transmitting (in diachronic and synchronous sections).

In the twentieth century there have been significant changes related to the role of social institutions of culture.

Thus, researchers talk about the crisis of self-identification of culture and cultural institutions, about the discrepancy between their traditional forms and the rapidly changing requirements of modern life, and about the changes that cultural institutions are undertaking for the sake of survival. And first of all, the crisis is typical for such traditional cultural institutions as museums, libraries, theaters. Proponents of this concept believe that in previous eras, culture served various purposes (religious, secular, educational, etc.) and organically combined with social life and the spirit of the times. Now, when the market economy does not involve the study of higher human values ​​and aspirations, it is not clear what the role of culture is and whether it can even find a place in this society. Proceeding from this, “cultural dilemmas” are formulated – a series of questions: about the relationship between culture and democracy, the difference between a cultural and sporting event, about cultural authorities, virtualization and globalization of culture, public and private funding of culture, and so on. The experience of the 20th century shows that in the post-war era of reconstruction, culture was used to restore the psyche of people after the horrors of World War II, and people's interest in culture was stimulated. In the 1970s and 1980s an era has come when people ceased to be passive recipients of culture, but began to participate in its creation, and the boundaries between high and low culture were erased and cultural processes themselves were brightly politicized. In the mid 1980s. there was a turn to the economy, and people turned into consumers of cultural products, which began to be perceived on an equal footing with other goods and services. In our time, there is a turn towards culture, as it begins to influence politics and economics: "in the field of economics, value is increasingly determined by symbolic factors and cultural context."

The authors distinguish five types of political reactions to the advent of the modern "age of culture": 1) a policy based on knowledge and employment (providing jobs for artists in various industries); 2) image policy (the use of cultural institutions to increase the rating of cities in the international arena); 3) organizational modernization policy (overcoming the financial crisis); 4) protective policy (preservation of cultural heritage); 5) using culture in broader contexts.

However, all this is an instrumental attitude towards culture, in these reactions there is no sympathy for the own goals of the artist, art or cultural institutions. An alarming atmosphere has now reigned in the world of culture, which is most clearly manifested in the funding crisis. The credibility of cultural institutions is currently shaken, as they cannot offer visible, easily measurable criteria for their success. And if earlier the ideas of the Enlightenment assumed that every cultural experience leads to the improvement of a person, now, in a world where everything can be measured, it is not so easy for them to justify their existence. As a possible solution, it is suggested that quality should be measured. The problem is to translate qualitative indicators into quantitative ones. A large-scale discussion about the fact that cultural institutions are in danger, and culture is in a state of crisis, with the participation of authors and a number of other competent persons, took place with the support of the Getty Foundation in 1999.

These problems were formulated not only in Western countries, which faced them much earlier, but also by the mid-1990s. in Russia. The role of theaters, museums and libraries has changed under the influence of other cultural institutions of mass communication, such as television, radio and the Internet. To a large extent, the decline of these institutions is associated with a decrease in state funding, that is, with the transition to a market economy. Practice shows that in these conditions only an institution that develops additional functions, for example, informational, consulting, recreational, hedonistic, and offers the visitor a high level of services can survive.

This is exactly what many Western and, more recently, Russian museums are doing. But this is where the problem of the commercialization of culture comes to light.

As for art, Susan Buck-Morse, professor of political philosophy and social theory at Cornell University, clearly formulates this problem in her works:

In the past decade, museums have experienced a real renaissance… Museums have become axes of urban redevelopment and centers of entertainment, combining food, music, shopping and socializing with the economic goals of urban regeneration. The success of a museum is measured by the number of visitors. The museum experience is important—more important than the aesthetic experience of the artists' work. It doesn't matter—it might even be encouraged that exhibitions turn out to be simple jokes, that fashion and art fuse together, that museum shops transform connoisseurs into consumers. Thus, it is not so much about culture itself, but about the forms of its presentation to people who, according to the rules of the market, should be considered exclusively as consumers. The principle of such an approach to the functions of a cultural institution is: commercialization of culture, democratization and blurring of boundaries.

In the XX-XXI centuries. along with the problems of commercialization, a number of other problems arise related to the development of the latest technologies, on the basis of which new types and forms of social institutions of culture appear. Such institutions used to be, for example, music libraries, now they are virtual museums.

Educational institutions in Russia teach the history of culture, nurture a culture of behavior, prepare modern culturologists: theorists, museologists, library workers. The universities of culture train specialists in various fields of artistic creativity.

Organizations and institutions that are directly or indirectly related to the study of culture and its various phenomena are consistently developing.

As we can see, complex interactions take place in culture between the traditional and the new, between social and age strata of society, generations, etc.

In general, culture is a field of various interactions, communications, dialogues, which are extremely important for its existence and development.