Keywords
How to Cite
Abstract
The article outlines a set of problems that concern both contemporary philosophy of the city and the study of the semantic space of the urban environment. It synthesizes the diverse intentions of the authors featured in this issue, united by their exploration of specific relationships between processes of identification and the formation of spatial-territorial “fields.” This research perspective directs attention to the urban environment of the 21st century, including the application of methodologies that conceptualize urban space as consisting of “zones of cultural alienation” — zones of restricted access, public access, depressed areas, commercial districts, industrial zones, sites of tourist attraction, sacred places, loci of political power, ruins, museum quarters, residential suburbs, ethnic and social ghettos, marginalized territories, and other geographically isolated spaces — in their correlation with cultural topoi of the city.
Contemporary meta-cities, as vast public spaces, necessitate a discourse on identity and the identification of place within the framework of the Philosophy of the City. This includes examining not only the interaction between humans and material objects, but also their engagement with networks and agents of social reality. The “reassembly” of urban spaces, as interpreted through actor-network theory, is understood as a process of rethinking questions related to urban identities.
The contributors to this issue — focused on the boundaries of identity and spatial borders within the city — investigate cultural and social practices that transform territorial barriers, dissolve the old, and facilitate the emergence of new ones. A connection is traced between this contemporary phenomenon and the historical processes that preceded it, with examples drawn from engagements with past experiences. Among the approaches presented are studies in literary and artistic topologies, where quests for identity unfold through the construction or negotiation of boundaries. The issue also explores pathways of cultural self-identification, including those shaped through language and liminal zones of linguistic culture.
References
Akkerman, A. (2009). Urban Void and the Deconstruction of Neo-Platonic City-Form. Ethics, Place & Environment, 12(2), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668790902863416
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. University of Minnesota Press.
Augé, M. (1999). From the Imaginary City to the Fictional City. Art Magazine, 24. http://moscowartmagazine.com/issue/75/article/1623 (In Russian).
Augé, M. (2017). Non-Places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity. New Literary Review. (In Russian).
Bauman, Z. (1992). Intimations of Postmodernity. Routledge.
Bialasiewicz, L. (2009). Europe as/at the Border: Trieste and the Meaning of Europe. Social & Cultural Geography, 10(3), 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649360902756655
Billé, F. (2014). Territorial Phantom Pains (and other Cartographic Anxieties). Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 32(1), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1068/d20112
Caldwell, M. (2011). Dacha Idylls: Living Organically in Russia’s Countryside. University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520947870
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2010). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. U-Faktoria; Astrel. (In Russian).
Foucault, M. (2006). Other Spaces. In Intellectuals and Power (pp. 191–204). Praxis. (In Russian).
Friedman, J. (1994). Cultural Identity and Global Process. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446222195
Hall, S. (1996). Introduction: Who Needs ‘Identity’? In S. Hall & P. Du Gay, Questions of Cultural Identity (pp. 1–17). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446221907.n1
Hannerz, U. (1992). Cultural Complexity: Studies in the Social Organization of Meaning. Columbia University Press.
Heidegger, M. (1997). Bauen Wohnen Denken [Building Living Thinking]. In Vorträge und Aufsätze [Lectures and essays] (pp. 120–180). Neske Verlag. (In German).
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199256044.001.0001
Lefebvre, H. (2010). Social Space. The Untouchable Reserve: Debates on Politics and Culture, 2, 3–14. (In Russian).
Lovell, S. (2003). Summerfolk: A History of the Dacha, 1710–2000. Cornell University Press. https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501704574
Mills, Ch. R. (2001). The Sociological Imagination. NOTA BENE Publishing House. (In Russian).
Nikolaeva, Z., & Troitskiy, S. (2018). An Introduction to Russian and International Studies of Cultural Exclusion Zones: An Analytical Overview of Recent Concepts. Rivista Di Estetica, 67, 3–19. https://doi.org/10.4000/estetica.2482
Nikolaeva, Zh. V., & Noskov, A. A. (2019). Reflection of the Phenomenon of Time in the Ontic Contours of St. Petersburg. Untouchable Reserve: Debates on Politics and Culture, 1, 107–114. (In Russian).
Savchuk, V. V. (2012). The Fence as a Kind of Media. International Journal of Cultural Research, 4(9), 105–111. (In Russian).
Sharifian, F. (2017). Cultural Linguistics. Cultural conceptualisations and language. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/clscc.8
Simmel, G. (2002). The Metropolis and Mental Life. Logos, 3, 23–34. (In Russian).
Struyk, R. J., & Angelici, K. (1996). The Russian Dacha phenomenon. Housing Studies, 11(2), 233–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673039608720854
Tilley, C. (2006). Introduction: Identity, Place, Landscape and Heritage. Journal of Material Culture, 11(1–2), 7–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359183506062990
Vakhshtain*, V. S. (2014). Reassembling the City: Between Space and Speach. Sociology of Power, 2, 9–38. (In Russian).
Zamyatin, D. N. (2006). Culture and Space. Modeling Geographic Images. Znak. (In Russian).
* Recognized as a foreign agent in Russia.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.