The retrovisual method of conceptualizing novelty in the city discourse
DOI: 10.23951/2312-7899-2024-3-138-164
The aim of the article is to study the concept of novelty in relation to the visual components of the city discourse. There exist different forms of novelty, and they can be generalized and conceptualized through the retrovisual method, which allows carrying out procedures for recreating visual images of the “new” formed in the past. The retrovisual urbanistic “fate analysis” makes it possible to identify three forms of novelty in the city discourse: reconstruction in combination with quasi-innovation, innovation, and upcycle. Examples of quasi-innovation are skyscraper piles, which, in their technical design, lagged far behind the projects of avant-garde artists or early modern architects of the first third of the last century. Recreating the past (sculptural and architectural creations lost during extreme events: revolutions, wars, and natural disasters) is one of the most popular trends in designing the future today. In addition to the well-known restoration (restoration of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow or the monument to Alexander III in Irkutsk), one can observe specific variations of reconstruction: post-reconstruction and reconstruction relocation. Post-reconstruction involves the creation of urban landscape objects that did not exist before, but which could have existed if history had developed differently (for example, the monument to Admiral Kolchak in Irkutsk). Reconstruction relocation (full or partial) is the localization of lost objects in new areas (for example, the transfer to urban localities of buildings that were previously located in places flooded as a result of the construction of hydroelectric power plants). On the one hand, the restoration of the lost can be considered as a form of historical continuity. On the other hand, reconstruction also often contains an element of destruction: the memory of the period when the lost structures were temporarily absent and in their place there were other, possibly also significant, objects is erased. Using the example of the so-called “cities of the future” (for example, Arcosanti in the modern USA or Akhetaton in Ancient Egypt), the thesis about the “curse of innovation” is put forward. Attempts to create something fundamentally new often end in failure; innovative cities turn out to be “non-functional projects”. Creative upcycle means a new life of ideas and projects from the past and, in our case, implies a creative urban project based on a certain pattern. St. Petersburg is an upscale of Amsterdam, and Helsinki, Makhachkala and Poltava are upscales of St. Petersburg, but Amsterdam is also an upscale of Antwerp, which, in turn, repeated the structural combinations of cities of the early Middle Ages. Creative upcycle as an integrative form of novelty in the discourse of the city is often more meaningful and durable than reconstruction, reproducing the past for the future, or innovation, rejecting and devaluing the past. The retrovisual method makes it possible to identify and conceptualize the forms of novelty that realize themselves in the discourse of the city. The same method allows one to model the success parameters of urban design. A four-dimensional coordinate system of the city discourse is modeled, including vectors of social communication and cognition, on the one hand, and vectors of subjective activity and creativity, on the other. It is established that, in quasi-innovations, reconstructions and innovations as forms of novelty in the discourse of the city, these vectors are extremely unbalanced, while in the technology of upcycle these vectors often turn out to be quite balanced and, therefore, ensure the viability of urban projects.
Keywords: retrovisual method, the city discourse, novelty, city of the future, utopia, city-project, subjectivity, creativity, innovation, quasi-innovation, reconstruction, restoration, upscale, relocation, ecosystem
References:
Alaily-Mattar, N., & Thierstein, A. (2018). Urban transformations through exceptional architecture: introduction to the special issue. Journal of Urban Design. 23(2), 165–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2018.1429903
Avanesov, S. S. (2015). The subject area and the epistemic structure of visual anthropology. ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Problemy vizual’noy semiotiki – ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics, 1(3), 1–20. (In Russian).
Avanesov, S.S. (2013). Visual anthropology: Image, subject and communication. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta – Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 137, 229–235. (In Russian).
Bunnell, T., Aung-Thwin, M., Clendenning, J. N., Goh, D. Ps., & Smith, N. R. (2022). Points of persuasion: truth spots in future city development. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 40(6). https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221133832
Domingues, J. M. (2001).Social creativity, collective subjectivity, and contemporary modernity. Contemporary Sociology, 30(5), 537–538. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230597556
Dukhan, I. N. (2021). El’ Lisitskiy. Khudozhnik – ego zhizn’, iskusstvo, tvorchestvo, zhivopis’ [El Lisitsky. The artist – his life, art, creativity, painting]. Art-Rodnik.
Epstein, M. N. (1988). Paradoksy novizny. O literaturnom razvitii XIX–XX vekov [Paradoxes of novelty. On the literary development of the 19th–20th centuries]. Sovetskiy pisatel’.
Faccioli, F., & Losacco, P. (2010). Nuovo manuale di sociologia visuale. Dall’analogico al digitale. Franco Angeli.
Fedorova, A. A. (2018). The Interrelation of Employees’ Creativity Level and Conflict Behavior. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya – Organizational Psychology, 2, 119–157. (In Russian).
Florida, R. (2016). The Rise of the Creative Class. Mann, Ivanov and Ferber. (In Russian).
Glazyrina, E. D. (2004). Cauchy-Riemann classification of two-dimensional manifolds of centered planes in four-dimensional Euclidean space. Izvestiya TPU. 4, 10–14. (In Russian).
Kasavin, I. T. (2019). The future of humanity and the new picture of the world. Tsifrovoy uchenyy: laboratoriya filosofa – The Digital Scholar: Philosopher‘s Lab, 2(2), 6–15. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.5840/dspl20192218
Kasavin, I. T. (2022a). When the future borders on utopia: science in perspective. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya – Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science, 68, 193–200. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17223/1998863X/68/19
Kasavin, I. T. (2022b). Creativity in science as a social phenomenon. Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki – Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. 59(3), 19–29. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.5840/eps202259336
Kochukhova, E. S., & Martianov, V. S. (2019). Creative city or the right to a city: alternatives to urban development in the Russian context. Antinomii – Antinomies, 2, 45–66. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17506/aipl.2019.19.2.4566
Kristol, I. (2014). Urban Civilization and Its Discontents. Al’manakh staroy i novoy kul’tury. 10, 13–30. (In Russian).
Kushtym, E. A. (2015). Subjectivity in the context of human spiritual creativity. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Ural’skiy region, 3, 52–57. (In Russian)
Loures, L. (2008). Industrial Heritage: the past in the future of the city. Wseas Transactions on Environment and Development, 8(4), 687–696.
Luhmann, N. (1992). Kommunikation mit Zettelkästen. Ein Erfahrungsbericht. In A. Kieserling (Ed.), Universität als Milieu. Kleine Schriften (pp. 53–61). Haux, Bielefeld (essay originally published 1981).
Luhmann, N. (2007). Social systems. Nauka. (In Russian).
Malevich, K. S. (2020). Suprematizm. Po lestnitse poznaniya [Suprematism. On the ladder of knowledge]. Akademicheskiy proekt.
Melik-Gaikazyan, I. V. (2017a). The ignoramus paradox: the time of visual symbolism domination. ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Problemy vizual’noy semiotiki – ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics, 4, 49–64. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.23951/2312-7899-2017-4-49-64
Melik-Gaikazyan, I. V. (2017b). Paradoxes of designing the future: conceptual models of socio-cultural mechanisms of divergence and convergence. In P. D. Tishchenko (Ed.), Konvergentsiya tekhnologiy i divergentsiya budushchego cheloveka. Rabochie tetradi po bioetike [Convergence of Technologies and Divergence of the Future of Man. Bioethics Workbooks] (pp. 35–44). Moscow University for the Humanities. (In Russian).
Melik-Gaykazyan, I. V. (2022). Semiotic diagnostics of splitting trajectories of dreams about the past and dreams about the future. Electronic scientific and educational journal “History”, 13(4). https://history.jes.su/s207987840021199-7-1/. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.18254/S207987840021199-7
Mieg, H. A., & Oevermann, H. (2014). Industrial Heritage Sites in Transformation. Clash of Discourses. Routledge.
Miller, F. P., Vandome, A. F., & McBrewster, J. (2009). Consensus Reality. Universität des Saarlandes.
Oevermann, H. (2018). Industrial Heritage, Historic Architecture, and Today’s Transformations of Cities. Contemporary Urban Research in the European City. ttps://www.europenowjournal.org/2018/04/30/industrial-heritage-historic-architecture-and-todays-transformations-of-cities/
Potera, N.(2024). The importance of urbanization in the process of shaping the “ubiquitous city” on the example of Songdo International Business District, South Korea. Studia z Polityki Publicznej, 10(3(39)), 9–24. https://doi.org/10.33119/KSzPP/2023.3.1
Radwan, Sh. (2022). Aproximación al discurso presidencial egipcio durante la primavera árabe traducido al español. dos discursos del expresidentE Hosni Mubarak como ejemplos. Orkopata. Revista de Lingüística, Literatura y Arte, 1(4), 30–45.
Rae, R. A. (2016). Arcology, Arcosanti and the Green Urbanism Vision. Open House International, 41(4), 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1108/OHI-04-2016-B0008
Reed, B. (2012). Heretic: The life and death of Akhenaten. Create Space Independent Publishing Platform.
Romanov, P. V., & Yarskaya-Smirnova, E. R. (Eds.). (2009). Vizual’naya antropologiya: gorodskie karty pamyati [Visual Anthropology: Urban memory maps]. Variant.
Savchenko, I. A. (2023). Stehr’s vector: knowledge in the city coordinates. Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki – Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 60(4), 173–189. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.5840/eps202360465
Savchenko, I. A., Bataev, D. K. S., Daukaev, A. A., & Bataeva, P. D. (2023). Restoration of urban monuments: the resource potential of the North Caucasus. Ustoychivoe razvitie gornykh territoriy – Sustainable development of mountainous territories. 152(56), 431–441. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.21177/1998-4502-2023-15-2-431-441
Shapinskaya, E. N. (2019). Images of the past in (post) modern representations. Kul’tura i iskusstvo, 9, 70–82. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0625.2019.9.30515
Terrenoire, J. P. (2006). Sociologie visuelle. Communications, 80(1), 121–143.
Tikunova, S. V. (2021). The identity of a person and the urban architectural and landscape space: points of intersection and discontinuity. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta kul’tury i iskusstv. 2(100), 88–95. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.24412/1997-0803-2021-2100-88-95
Vasilenko, L. A., Molchanova, O. I., & Bogdanova, L. V. (2024). Creativity and subjectivity as phenomena of digital society. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial’noy antropologii – Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology. 27(1), 139–161. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2024.27.1.7
Vonnegut, K. (2021). The Sirens of Titan. AST. (In Russian).
Vysokiy, V. A. (2014). On pseudo innovations in the production of construction works. Nauka, obrazovanie i jeksperimental’noe proektirovanie [Science, education, and experimental design]. Abstracts of the Conference. Moscow Aviation Institute. pp. 368–370. (In Russian).
( 1.29 MB ) 
( 1.27 MB )
Issue: 3, 2024
Series of issue: Issue 3
Rubric: ARTICLES
Pages: 138 — 164
Downloads: 149