Images of architectural heritage in the cultural space

Khil'ko Nikolai Fedorovich ORCID: 0000-0003-3204-2216 Doctor of Pedagogy Senior Researcher, Siberian Branch of the D.S. Likhachev Russian Cultural and Natural Heritage Research Institute; Professor of the Department of Directing and Choreography of the Omsk State University named after F.M. Dostoevsky 644077, Russia, Omsk region, Omsk, Andrianova str., 28, office 204A fedorovich59@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Gorelova Yuliya Robertovna PhD in History Scientific Secretary, Siberian Branch of the Russian Research Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage named after D.S. Likhachev, Associate Professor of the Siberian Automobile and Road Academy 644077, Russia, Omsk region, Omsk, Mira Ave., 12 gorrlovaj@mail.ru

Introduction "Cultural space", as well as "cultural landscape" and "cultural environment" are defined by different researchers in different ways.

The possibility of this is laid down by the very root concept of "culture". In addition, the goals and objectives of the study, the methodology chosen by the author and a number of other factors leave an imprint.

It is probably not possible to give an exact and unique definition of the concept of "cultural space", and this is not the purpose of this publication. For us, it is important to note several fundamental points. Firstly, the very understanding of culture in a broad and narrow sense, lays the difference between the understanding of "cultural space" in a broad and narrow sense.

The broad aspect of understanding culture expands the scope of cultural space to the totality of human interaction with the outside world. In this case, the study of cultural space should involve the study of the sphere of human activity, within which the creation, storage, transformation, transmission and consumption of cultural values (material and spiritual) takes place. In a narrow sense, culture should be understood as a specific area, the sphere of public life, within which the functioning of cultural institutions such as theaters, libraries, exhibition halls, museums, etc. takes place. Then the cultural space narrows down to the study of the cultural life of the city.

Research methodology. To prepare this article, a number of methods of conceptual, semiotic, systemic, factorial, functional and vector analysis were used in a complex of sovokuspnot.

Interpretations of cultural space    

All the variety of modern interpretations of cultural space can be conditionally reduced to several basic approaches consistent with the basic interpretations of the concept of "culture". So, firstly, the cultural space acts as a very real physical space on which specific cultural institutions are located - libraries, theaters, cinemas, museums, etc. From this point of view, the cultural space is clearly localized in space, and is set, among other things, by the administrative framework. That is, the cultural space of the city is understood as a certain territory that has a set of cultural institutions, and is under the operational management of the city Department of Culture.  This aspect can be called institutional, or more precisely, institutional–activity, because culture seems to be a special sphere within which the creation, storage, transmission and accumulation of cultural values takes place. Accordingly, the study of this area involves the study of the activities of both creators and consumers of cultural values.

Secondly, cultural space is a non-natural space, or more precisely, above-natural. In this sense, the cultural space of the city is a kind of cultivated and equipped environment for human needs and interests, which, on the one hand, is based on certain natural resources and is determined by them, on the other hand, is not reducible to them, since it involves the creation of a value–semiotic reality. The space of the city is a receptacle of codes, signs, illusions and myths.

Factors of perception of cultural space The factors determining the nature of perception of urban space by residents are multidimensional.

They can be represented in the form of the following scheme (Fig. 1).

Fig.1. Factors determining the nature of perception of urban space.

      So, among the factors that determine the nature of the perception of urban space by residents in the first place are: key problem zones of comfort and discomfort: convenience and inconvenience, ecology. Next, peculiar points of growth of urban space are connected: city-forming systems and factors: ensembles, landscaping, landscaping. modernization, reconstruction. restoration. All this forms the overall appearance of the city: its architecture, natural landscape, monuments. In the cultural space of the city, the leading role is played by markers of perception of the urban environment, which leads to a conceptual and associative justification of the image of the city, its mental basis and, ultimately, the figurative framework (profile) of the city, expressed in its typical figurative characteristics.

The essence of the figurative-symbolic approach to the perception of the city in its figurative characteristics    

Within the framework of this subject of research, a comprehensive and systematic study of not only the appearance, but also the image of the city is necessary. The image is the result of a person's interaction with the surrounding reality. Images are always born from the contact of our senses with objects and phenomena of the outside world, but this happens with the active inclusion of memory and imagination processes. Thus, images are always based on external objective reality, but they are never exhausted by it, but actively include all the accumulated human experience of experiences, impressions, memories associated with one or another fragment of reality.

           The process of image formation is always influenced by cultural stereotypes, the results of other people's perception (the opinion of others, society), the memory of the past effects of this object and phenomenon on our feelings, and many other factors. Through the category of "image" there is a connection of the world of material things and phenomena with the world of ideas. The image acts as a natural result of self-reflection, experiencing oneself in the surrounding world. When the image is formed, the externally perceived image (the appearance of the city) is correlated with the system of culturally and socially conditioned stereotypes of perception and thinking that already exist in the human mind. The process of image formation is always associated with concentration, condensation of certain ideas. The image represents a system of the most vivid and powerful signs, symbols, representations and characteristics reflecting the essential features of something (in particular the city).

The meaningful characteristics of the image can be presented in the form of the following scheme (Fig. 2). Fig. 2. The essence of the image of the city, its meaningful and figurative characteristics as a methodological construct.

I would like to emphasize once again that despite the fact that the image of the same city appears differently in the perception of different people, it should be recognized that there is a core image of the city that is identical for most of its inhabitants. This is achieved due to the existence in each city of several of the most semiotic dominants, acting as the main identification markers of a particular space. Architectural ensembles inherently belong to the territory on which they were created.

The objects of architectural heritage are undoubtedly included in the so-called "cultural core" of the city space. In this case, by the cultural core we mean the totality of the most basic, unchanging characteristics of a particular cultural community, its foundation.

The mechanism of cultural development of the territory is reduced to the interaction of the cultural core with cultural variations. The core of culture provides the necessary unity of its structure, and the subcultural segments growing out of it are more or less distinct subsystems of this whole. The core consists of fragments of the picture of the world that are common to most and is essentially a cultural heritage passed down from generation to generation. The cultural core is the connecting principle that ensures that all residents of the city belong to a certain cultural whole, their perception of each other as "their own". Of course, the cultural core is not limited to the architectural heritage, but it is an integral and significant part of it, defining the imaginative originality of the territory and laying the foundation for the formation of a positive cultural identity. In this case, we completely agree with the opinion of G.V. Gornova that "architectural images carry a complex set of meanings – they define the history, the relationships of people who previously inhabited the city.... Architecture, as a living memory, connects generations and is the most powerful visual evidence of this connection, allows for a symbolic reconstruction of the past in the present" ^{[1, pp. 27-31]}.

These installations are also supported by foreign researchers. For example, I. Robinson and P. Richards note that there is a "symbolic reading of the most diverse landscapes" of the city, representing historical, cultural, political, visual and poetic perspectives" ^[2]. These positions suggest that the images reproduced by the objects of the architectural heritage of the city are significant factors of human identification with a certain space.

  Thus, thanks to the figurative characteristics of the architectural heritage, an image of a place is formed that fits into the totality of various symbolic images of cultural space.

This methodological principle is the basis of the figurative-symbolic approach to the consideration of cultural heritage. We can agree with the opinion of V.D. Zamyatin that "with the help of figurative-symbolic interaction, conditionally directed to the past represented here and now, the image of a place, territory increases, the scale of associative cultural landscapes increases - there is a symbolic and sacred appropriation of space by its figurative expansion within the paradigm of a self-moving, self–developing heritage, as if moving the past into the future through figurative, symbolic and sacred transformations of modern space." At the same time, it should be borne in mind that "heritage is an image that performs not only specific protective cultural functions or ideological reinforcement functions during the formation of a new tradition; it clearly connects different cultures – most often of different times, separated in historical time by centuries and millennia, and sometimes separated in geographical space. This is where cultural memory comes into play" ^[3]. By virtue of the above, it becomes clear why the images of the city are closely connected with its cultural memory, which is creatively transformed in the minds of citizens. This position is noted in the writings of K. Lynch, who writes: "In order to preserve effectively, we must know why and for whom the past is being preserved. Creative handling of changes and the active use of the remnants of the past for the purposes of the present and the future is preferable to a corseted reverence for the holy of holies – the past. The past should be chosen and changed, it should be created in the present to facilitate the construction of the future" ^{[4, p. 163]}.

The development of the representation of the figurative characteristics of the architectural heritage of the city, however, cultural memory is transformed and formed largely due to the model of reality created in the imagination.

This model is often a representation of images of territories. At the same time, the images of the territory are differentiated "depending on the historical and cultural characteristics of the territory, the specialization of the image, as well as its level in the territorial hierarchy" ^[5].

The research conducted by Yu.R. Gorelova made it possible to identify both problem areas and points of resource development in the perception of urban spaces of the cities of the region ^[6]; ^[7]; ^[8]; ^[9].

Within the framework of this publication, I would like to pay special attention to the fact that it was the objects of architectural heritage, which are bright visual markers and semiotic points of space that most strongly supported the positive cultural identity of citizens, acted as a matter of pride, attachment to this territory.  Citizens have repeatedly noted that history and culture are the areas that Omsk is traditionally proud of. And it is very important not to lose this resource. The facts of history and culture associated with a certain territory, as well as the fate of outstanding people, somehow connected with a particular Place, architectural objects with artistic, aesthetic and historical value are perceived by respondents as significant characteristics that increase the attractiveness of this space in their eyes, forming its positive image.

It should be noted that the development of the architectural environment of the city is subject to three differently directed vectors, which can be designated in connection with the resource points of the development of the architectural environment.  The three vectors of the development of the architectural environment of the city and the resource points of its development are shown in Fig. 3. 2 1 renewal and reconstruction 3 REPLACEMENT1.

the starting point of development: preservation and development; 2. the crisis point of development: destruction and loss; 3. the critical point of development: renewal and recreation.

Fig. 3. Three vectors of development of the architectural environment of the city and resource points of development.It should be borne in mind that the differentiation of architectural heritage according to the degree of preservation has the following gradation.

1.                    

Preserved in its original form and requiring restoration.

2.                     Restored (recreated) buildings (new models).

3.                     Rebuilt (reconstructed) buildings.

4.                     Disappearing and lost architectural monuments.                                                                        

At the same time, it can be noted that each type of figurative characteristics of a different state of architectural heritage correspond to the degree of preservation of architectural monuments. Positive images – 1st and 2nd types, nostalgic – 4th type, progressive (3rd type).  They are indicated in Fig. 4. In positive images there is a return to the memory of the shrines, as well as the restoration of the integrity of the perception of the ensemble of buildings of the city.

In nostalgic images, there is a focus on the return of the ancient appearance of buildings, a kind of revival from the ruins. In some cases, there is a loss of memory of the ancient appearance of buildings and the atmosphere of provincialism.

Fig. 4. Figurative characteristics of the state of architectural heritage according to vectors and resource points of development.

Finally, in progressive images there is a desire to follow the "progress", the reconstruction of the city. There is an attitude towards rethinking the past in a new space, updating the character of the vision of history and the perception of architecture and, as a result, the transformation of the spirit.

Conclusion Thus, it is necessary not only to preserve the objects of architectural heritage themselves, but also the competent formation of the architectural environment surrounding the monuments.

It is also important to recognize the activities for the actualization and popularization of cultural heritage, which is necessary for the active inclusion of images of architectural heritage in the semiotic field of the cultural space of the city and increasing awareness of their value on the part of citizens. The results of the analysis allow us to present the figurative framework of the city in its architectural dimension and organically represent it in the field of value reflection and determining the level of significance of cultural heritage.