Art and creative spaces in the context of architectural and art education

1. The terms "creativity" and "creativity" change shades of interpretation among different researchers of philosophy, linguistics, psychology, cultural studies and pedagogy. The problems of such a complex object of study as creativity were dealt with by Z. Freud, K. Jung, E. Neumann, A. Adler, M. Wertheimer, K. Dunker, V. V. Savich, Ya. A. Ponomarev, G. S. Altshuller, O. K. Tikhomirov, A.M. Matyushkin E. P. and others. The father of the term creativity is D. Simpson, who defined them in 1922 the ability to solve problems in a non-standard way. The idea of creativity as an ability was developed by A. Maslow, J. Guilford, E. P. Torrens ^[11], J. Piaget ^[27], M. Csikszentmihalyi, R. Florida ^[35]. And if everything is more or less clear with "creativity" (a section of the psychology of creativity has been emerging in world psychology since the 19th century), then with Anglicism "creativity" is not quite. However, two camps of opinions can be noted: in one these concepts are identical, in the other they are not. Which came to Russia in the post-perestroika 1990s, this concept was developed by E. P. Ilyin, G. A. Glotova, T. V. Andreeva, G. V. Ozhiganova, etc. Analysis of the works of most sources ^{[13, 21, 24, 28, 35]} allows us to conclude that the predominance of the second camp of opinions. The difference between the concepts of "creativity" and "creativity" lies primarily in etymology and semantics. The English noun creativity – the ability to produce or use original and unusual ideas, in fact, is interpreted as creativity (Cambridge Dictionary https://dictionary.cambridge.org ). Creativity in the Russian language is both a process and the result of the activity of a person involved in this process ^{[34, p. 973]}. In the concept of linguist O. I. Glazova, creativity is the initiative of generating and demonstrating unusual ideas with the involvement of others with the secondary nature of the result of this activity, and creativity is the inner activity of the soul and consciousness aimed at creating objects, phenomena of science and culture that have no analogues, potentially significant at all subsequent stages of the development of society ^{[17, p. 189]}. Thus, creativity is an open, purposeful process, and creativity is closed, often spontaneous, since there is no direct dependence of the result on the goal (for example, we do not know which picture or sonnet we will get in the final).   And if we agree with this concept, then it is fair to assume that the spaces for these processes should be different.

Typologies of creative spaces. Cultural Center BASE Milano (Italy, 2014), Centro Cultural Arauco (Chile, 2016), public cultural center Ku.Be House of Culture in Movement (Denmark, 2016) ^[23], Zil Cultural Center (Russia, Moscow, 2012), Vinzavod Center for Contemporary Art (Russia, Moscow, 2007), HPP-2 House of Culture (Russia, Moscow, 2021), etc. – all these are some spaces starting from public sites and clubs of interest, and ending with contemporary art centers or entire art quarters. Analysis of foreign sources has shown that in European countries creative spaces in the late 2010s begin to be designated as creative centers or hubs (hub). European Network of Cultural Centers (ENCC; European Network of Cultural Centers, ENCC https://encc.eu /) – this is 3000 such hubs offering on their website for rent both just premises and activities. We will try to organize many types and forms, reducing cultural spaces and hubs, creative clusters to a single definition of creative spaces.

Typology by initial parameters from Dita Pfeifer from the Latvian Academy of Culture: typology by multifunctionality (offer and function); socio-cultural aspect and orientation to the local community; availability of buildings/technical equipment. The author defined and proposed a scheme with four main dimensions characteristic of cultural centers: art/culture; education; leisure/recreation; social ^[4].

The typology of the key ways of organization and functions from Italian urbanists divides cultural centers into three large groups:

1. Community hub - orientation towards revitalization through the organization of social, cultural and educational activities in order to integrate local communities, often combines non-profit and entrepreneurial activities.

2. Cultural hub - orientation to regional local identity, territorial context in culture and art, with the support of public or private foundations.

3. Creative hub – orientation to the joint use of production, exhibition or residential spaces by the professional community and entrepreneurs of the cultural and artistic sector, carry an inclusive function, working with local associations ^[31].

Classification according to the method of organization of space from the candidate of Philosophical Sciences D. N. Sukhovskaya, is a system independent of the organizational and legal form, but, in fact, intersecting with the typology of functions ^{[18, 33]}. There are five types of spaces in this classification (Fig. 1):

1. loft – prom architecture transformed into housing with accompanying art venues for citizens and tourists as part of the revitalization of depressed areas;

2. art space — former factories and factories converted by designers and architects into exhibition, office, concert spaces with catering facilities;

3. coworking zones (from English "co-working" — working together) — commercial spaces that are rented to a group of people for a small fee for temporary collaboration;

4. centers of contemporary art — museum and exhibition and research organizations engaged in the development of contemporary art;

5. An art quarter is a part of a city that combines all or some of the presented types of spaces.

In Russia, creative spaces are only being realized and modeled. As a rule, these are rooms of a small area with leisure, exhibition, educational zones, attracting representatives of creative spheres or the public in general to use. There are 14 coworking spaces in Khabarovsk, including boiling points from the Association of Strategic Initiatives at the RANEPA Far Eastern Institute of Management (since 2017) and in the TOGU business incubator (since 2019). Coworking spaces are rented out and, as a rule, open for some kind of event, events in them are held randomly, locally. The Khabarovsk Center for Contemporary Art and Culture, which opened in 2018, was as close as possible to the model of the organization of the European cultural hub in terms of organization and multi-functionality. The institution remains in the city center, in a restored historical building of the former military topographical department built in 1902. However, since the end of 2022, exhibition, social and cultural activities have left the functional due to the financial difficulties of the center and the departure of the founder and ideologist of the community. Of the remaining advantages – an up–to-date event calendar, permanent tenants - creative schools and studios (Art Observatory website https://artservatory.ru /).

Obviously, the question is not about spaces, but about the meanings of their content and the economic model of existence. In Europe, researchers are already studying the risks of the functioning of creative hubs, noting the problem in the initial definition of not only functions, activities and goals, but also the overall comprehensive mission. Also an important aspect is the issue of the management model and the availability of resources ^[1]. The wide variety and differences of hubs emphasize the problems of developing their definition, typology and classification.

Fig. 1 Classification of creative spaces by type of premises

(Fig. 1. Classification of creative spaces by type of premises)

(source: https://fb.ru/article/417042/chto-takoe-tvorcheskoe-prostranstvo , https://mykaleidoscope.ru/interer/7032-sovremennoe-iskusstvo-v-intererah-65-foto.html , https://funkyprize.org/category/business-services /, https://thecity.m24.ru/articles/8159 , https://urban.ranepa.ru/spetsialnaya-literatura/kreativnaya-ekonomika-kreativnye-industrii-i-klastery/snosit-nelzya-revitalizirovat-prakticheskoe-rukovodstvo-po-sozdaniyu-kreativnogo-klastera / , accessed 04.04.2023)

A creative space for an architect, designer, and artist student. At the heart of the educational space for the training of students of architects, designers and artists are the systems of creative workshops – forms of organization of working and educational space, the closest to the real creative and project activities of graduates. Practice is one of the main tools that students of these areas use when studying their profession.

Based on the analysis of the traditions of the organization of the educational process of specialized universities, institutes, faculties of Russia, three formats of workshops can be distinguished:

 The first is to assign a room for course design to one teacher, where both other teachers and students of various courses work under his guidance. This type of individual workshops is the most traditional (Academy of Arts, Vkhutemas (Fig. 2.1), but poorly suited where there is no pronounced hierarchy among teachers. Also, the presence of several teachers at the same time leading different subgroups in the same audience has a positive effect on the educational process, because students can look at different approaches to solving project tasks.

The second is to assign an audience to one group for the entire period of training. This approach is practiced both in Russia and abroad. The convenience of this approach is that students form a workplace where they can store computing equipment, materials for layout, their sketches and developments, thereby fully engaging in the learning process and forming the opportunity to work in a team. Until some time, such an approach was in SamSTU, NNGASU, KGASU and D.R. (Fig. 2.3) In TOGU until the mid-2000s, only a separate room was allocated for graduates to work on the WRC. The advantage is that there is no need for other types of classrooms, except for in-line lectures and specialized ones (in-line lectures, laboratories, drawing, painting and sculpture classrooms), since all architectural disciplines are more or less related to project activities. In addition, it is possible to provide for the possibility of allocating an entrance area to the audience with the possibility of author's design development by students.

The third is the creation of the minimum required number of classrooms for course design, where students stay only for the period of study. The main disadvantage of this approach is that students are not fully involved in course design, which is due to the inability to store their work at the university and actually work on the project at home. The consequence of this is that students, getting the basic knowledge necessary for a minimal understanding of architectural and design activities, begin to skip pairs, since the main place of work becomes an apartment / dormitory. Example: TOGU, KNAU and many specialized institutes and faculties in polytechnic universities (Fig. 2.4). Spaces for learning of the third type show a lower percentage of students' integration into the environment of the educational institution, they are outdated.

There are quite a large number of architectural and art universities in Russia. Their main disadvantage is that none of them was specially designed for students of creative directions. As a rule, these are adapted and reorganized buildings for design, exhibition halls and workshops. On the other hand, there are creative spaces that are alienated from specific communities, created without any specific goals and missions. Hence, the problem arises of the need to create a new type of space and identify the criteria by which it should be formed, which in the future would make it possible to build a design model.

Mission 3.0 of the University. Returning to the terminological binary "creativity" – "creativity", we can say that it makes sense to consider their dialogicity within the framework of a new format of education, and not only in educational organizations, but also in offices, company headquarters, laboratories, etc., at least, so does a number of researchers S. Eymann, S. Borges, R. Klanten, K. Thoring, A.O. Karpov, O. N. Shentsova [6-8, 19, 36-38]. For example, it is important for a future architect-designer to be able not only to produce a creative idea, to find an extraordinary solution by developing project documentation, but also to defend his project to the customer. And these are not creative skills, but creative ones. In addition, in the personal creative workshop of the creator, individual processes are implied, and in the training workshop, group processes, which also brings this process closer to the creative one. The organization of the educational process of a student studying a creative specialty is directly related to such a type of spaces as creative, precisely in its functionality: creative, educational, leisure, exhibition areas, performance areas, etc.

A moderate combination of these two types of spaces can complement and stimulate the productivity of both the action itself (creativity) and the result (the product of creativity). This practice is used in cultural hubs in Europe with educational functions (Ku.Be House of Culture in Movement), at the Ecole de Beaux Arts universities (Paris, France), the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Boston, USA), Columbia University (New York, USA), where in addition to workshops there are spaces for exhibitions and sales of projects and products of students ^{[14, p. 95]}. You won't find this in Russian universities, but something similar can be observed in the HPP-2 House of Culture in Moscow, where various functional zones are maximally open to each other (in appearance, but not in sound): art studios, shopping and exhibition venues, lecture halls, cinemas, etc.

The most important starting point is the functional purpose of such a hybrid space in the context of the mission of a higher educational institution. Socio-economic development of society, the mission of the university 3.0 can be solved by optimizing the creative potential of the population as a resource for this development. In Russian realities, the introduction of such a concept is possible in new interuniversity campuses created by two or more residents of educational organizations ^[32]. Now multicampus collaborations, where there are universities with creative directions, organize the so-called creative cluster or cluster of creative industries (Tyumen, Khabarovsk, Tomsk). Considering this cluster, we understand that its creative structure is provided by the functions of creative directions. A. O. Karpov describes such a structure as "a system of creative spaces that create a synergy of cognitive activity and an environment for attracting and concentrating talents" ^{[19, p. 20]}. There is a need to design a campus suitable for the educational functions of architectural, artistic and other areas. However, it is obvious that this should be a new conceptual space. Dialogicity of educational, creative and creative activities can make this space alive, constantly active. The expected progressive effect: in the presence of workshops of the second type – an increase in the involvement in educational creative activity, first of all, of students of specialized areas, which will attract students interested in the creativity of other areas of the interuniversity campus, as well as creative citizens. Students and teachers of creative directions act as the core of the community around which creative activity is built, commercial and non-commercial, but permanent. An inspiring multicultural environment will emphasize the image of the place as open and creative, hence the growth of the prestige of the campus, the improvement of the economic indicators of the district, the city.

Conclusion. Although a review of sources shows that there is no single definition of cultural spaces in Europe and Russia, the authors analyzed the existing types and classifications. The terms "creativity" and "creativity" formed the basis of two criteria for determining such spaces: open public, closed individual. In the first, the process is important, in the second – the product. The hypothesis of successful coexistence of spaces with these seemingly different processes is put forward. The hypothesis of a new type of space with the main four parameters: art/culture; education; leisure/recreation; society. To develop the concept of such a space, an analysis of the current state of the classroom fund, a survey of students and teachers of architectural and artistic directions of the TOGU for the formation of needs in certain rooms is necessary. It is also planned to use the results of a survey of the population of Khabarovsk in 2021, dedicated to the study of public opinion about the need to create an interuniversity campus in Khabarovsk ^[16]. Based on the analysis of these surveys, it is planned to develop an architectural model that, along with the results of the study, can be used in the design of the building of the cluster of creative industries of the intercollegiate campus in Khabarovsk, which currently unites the Khabarovsk State Institute of Culture, the Faculty of Advertising and Design Arts and the Institute of Architecture and Design of TOGU (Fig. 5). According to mission 3.0, this cluster it is positioned as the center of attraction and communication of the entire contingent of the intercollegiate campus, as well as the population of the city.