For what Ukrainian glossy press scolds Ani Lorak and Joseph Kobzon? Why did the Lviv book fair refused Russian publishers and why Ukrainian writers are dissatisfied with this? Why in Russia will not be the official year of the culture of Poland and England, but this does not cancel the cooperation of the people, movies, literature and music? Can a Ukrainian ban on Russian goods extend to books and musical discs? The gap of cultural arrangements - a refusal of politics or from art? Why is a modern artist can't do not engage in politics? Do Russian artists understand, for what reasons they may not be invited abroad?

Marek Radzivon, Director of the Polish Cultural Center; Oleg Dorman, director of documentary cinema, author of the film "Constress"; Alexander Iliachevsky, writer; Alexander Koval, Director of the Lviv Book Forum; Yuri Volodarsky, literary critic (Kiev); Marianna Kiyanovskaya, poet, translator (Lviv).

In video and radio broadcasts on Sunday and Monday at 18 o'clock, in the radio protector - on Wednesday in 22. He is conducted by Elena Fanailov program

Elena Fanailova: On culture and politics against the background of hostilities in the East of Ukraine, about the challenges of time, about what a man of culture should do in the proposed circumstances.

Behind our table today - Oleg Derman, director of documentary cinema, author of a very famous film "Interspit"; Marek Radzivon, Director of the Polish Cultural Center. On Skype will be with us Alexander Iliachevsky, Writer. He is now in Israel.

Let's start with the plot about the Lviv Book Forum. Lviv publishers refused to accept Russian publishers this year, and this caused a large scandal in the Ukrainian cultural world. Poland refuses to hold a year of culture in Russia. It became known that England also refuses state support for its cultural programs with Russia. I am no longer talking about the fact that Latvia and Lithuania banned entry into their territory to famous Russian pop singers - Kobzona, Valeria and Gazmanov - for their public position in Crimea and in general in Ukraine. And the Ukrainian glossy magazines criticize, on the contrary, their collaborants, for example, the singer Ani Lorak for receiving some awards to Moscow. Contradictory and important balls of questions.

How does cultural management participate in the current situation and what should people feel and make people in these circumstances?

I recorded Alexander Koval, Director of the Lviv Book Fair.

Alexandra Koval: With a proposal to us, members of the public initiative "Economic Boycott" came to us, which operates in Lviv since Euromaidan, when the guys began to boycott products produced by members of the regions party. They believe that people can vote against something without buying some products and damage to manufacturers, and buying Russian books, we finance the aggressor state, which Russia is now in relation to Ukraine.

At first, I did not agree with this position, because it is very far away - books, economics, cartridges that are bought on these taxes ... But, by reflection for some time, consulted, after all, we decided not to invite Russian publishers, because the war, and The time of hostilities can not be otherwise. We must wait, aggression will end, and then we will see what can be returned back. But still, together with the boycake committee, we decided that it would be wrong to deprive the people of those books to which they were accustomed to, those Russian books that they love, and especially those analogues that are not yet in Ukraine who are not translated on ukrainian language. Therefore, publishers will not, and there will be books and writers.

Elena Fanailova: And how is it technically possible if the publishers do not accompany their writers?

Alexandra Koval: Some funds will be connected. For example, Lyudmila Ulitskaya comes to us with the assistance of one Russian Foundation. Vladimir Wornovich invites his publishing house. And perhaps, Ukrainian book-trading companies or branches of Russian publishing house will invite Russian writers. By the way, our Russian publishers first appeared in 2009 at the collective stand of Russia, and there were no them. And, in fact, on the stand of the publishers, there was also no books, there were presented books, and books represented the organizer of the stand, the OGU publishing house, with whom we continue, I hope, the good relationship, friendly, and in the future they will come in the future. Our main thing is not to find enemies that do not exist, do not create these enemies in our community environment. We have a common cause, and we must through all these tests that have now fall out on our share, go quietly and with dignity.

Elena Fanailova: And whether it was among Russian writers who would you like to invite who would refuse to go to you?

Alexandra Koval: Yes No, there were no such.

Elena Fanailova: If we talk about a broader field in which this military situation is forced to put people, now it became known that Poland refused to hold a year of culture in Russia for the same reasons that you close for Russian publishing houses Lviv book fair: until it is completed military actions. What do you think about this Polish solution? How parallel to your decision, do you understand Poles in this sense?

Alexandra Koval: Yes, I understand their decision, it is purely political. In Poland, there is also a discussion about this, many people seem to be to use any opportunities, any means to convey their position and discuss. But for some reason it seems to me that now such circumstances are that the discussion does not work. We speak our, the Russians speak their own, and do not hear each other. We observed this at the recent Congress Russia - Ukraine, who organized the Khodorkovsky Foundation. It seems that everyone agrees that it is necessary to stop the escalation of tension, but on what basis it is to continue to build their understanding - for some reason the common platform has not found. So it seemed to me.

Elena Fanailova: Even the leading European editors of liberal newspapers turned to the European Union that his position should be much more tougher in Russia now. In particular, Adam Michnik, chief Editor The publication of the "Children's newspaper" was one of the main features of this appeal.

Marek Radzivon: I would like to talk about the year of Russia and Poland and Poland in Russia, and not about the war in Ukraine. For several months ago, after the Russian military appeared in the Crimea, in early March, it was clear that the Year of Poland in Russia would not have some official "cap" that we would avoid official meetings at a high level. What, most likely, the discovery will not be solemn, there will be no ministers and prime ministers ...

Elena Fanailova: I will clarify, this is the level of negotiations Lavrov-Sikorsky.

Marek Radzivon: Yes, these are negotiations of foreign ministers and two ministers of culture, Russian and Polish. The decision to cancel the year of Poland in Russia is a decision, on the one hand, political, of course. But we must be aware of, I always emphasize this and I also repeat it, that in fact we do not cancel the cultural ties. We are not able to cancel them, firstly. Secondly, no one wants to cancel cultural ties, and we cancel the official Year of Poland in Russia.

As for solutions on political levelAs for ministers, as for some government agreements. Over the past few days in Moscow and from friends, and from Moscow journalists, I heard such a question: how so, we will not have any connections, there will be no Polish cinema, we will not be able to read Polish books, or you will not publish Polish books. Nothing like!

Elena Fanailova: Or, for example, it will not be the next arrival of your wonderful directors to the next "Golden Mask".

Marek Radzivon: Yes. So it seems to me that it is very important to remind myself too that we cancel the year, because it would be some kind of superficial scenography that would close the problems that exist, very serious problems. And we would try to create such an artificial scenography, followed by which we will hide and silent on the themes are really very complex. There are disagreements related to the war with Ukraine, the occupation of the Crimea, there are disagreements on the elementary level itself, which concern elementary concepts and values. Therefore, we cancel such a formal year.

Elena Fanailov : Oleg, comment on this situation. I think there is a culture like live bodyAnd there is a toolkit. In particular, we are now, as it seems to me, we are talking about the more accurate use of the toolkit. Boycott and statements of people of culture - is an important way to appeal to public opinion?

Oleg Derman : The patient comes to the doctor, puts the results of his research before him and is waiting for an answer. Doctor looks for a long time, wrinkles forehead. The patient is asked by the question: "Doctor, I will live?" Doctor answers: "And the meaning?"

This is me to the fact that I, like this patient, would like to hear the easiest answer to your question. It is not. It seems to me that all solutions are bad, but the answer, as often happens in the most important issues of life, no for everyone, but for everyone, in particular, as a response. Let's say, I will not go to the company that is unpleasant to me, and not a call to myself into the house of the people who are uncompatible to me. Miscellaneous may be any forcing circumstances, but if they are not, I will not call. What does argue here?! Someone will call unpleasant people, and someone will not call.

Elena Fanailov : For the sake of higher purposes, for example.

Oleg Derman : I do not know what every particular person will be guided by, a separate person. I think why it all acquires, this dispute around the boycott, the heat. Because in fact, we decide one of the most important existential issues. human life. Each of us is born himself. And gradually discover themselves with members of various communities - community of family, community of friends, groups in kindergarten. Then it turns out that we are citizens of a particular country. We are fulfilling countless other roles at the same time. Which of these roles are guided by one or another life situation? I must argue, for example, as a citizen or as a father? How is the father or as a writer, faithful to some high spiritual ideals? Like a writer or as a friend? I believe that these issues of the general answer do not have and can not. No wonder a more wise person than I, however, in German said that "only that is worthy of happiness and freedoms, who goes for them every day." Apparently, he meant that it was impossible to solve the issue of freedom once and permanently, I'm not talking about happiness. This is a permanent art to live and war. This is what I am trying to explain why such a heat acquires the question of boycott.

Question about good and evil - about your responsibility. I am responsible for doing the government of my country. This is a very difficult question. Let's say I think that yes, I answer. I am very unpleasant now, but I think that, yes, I answer. Does it consider, for example, the Polish government, that I, a citizen of Russia, is responsible for the actions of my country? Apparently, believes. I agree with them. I think that there are many people, people of honest, courageous and decent, who disagree to bear such responsibility. I have not annexed the Crimea. I can understand their right. I just can't, being in my place, with my heart, agree with them.

Elena Fanailov : If a boycott was subjected to you, did not call your reaction what would be?

Oleg Derman : "Not up to mushrooms, Vasily Ivanovich," I would say quote from another joke. What festivals! This is the old as the world question.

Elena Fanailov : Sasha is located in the war zone in Tel Aviv. The past program was with the participation of Volodya Rafehenko, the writer from Donetsk, who left Kiev. He said that the most a big problem - Think. When the shells are exploded under the windows when you hear shots, the biggest problem is to preserve the mind and critical attitude to what is happening.

Alexander, about your challenges do you tell us something?

Alexander Iliachevsky : To say that we have broken out some cultural contacts with Hamas, and regret it does not have to do anything at all.

I would comment on what Oleg said, that I heard about the boycott. Without a doubt, this situation in which nothing can be done. Without a doubt, you are responsible for what is happening in your country, as she behaves in relation to other countries. It seems to me that, in spite of everything, people of culture should leave each other on both sides the possibility of dialogue and the opportunity to somehow sow peace, fight with the help of some cultural meaning with what happens.

I remember the 60s, dissident movement when illegal contacts with the West took place. With all the citizen responsibility of the same Brodsky, I am sure he did not take responsibility for the actions of the USSR. He always emphasized his citizenship. Nevertheless, he was opened to the world. We also need to be opened to the world and with understanding to treat all kinds of official tensions between our countries.

Elena Fanailov : If you personally vote for some festival of literary in Berlin, to France, and then -spacible, writer Ilchevsky, you as a person responsible for Putin's president's policy ... We do not need you until the war will end. What is your inner reaction?

Alexander Iliachevsky : That would be deep regret. You can not do anything here.

Elena Fanailov : In 2008, one very distinguished by me from the world of St. Petersburg unvalted literature, a famous critic, a member of many literary jury, said (and it was the Russian-Georgian war): "While the civilized world, while the European world does not arrange a boycott for Russia in all directions , including in the areas of culture, Russia, unfortunately, will not be able to change truly. Because we cannot make sure that civil society controls its government. " There is such a radical point of view. I do not say that it is the only right. But I'm talking about what boycott is still looking like political tools. And to refuse to man a culture in the fact that he can have his position and pretty tough, including, it seems to me, completely incorrectly.

I sometimes hear this opinion that a person of culture should not be engaged in politics, nor interested in politics. It distorts him as an artist. It harms creativity, it harms a person. I do not agree with that. What do you think about it?

Marek Radzivon : I also disagree with this too. It seems to me that this point of view has, I would even say a misunderstanding of what the policy is and culture. We are accustomed to in our part of Europe to that over the past 50-60 years, and maybe since 1917, that politics is a dirty thing that you can not climb there with decent people that we cannot influence anything. I just think that politics are not only presidential elections that can be falsified or can be honest. Politics is my daily behavior in my stairwell. These are the election of a person who in our area is engaged in cleaning or something in our house, in our entrance. We solve our questions through honest vote at such an elementary level. And then there is the same thing, in fact - at the city level, the country, in some international relations. There is a certain escapism in this, an attempt to escape from our daily life, to go into some kind of internal emigration and say is not mine, I do not want to participate in this. But very often happens that if we say that we are not interested in politics, we are far from politics, unfortunately, then politics begins to be interested in us. It is much worse.

Elena Fanailov : Two main poet in my life is Cheslav Milos and Joseph Brodsky. These are people who are still interested in politics. They were included in it - Milos as one of the heroes of the Second World War, the underground in Warsaw, then as a diplomat and an emigrant, and Brodsky as a political prisoner, then also an emigrant, which politician was interested in the end of his days. It seems to me that this is such discrimination of even people of culture - you are such as weakly, you do not need to be interested in politics.

Oleg Derman : I continue my theme involuntarily - about the impossibility of dividing different roles. Politics separated from art, art is separated from morality, morality is separated from science, science is separated from physics, physics is separated from chemistry only in the head in humans.

What happens really? I would be sad, a little grotesque, but on the convincing example demonstrated. Here they do not want to see a talented singer in some country, despite all his talent. Maybe he takes his talent, wrapped into cigarette paper, put in a velvet box and send it there without himself, that is, maybe he is his talent to separate from himself? Not. And they can not. It is impossible to separate it. And then what to say?

Elena Fanailov : Some want this branch. Such claims to people of culture are not engaged in politics.

Oleg Derman : I would not want to hear from them, as they are able to share politics and culture. As a polemical consideration, I would even say that the policy is, in the end, the culture is not becoming or, alas. Because from a political point of view, which we can perplex for a second, the meaning of writing and read, in particular, books, listen to music and look at the beautiful works of painting in the fact that the person becomes better, he became different and behaved humanly. And these concepts about humanity produces culture for us or what we call the word culture. In the sense, it seems to me that absolutely no matter how educated person. It is important how enlightened. Sometimes he enlightens one-only read book, sometimes just a mummy lullaby or grandmother's fairy tale. But ultimately, if a finite account is possible here, the real result of the grandmother's fairy tale is that the granddaughters have not annexed the Crimea.

Elena Fanailov : Sasha, are you interested in politics? How do you see yourself in this?

Alexander Iliachevsky : When I was 20 years old, I was an absolutely apolitical companion. At this age, I came across some extensive interview with Joseph Brodsky, where literally the entire band of the newspaper was devoted to Brodsky's reasoning about the future geopolitical situation in the world. All of his reasoning was reduced to about the fact that China would absorb us all. I read all this and said in the hearts: "How can he be interested in politics." To which my then buddy, I said, "Stop! This is still an extension of the horizon." It has already become clear to me that it is impossible to leave politics, it is after reading Milos. He has a poem of 1944, where he talks about what hell is. Hell is where you get when you step by the fence. We must leave our hedge. This is true. Because the whole civilization is created using words and rivers, with the help of words and communications. Culture and verbal creativity are some kind of creation with what creates civilization and so on. If seriously engaged in literature, not going anywhere from politics.

Elena Fanailov : I propose a replica Yuri Vododarsky. He is a famous literary critic in Kiev, one of the editors of the Sho magazine. He was one of the opponents of this boycott. I asked him - he did not change his attitude towards this, did not make it difficult to perceive.

Yuri Volodarsky : No, I do not think something has become more complicated. Rather, it simplified. Because some circumstances became known. And due to these circumstances, it seems to me that it can be said that this decision was made under sufficiently strong pressure. This campaign of the boycott of all Russian goods has come to the Lviv forum such a stupid wave, which covered good, innocent people. It seems to me that the forum as such, in the face of the presidents of the forum Alexandra Koval, did not want to do this at all. He is more forced to do it. It turned out that the forum was hostage.

Still, I believe that this decision is incorrect. In general, the decision on the boycott and the Russian book is simply stupid. Because the book is a little more. It is not canned, it is not the products of light or heavy industry. Those money that the book brings to the Russian budget, I think they are meager compared to those reputational losses, which as a result received the forum. It turns out such an absurdity. Let's say, the books of such people who are very difficult to reproach in a negative attitude towards Ukraine may not be sold on the forum or sold only with stickers, with the Russian tricolor. I do not think that Vladimir Sorokin or Lev Rubinstein will be rejected by such a decision. IN best case They will understand and just keep silent.

You can continue this series. Not only with books such a situation. Can be boycott, for example, discs russian performers - Andrei Makarevich, Yuri Shevchuk, people who provided and provide Ukraine with all-time support, oppose Putin's regime. Strip under one comb in this situation is categorically incorrect.

Elena Fanailov : I would put a question more widely. The situation that has now has developed in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, forces people of culture, one way or another, react. Ignore the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is impossible. Do not occupy some of the sides are also quite difficult. Is there any universal tactics of human culture and cultural manager?

Yuri Volodarsky : The fact of the matter is that there is no universal tactics here and can not be. Attempting to work out such universal tactics leads to fatal simplifications, as in the case of a boycott of Russian publishers. Probably, you just need to resist nonsense. If some nonsense is obtained, then you need to talk about it. Here is a boycott of the Russian book, the labeling of Russian books, talking about what needs to license the Russian book, you need to quote it now. Good, okay, for God's sake. Let's see how exactly what discrimination who will be subject to. It's one thing - to limit access to Ukraine cheaply, and another thing - if in Ukraine will cease to fall good books, good literature of the most different kind, the analogues of which Ukrainian publishers do not provide. It turns out absurd. We cut off the Russian-speaking, and Ukrainian-language reader.

If we talk about my work, then I can say that, probably, 95% of the books of translation (I'm talking about the fiction) from English, French, Italian, German, and God knows what, no relevant Ukrainian translations. They do not exist for obvious reasons. Therefore, cut access to the Russian book or restrict access to a good Russian book, it seems to me, incorrectly.

Elena Fanailov : The main thing is the fatal simplifications, said the Volodarsky, who is inevitably exposed to a cultural field. It is erosion when cultural managers are forced to make such a decision. These simplifications are inevitable? Do we have to sacrifice the difficulty in this time that the situation of war generally simplifies our lives?

Oleg Derman : I do not know the overall answer. Every time in different ways. I do not think that something can be easier. Apparently, everything becomes only more difficult and more difficult.

Marek Radzivon : And it seems to me that we are able to distinguish the official, international all sorts of agreements, performances in some big concerts Officials from the present, personal, each separate participation in real culture, in such a one of us. I think, we will cancel the official event, we will cancel this official cap, but at the same time I am ready to name several dozen, a few hundred people of Russian culture, which I would like to see in Warsaw, whom I hope we will be invited to Warsaw anyway. It seems to me who is consciously interested in culture in general, of course, perfectly understands this difference between the president's trusted persons and people who will never perform in the big halls here, although they are also very talented. The farther from any state official, the better for culture in a sense. I am sure that there are a lot of Poles, people of my environment, perfectly understand this difference and know how to understand it. In Poland, you can also call examples, for example, festivals of documentary cinema, which show Russian ribbons, Russian cinema is not that official Russian institutions offer us, and the fact that Polish selectioners find themselves through their connections.

Elena Fanailov : What is the difference between this choice? What does the official channel offer, and what are you looking for?

Marek Radzivon : I think it is obvious. I will not call specific surnames. But we know the list of those people of culture, those directors and russian musiciansWe see and in London, and in Berlin, and in Munich, when we organize official events in official cross years. At the same time, I am ready to name several surnames of Russian writers whose books we publish in Poland, who are not easy to get support and publish their book in Russia.

Elena Fanailov : I do not think that these are the reasons for pure political. I think we are talking about the type of cultural work, which is carried out by these writers, directors, musicians. Surely, the Polish side in Russian culture is interested in interest in social practice, to the social life of people, to real problems that exist, and not at all to the image of the Great Russia?

Marek Radzivon : Yes, I would even say that in our Polish perception of Russia there is some drawback, some omission. Most Poles do not speak Russian, do not know Moscow, do not know Russia, do not know the local cultural environment. They receive the information that we receive in the Polish media. We sometimes do not everyone understand that life here is very interesting and stormy that there are different informal groups, there are different works of culture that do not reach the average Pole.

Elena Fanailov : I am afraid that they do not even reach the average Russian.

Marek Radzivon : May be. But I believe that now our main role, I would not want to overestimate it, of course, but our main task is now to establish connections with NPOs, with informal sites, with theaters, with playwrights and directors who do not use state support that survive It's pretty hard here. I am sure that their works are talking about modern Russia much more, much more interesting than what we can get in the official rental in Goskinetaraths.

Elena Fanailov : Sasha, it seems to me that the topic of simplicity and difficulty is one of your main and beloved. Do you personally do not simplify yourself when you react to political challenges of time?

Alexander Iliachevsky : I think this is not a simplification, but the choice of a new chair. I do not think that the inner movement is associated with some dimension of the complexity with which we are accustomed to dealing with. For me, this is all quite painful in that, that I used to perceive modern culture with more transparent borders than it was before. Now you can write almost anywhere in the world in your own language. If earlier there were some difficulties, now it is very moving. Situation of War, the situation of confrontation immediately infringe on you in this space of culture. All borders that were permeable earlier for you, they become tougher. You feel disadvantaged and forced to change the channel. So I am in a state not that bewilderment, but a point of existential choice. This is quite a serious matter.

Elena Fanailov : I propose to see an interview with Marianne Kiyanovskaya, the poet, the translator, an important intellectual of Westow Ukrarana, which was a sharp opponent of this boycott. She has its own arguments. We started with whether she changed her mind. It is important where she talks about the symbolic role of Russian literature for Ukraine.

Marianna Kiyanovskaya : First, I would like to clarify that my first and most rigid reaction concerned primarily the decisions of the boycock committee of our Ukrainian. It was some kind of solution that Alexander Koval, president of the Publishers Forum, inspired by surprise. This, in my opinion, is substantial clarification. Because some further compromise decisions were taken, after speeches of several people who strongly protested against the decision of the boycock committee - boycott the Russian book as a product. Then several decisions were taken. Not only forum publishers have already made an official position, and the decision on the quotas for the Russian book in the Ukrainian market has been made.

Of course, I do not change views. I must say that my main messaging, which was almost all heard, concerns the fact that the book is not quite a product. I immediately tried to say that the book cannot become a hostage of war policies and other things, because the book is a completely different product type. He, besides the actual, commodity, very large symbolic value.

Elena Fanailov : For Ukrainian readers of Russian literature, still, remains a big symbolic value?

Marianna Kiyanovskaya : I treat the circle for which it remains. I know that many have now revised their positions that concern, including and attitudes towards the Russian society as a whole, and to the positions of many intellectuals. Moods were very radicalized. If we speak personally about me, then I will stay on that position all the time that the humanitarian space, the book, is cosmopolitan, especially during globalization. The worst and most dangerous in these conversations about the restriction of the Russian book in the Ukrainian market, about the ban, etc. - the aftertaste, the sediment. After a few years, the nuances of these discussions, these conversations will already disappear. Nobody will remember them. The fact of the ban will be remembered by the establishment of restrictions. Will be remembered by the word "boycott".

In principle, a very terrible thing - cultural nostalgia. At the cultural nostalgia, Hitler rose at one time and was able to approve his propaganda through the nostalging part of the population. On cultural nostalgia, Putin builds a lot now. Nostalgia, except for other things, includes a desire for some kind of revenge. In these games around the Russian-speaking book, around the book printed in Russia, a lot of danger, I see that this can at some point to become a pretext of serious revengers.

I emphasize, I am absolutely a Ukrainian language. I am a man in my eyes uncompromising. But I believe that in this situation the question is the cancellation of all the prohibitions to the Russian book, which does not carry agitoxes, the propaganda of anti-Ukrainian, it is necessary that Ukrainian intellectuals support this opportunity to be Russian-language book. Because the prohibitions of this kind in their nature are totalitar.

Elena Fanailov : Kiyanovskaya puts the question far ahead. She talks about the revenge of Ukrainian society, that this ban is one of the usual mechanisms of totalitarian. And the Ukrainians now ban the Russian book would mean to return to their insults to Russia, or rather speaking to a large empire, which peoples once suppressed. It seems to me that it important thing, but its reasoning is very strongly ahead of the situation of a particular war in which Ukraine is now.

Marek Radzivan : I do not take and have no right to comment on the point of view of Ukrainian friends simply because after 5 years of life in Moscow I do not know very well in the Moscow and Russian situation (laugh). Here it is necessary to be more compromised, and I understand a little in Ukrainian, unfortunately.

The fact that this point of view will really run away far forward, it seems to me correctly. Maybe we should exaggerate any threats every day, and be consciously more sensitive than necessary. On the other hand, it seems to me that despite the decision of the Lviv Forum, we are not talking about the abolition of Russian and Russian-speaking literature in Ukraine. This, of course, is another question and the other topic, but there is a little bit like: when I hear that Russian-speaking Russian-speaking, my personal experience shows - I do not know a single Ukrainian-language Ukrainian who does not know Russian, but I know many Russian-speaking Ukrainians, who can not say anything in Ukrainian. This also must be considered. And about the abolition of Russian literature in Ukraine, in general, there can be no speech. Maybe just worth putting the question specifically and exaggerate.

Elena Fanailov : Oleg, what do you think about this projection in the future?

Oleg Derman : I do not like to give advice to the Ukrainians in the Puhu, how to behave in relation to my country. That's all my answer.

Alexander Iliachevsky : Marianana's position is absolutely close and transparent. What did the Lviv forum do? The Lviv Forum said - let's, we do not let the publisher here, as such, because in each publishing house there may be completely different authors. We do not have great diversification on each market. Therefore, with our such globalization, monopolization, which is on the book market, in each publishing house absolutely different people. Therefore, the decision to treat the Russian book is selectively, focusing that the forum does not have any pseudo-intelligent efforts that are full of Russian culture and everything else, absolutely understandable and clear.

And the statement that it is too much position, there is nothing terrible here. Because in fact, we do not quite understand themselves, with what we have from a historic point of view. It is possible that this divergence point of the Slavic world, although for me it is a split of the Russian world, what is happening now for many reasons. This should be ultimately fixed. It should be heal. This wound will need to tighten and restore with tremendous effort. You need to think and take care of continuity. As psychologists say - if you are in a shock situation, you need to get out of this situation as soon as possible by searching for some solutions. Then post-tramatic syndrome will be much more lightweight. Therefore, it simply blocks all sorts of cultural contacts is completely meaningless. You need to look for something else.

Adjusting the relationship between the floors, the society should have ensured the appearance of as healthy, viable offspring. In the theory of culture there was a tradition to represent anomalies of sexual life as certain phases of social development. Lang, Atkinson, Freud and others, considered the original stage of the social organization a harem family. Morgan, Fayson, Engels and many Soviet ethnographers were convinced of the initial promiscusive (from Promiscuis - "Mixed", "Universal") relationship. Y. Semenov attempted to describe a harem family and a promiscity as stratum replacing each other. All these approaches are not convincing. What an anomaly could not be a phase of social development. Neither the absolute monopolization of sex nor a complete promiscity in any ethnicity is not found, unless there, where the universal decomposition foreshadowed the inevitable death of the entire civilization. (The well-known ordering exists even in the sexual life of perverted, degraded communities, for example, in places of imprisonment among criminals. This life is also subordinate to the special, very tough rules that, however, in its content and spirit are very far from the norms of the civilized world and what - It is similar to the stereotypes of the Paviania "Haremov".)

By the way, the authors of the concept of its initiation themselves did not allow a complete promiscitic. Nature's laws can oppose only regulations, But not arbitrary. The arbitrariness has no inner pattern that would allow human society to survive, relying on him. Chaos in sexual life would lead to degradation with the same irreversibility, which all entropy processes proceed with. The promiscity destroys the social hierarchy, and without it the society loses its dynamic potential and disintegrates.

In a word, it is possible to talk about promiscuity and monopolism in sexual life only in a relative sense, as trends, one of which can temporarily prevail over another, and not as independent phases of social development. We would like to join the authors who, not falling into bold and witty speculations, consider the initial state and the norm of human sexual life a pair family, and a promiscuity and a harem - only exceptions and deviations from the norm. Human culture sought to find ways to combine opposing trends, introducing sex life into the framework of existing social structures. The most effective of them were obviously exogamy, individual marriage and love. They made a sex life at the same time and selective and publicly available.

Exogamia and ban on incest. IN The generic basic basis of the regulation of sexual relations was marriage and exogamy - the obligation to choose a wife or husband beyond its generic team (clan, subclasses, marriage class, etc.) and, accordingly, ban on marriage inside the genus. Violation of an exogamal ban was regarded primitive culture as the most disastrous form of promiscuity. Married infidelity ("adultery") was, as a rule, less malicious, but still a condemnation of action.

Exogamia is a purely human, cultural phenomenon, because in the animal world, to detect something like that did not succeed. Some higher animals have biological mechanisms that prevent the pairing of nearby individuals. For example, in monkey herds, sexual contacts between representatives are very limited. different generations. In the chimpanzee colony, sexual relationships of brothers and sisters are extremely rare (willingly admitting other males, the female protests vigorously against rapprochement with the brothers), and between the sons and mother they are missing at all. But such private preferences and restrictions have only external similarity With exogamy, not coinciding with it.

The problem of the origin of this institution with ethnographic science is not permitted unequivocally. Many of the existing explanations of the essence of the exogamal prohibition are of serious doubts. The introduction of exogamia cannot be explained neither conscious nor an instinctive desire to avoid harmful biological consequences incest - Blooding sexual communication. The point here is not only in the problematicness of such consequences and not only that the savages who practiced exogamia were not still, as B. Malinovsky claimed, a clear understanding of the relationship between the sexual act and the birth of children. Exogamy hardly arose from the desire to avoid inbreeding (the appearance of offspring from closely related individuals, which has obvious signs of degeneration), for it in those forms in which existed, I did not exclude incest. The matrilinene system of kinship eliminated the bloodstream between relatives of all generations on the maternal, but not on the father's line. The so-called "cross-cousin marriages" (with the daughters of the sister of the father or brother of the mother) were a system in many primitive peoples, whereas they are in the biological sense of blood monastery. In addition, if only concern for the health of future offspring, the invention would have been on the basis of an exogamal ban, then the invention of reliable contraceptives would have to put an end to the condemnation of incestuous bonds. However, in the era of the mass application of contraceptors, Moral has not changed its negative attitude towards instications, although Exogamia itself as the institute has long ceased to exist. In addition, exogamia is not needed to curb hereditary anomalies if the infanticide described above is practiced in the community. In short, the reason for the occurrence of exogamia and the prohibition of incest should be searched not in the biological sphere.

The needs of the reproduction of a healthy population seems to be at all the leading reason for the establishment of exogamia. The concept of incest, as well as the ban on incest is not preceded by exogamy, but are generated by it. Instinctive disgust for instications, if it had an ancient person, could, at the same time, to exist simultaneously with an exogamatic ban and to some extent to stimulate it, but it could not give rise to exogamia as a complex social institution, but more likely the fact that nature did not provide Human (in any case, a man) explicit instructions on the inadmissibility of incest. People began to avoid him due to the culture exciting a burning shame in those who did not find themselves more suitable partner For sex life. Orgiastic festivals and rituals for initiations, in which Incest was performed legally, indicate that if social ban was removed, it disappears and prejudice against sexual communications with her daughter, niece, cousin, etc.

The cultural origin of the prohibition on incest confirms the variability of its content. In societies with the matrilinean focus, the relationship between the native brother and sister is considered the most blasphemy crime. But in the ancient Persians, such marriages in the royal surnames looked even preferred. In the genovers, the marriages of "parallel cousins" were prohibited (with the daughters of the mother's sister), and the European Class Society Culture did not find any difference between parallel and cross-cousins, allowing the marriage between those and others equally. Such variations would hardly be possible if the ban on incest had a natural origin.

In the concept of incest, the primitive culture expressed and secured the special status of kinship. The emerging social structure required further differentiation of intermediary relations, including more selective sexual behavior. In relation to a woman, he became not a male that satisfies his organic attractions when, where and with whom she fell, but the father, son, brother, but the face that preserves a strictly prescribed distance and bearing clearly defined duties. The relationship between people has no natural, but culturally. It was erected by centuries in order to tie people with durable uzami, make them necessary for each other. Obviously, the relatives, with the exception of maternal love, is the later superstructure over artificially established relations.

An extremely sharp response to incest, characteristic of primitive culture, is not explained by the fact that such a form of promiscuity carried a potential threat to offspring, and by the fact that she symbolized the undermining of the entire generic company. The one who comes into sexual relationships with his sister destroys the current procedure, a system of mutual obligations. He behaves not as accepted in humans and therefore deserves the most merciless punishment: murder, castration. The main thing is that such behavior contributes chaos into the system of related relationships. This circumstance is very important to understand the attitude towards the instications in the subsequent, non-corporal. Incest remains incessant, i.e. exclusively shameful and shameless act, regardless of whether he is committed by his own father or stepfather, is there any danger of inbreeding or sexual relationship is carried out in this way that he knowically excludes the birth of offspring. The difference here and high-quality, and purely quantitative. And in that and in another case, the holiness of a related relationship is deficient - the very deep base of morality. The most radical culture condemns what destroys its foundation.

Exogaminal regulation of marriage played an important role in the development of mankind. First, banning sexual attractions towards relatives, she contributed to the creation of unprecedented before, purely human relations - related duties and affections. Their development led ultimately to enrich the inner world of man. Along with the domination system, a completely new system of mutual support and patronage has arisen: paternity, fraternity, maritime, etc. The connection of human efforts and abilities has become possible without violence and coercion, based on the generally accepted and stored by traditions of order ..

Secondly, Exogamia served as a limitation of intergroup hostility. Thanks to her, the possibilities of turning "others" in "their own" were expanded. IN primitive society Alien, as neither paradoxically, could be the object of murder, rebuilding or implementing matrimonial intentions. An alternative between the ability to be eaten and the ability to make marriage was considered ordinary.

The mysterious nature of shame. In the generic, a strict hierarchical principle of the organization of the community continued, as mentioned, act, but changed his character. The place of the individual in the hierarchy began to be determined not so much by the real confusion of forces, but an assessment of public opinion. Under these conditions, the dependence of the individual from the immediate environment has been paramount importance and, it became, the sensitivity to its judgments and prescriptions. All this contributed to strengthening the role of shame in social life in general and in relations between the floors in particular.

According to the well-known conclusion of Russian philosopher V.S.Soloviev, the sense of sexual shame does not depend on any practical needs of a person. "An independent and initial meaning of the feeling of shame would be eliminated if it was possible to tie this moral fact with some material benefit for individuals or for the kind in the struggle for existence. In this case, the shame could be explained as one of the manifestations of the animal instinct of self-preservation. individual or public. But it is precisely such a connection and it is impossible to find " (Solovyov V. S. Justification of good. Moral philosophy // op. In 2 t. M., 1988. T. 1. P. 124-125).

Indeed, the mysterious phenomenon of shame cannot be removed directly from human practitioners. The shy, the shy man more often loses what wins in the struggle for achieving certain vital benefits with less scrupulous and sensitive competitors. No wonder Shakespeare spoke of the power of shamelessness. However, this power does not mean that the shame is completely deprived of practical importance. The meaning of this behavioral mechanism is to maintain the qualities, abilities, the appearance and actions of the subject at the level of public opinion requirements. Shame is practically significant, but not in a narrow-utilitarian, but in a wider socio-cultural relation. The mistake of V. S. Solovyov consisted that he, following the centers of idealistic ethics by Kant and Hegel, believed that a person was ashamed of his material nature, natural deposits and functions of his body (see ibid. S. 123). In fact, a person is ashamed of his physicity, but loss of control over her (and above mental functions too), and in such situations, when public opinion prescribes it to preserve, and other people can do it.

It is directed directly against what is evaluated as licenses, i.e., internal imperfection, inferiority dependent on the subject itself.

The connection of shame with exogamy can be found in a peculiar customary of mutual avoidance or, "mutual non-teaching", practiced by many primitive peoples. The system of kinship that determines the standards of behavior contained among other things the requirement to avoid someone, to limit relations with anyone, to exercise diligence in communication, etc. The Australian Aborigines should avoid his mother-in-law, testing, brother of his wife or her husband sister and Brother mother wife. Persons consisting in such a relationship, more precisely, the property should shy away from the face-to-face meetings and not to pronounce each other's names. The restrictions were sometimes so stringent that there was a special language for communicating son-in-law and mother-in-law. The avoidance was distributed not only to real relatives, but also on classifications.

Shame and value chastity.

The presence of young people of low social rank, forced for some time to live bachelors generates demand for extramarital sex. This demand can be satisfied again. Or communication with women who are out of marriage. But the first path loosened family bonds, and the second led to the ejection of individual women from the family circle into the sphere of an indiscriminate relationship. Civilization preferred the second path and formed a layer of women whose sexual life was built on a promiscitic basis.

This is clearly traced that the regularity that the monopolization of sex not only does not exclude the Promomiscite, but even stimulates it. When the ability to create a family is real not for everyone, but only for the selected, losers are forced to be content with surrogates. For the sake of strengthening the family, humanity sacrificed part of his representatives, making them a kind of "goats of the vacation" and rewarded for this idle and luxurious clothes. This process began in primarity, but the completed forms acquired in a class society when religion exalted chastity as such - not only marital loyalty, but also a prefabricant virginity.

The primitive culture of such a value of chastity has not yet attached. This can be seen, in particular, by the fact that a woman who was married and having a marriage experience is sometimes higher than that that comes out to marry for the first time. In some natives, the girl has a certain time at the disposal of men's clubs, where each of the members could at any time show their rights on them; And then, in a few years, they got married, most often for one of the club members. The so-called "Nasamonian Custom" is also evidenced by the so-called "Nasamonian Custom", according to which all guests present at the wedding take turns in turn of the bride, and the custom of the prebrid defloration (deprivation of virginity) of girls by fathers, sorcerers, leaders, etc. Finally, This indicates the practice to give up his wives guests in hospitality.

Since the chastity meant nothing more than anything, trading by itself or his closest achievements of any benefits was not considered in primitive society shameful. With all the tendency to mythology, a savage or barbarian looked at such things extremely simple. The sexual need was as natural for him as the need for food or in vacation. Of course, no self-respecting savage will make love publicly, but also the adoption of food some of them considered it such a delicate that it could not be performed in the presence of outsiders.

480 rub. | 150 UAH. | $ 7.5 ", Mouseoff, Fgcolor," #FFFFCC ", BGColor," # 393939 ");" Onmouseout \u003d "Return nd ();"\u003e Dissertation period - 480 rub., Delivery 10 minutes , around the clock, seven days a week and holidays

Samoilov Evgeny Voldemarovich. Cultural prohibitions as a factor of economic activity: dis. ... Dr. Form. Sciences: 24.00.01: Rostov N / D, 2004 267 c. RGB OD, 71: 05-9 / 74

Introduction

Chapter I. Culture as a prohibitive Regulator of Economic Activities 18

1.1. Culture and type of economy 18

1.3. Culture "Shame" and "fear" as regulating economic activity 43

Chapter II. The historical dynamics of cultural prohibitions in the economy 53

2.1. Cultural prohibitions in the economic sphere traditional society 53

2.2. Cultural prohibitions in the economy of the new time. 76.

2.3. Modern innovative economy in the field of cultural restrictions 93

Chapter III. "Archaization" of culture and archaeization of the economy in the period of the crisis development of society: the destruction of the norms of the ban 122

3.1. Cultural norms Prohibition and sociocultural degradation 122

3.2. "Demoralization" economic Culture and "Archaization" of the norm of prohibition 135

Chapter IV. The problem of cultural prohibitions in the context of the social responsibility of the entrepreneur 152

4.1. Social responsibility as a socio-cultural entrepreneurial limiter 152

4.2. Cultural prohibitions in the formation of the individualism of the modern entrepreneur 174

Chapter V. Socio-cultural conditions and limitations of the process of occurrence and development of Russian entrepreneurship 194

5.1. Socio-cultural status of the pre-revolutionary Russian entrepreneur 194

5.2. Cultural conditions for the formation of social responsibility of Russian business 214

5.3. Modern Russian entrepreneurs as a socio-cultural community 2.29

Conclusion 250.

Literature 253.

Introduction to work

The relevance of research.Right now in early XXI in. The crisis trends of modern civilization are increasingly obvious, and society, headed by a traffic point of technical and technological innovations, seemingly looking for an exit in extrechnic, out-economic spheres. The cultural determinant becomes the force that gives an acceleration to society on the way out of the crisis. Where there was a "society", "culture" (Becking) became one of the conclusions of social studies of our time. The principal importance is acquired by the explication of the sociocultural essence of the economic process, as the most important constitutional part of public progress.

The natural and social catastrophe is inevitably produced by the economy based on a bare idea of \u200b\u200bprofit. Unlike traditional society, where there is a whole system, as "check-in-law" says, in the form of religious rites, customs, ritual forms of communication, etc., regulating the acts of commercial exchange, there are no such prohibitive mechanisms in a market economy. Of course, there is a developed system of law, which, however, is an external controlling force in relation to the economic element. The absolutization of the liberal principles of the capitalist economy leads to the elimination of the cultural and restraining principle.

Sharp changes that occurred in our country during the transition to a market economy requiring an individual of a greater individual initiative, making responsibility for. Own fate, meet, on the one hand, significant resistance in the established "traditionalist" cultural models of behavior, and on the other hand, can lead to the disintegration of society, who has denied traditions in favor of unrestrained novelty. Hence the ultimate need

5 definitions of human readiness to perceive social change and finding possible boundaries of his behavior in the "era of change".

The technocratic approach to the study of economic phenomena is becoming less and more popular, because the modern economy is focused primarily not on an individual as a purely economic agent, but on a holistic person who is in a complex system of factors interacting in society: social, cultural, national, etc. From here it is clear that the conceptual reflection of this social institution and business entities is quite possible from the point of view of theoretical cultural studies with an adequate methodological apparatus, which allows to explore a complex continuum of sociocultural tissue of society. A particularly relevant problem under study is for our country, where the formation of a socially responsible Institute of Employment and the corresponding type of personality of an active agent of economic changes is a pressing and theoretically inevitable task.

The degree of development of the problem.In your research we
Recommend primarily on the classics of sociocultural thought, exploring
This problem in a variety of aspects: A. Smita, B. Franklin,
I. Bank, J.Kains, M. Marks, M. Deber, R. Franca, E.Fromma,
"H.Lampert, M.Tugan-Baranovsky, P. Struv, S. Bulgakov, P.Budje,

T.Veblen, V. Zombart, y.Shumpeter, etc.

Problems for the inclusion of economic entities in
context of cultural, social, political life Societies, their
Personal characteristics and ethical norms of behavior and orientation
considered such authors as A.I.Ageev, T.I. Zaslavskaya,
L.V. Babaeva, S.Kaymanakov, R.Hizrich, V.K. Korolev, N.N. Kulikova, R. Huber,
R.G.Apresyan, N.N. Zarubina, R. Frederick, E.Petry, R. Tretener,

A.I. Prigozhin, etc.

Interesting position A. Smita, who analyzed
contradiction between the real parameters of the economic

people's activities and subjective ideas about it. Hence the value of the personal factor for studying the phenomenon of entrepreneurship was displayed. In general, classical political economy operates primarily by the categories of "capital", "labor" and "raw materials", without fixing the features of the sociocultural status and the social significance of the "living" business entities: "merchant", "entrepreneur", "employer".

Capitalistic type of personality is deeply analyzed in
Classic works K.Marks and F. Engels. In Marxism developed
Categories such as "alienation", "Capitalist form

operation "," Labor division ". All this gave the basis for criticizing the social position of the capitalist of the XIX century, oriented primarily to reach the profit of" at any cost ". According to K. Marks and F. Engels, all moral and cultural restrictions disappear for capitalist, "Having reached" an increased rate of profit.

Of particular importance is a series of studies of the classic

socio-cultural thought M. Deber. In his interpretation, the entrepreneur "Protestant Asksua" is the "ideal type", social personality, with the emergence of which is connected by a fracture in the development of commodity-monetary relations and society as a whole. Cultural prohibitions and rigid prescriptions for the entrepreneur of this period were associated with the fulfillment of religious debt in front of themselves and God. It is honest, methodical, ascetic economic activities He was a way to save the soul, and capital in this culture was perceived as a visible, material proof of the fulfilled religious debt. Thus, the entrepreneur "Protestant Asksua" acted as a sample of social activities, which was manifested by his social significance. At the same time, cultural prohibitions in economic activity (such as on the waste of capital for personal needs, on the "spending" of time, on deception

7 unintellite, etc.), although they acquired a religious form of their existence, but became deep internal, personal quality entrepreneur of this type.

The problem of restrictive and prohibitive rules in culture is very relevant and discussed - especially in turning and crisis periods of development of society. In a number of philosophers who discussed this problem, we will find both Plato, and T.GBBS, and M. Foux and others.

Note that currently exists various methods Classification of norms. So, allocated, for example, the norms of universal, national, class, group, mertine-pervalted. This is another classification: it highlights the norms that establish orders in society as a whole and in the components of its groups - economic norms, political norms, the norms of culture, which relate to the field of communication and socialization. For E. Hiddens, the norm, as a rule, sociocultural behavior are prescriptive or prohibiting certain Type behavior. In ethnography and cultural studies after the work of Levi-Stros, there was an idea of \u200b\u200bculture as a system of additional restrictions. At the prohibitive nature of cultural norms, Y.M.lotman drew attention. In his structural cultural formation, he expressed the idea that culture in principle is a system of norms and prohibitions, restrictions and permits. From here the content of the cultural norm consists of three modes: must, is prohibited and allowed. The fact that culture exists primarily through prohibitions, stressed V.K. Korolev.

However, the problem of compatibility of norms and prohibitions imposed by culture on human activity, and its implementation in economic and economic life remains relevant. It suffices to recall the well-known work of the Swiss theologian and the economist Arthur Rich, the founder of the Institute of Social Ethics in Zurich - "Economic Ethics". Continuing research by M. Deber and G.Vyunsha, he puts the following problem: how can a person in the conditions of modern industrial

8
society combine the commandment (it can be called forbidden norm)
Jesus Christ "Can't serve God and Mammon" with the requirements
economic life, which are presented to any modern
enterprise to be cost-effective, profitable,
Effective. These ethical arguments are transformed into concepts,
Confecting the essence of modern entrepreneurship.

Neoclassical, rationalistic, individualistic approach (F. Hayek and M.Fridmen) "utilizes" the individual and relieves the problem of his responsibility, cultural maturity, etc. On the other hand, there is a socio-conservative paradigm, ideas about a person as originally morally damaging and often an irrational creature, which requires the urban of strong power, order, authority to send it to the path of serving society.

Historical and cultural view of the interaction of the rules of culture (including prohibitive) and the economic sphere of the life of society have demonstrated such well-known researchers as M. Mosms, B. Malinovsky, L. Shuyt, J. Dyumezel, and others. For J.Bay, modern society With his fetishization of economic processes, there is a society of "production madness", in contrast to societies of ritual consumption, military enterprise and religious enterprise. In the most general form, a cultural view on the history of the economy was manifested in the works of K. Polania, in which he allocates three main stages of historical and economic development.

Thus, the undertaken analysis of the interaction of culture and economy, prohibitive norms of culture and economic activity recorded the existence of a wide variety of theoretical positions - from the recognition of the decisive nature of the regulatory and value sphere on the economic subsystem of the Company to the idea of \u200b\u200bremoving any moral, religious restrictions in its assessment.

We also note that consideration of literature on this issue shows that the phenomenon of the actions of cultural norms of the prohibition in the economy is investigated outside its historical concreteness and as a result of this suffers from some abstraction and empirity. The scientific and practical need to study this problem requires the use of both interdisciplinary approaches and the development of the existing theoretical basis on this issue.

Object researchthe work is the cultural regulation of economic vital activity of people.

Subject of researchthe historical dynamics and the specifics of the impact of the "prohibitive" rules of culture on the economy are performed.

The purpose of the dissertation workit is the consideration of the essence of cultural prohibitions as regulatory activities.

Achieving this goal is carried out through the decision of the following tasks:

- consider culture as a restrictive mechanism
economic activity;

reveal the historical dynamics of cultural prohibitions in the economy;

the characteristics of the cultures of "shame" and fear "in the context of the main problem of the dissertation;

analyze the processes of degradation and "archaeization" of culture and economics in the context of the crisis development of society;

Fix the role of cultural prohibitions in determining the measure
social responsibility of entrepreneurs;

Show sociocultural conditions and process limitations
The emergence and development of Russian entrepreneurship.

Methodological and theoretical foundations of the study.This work is based on a sociocultural approach to the study of complex social entities. Significantly used cultural and analytical methods developed by such classics

10 social scientists, like M. Deber and Zimmel. Cultural prohibitions in this context are considered as holistic phenomena, implementing various functions depending on the social, historical and sociocultural context. The phenomena under study arises during the interaction of people, social groups and public structures. Social analysis here is carried out in unity with the cultural and personal aspects of the study of the problem. The works of philosophers of the Rostov Cultural School are important here: Yu.A.vdanova, V.E. Davidovich, G.V. Scharcha, V.K. Korolev, E.M.Liss, El.S. Roszhabek, O.M.shtompel and Others.

The theoretical design of the thesis was also constructed using a dialectical method for detecting contradictions in socio-cultural phenomena, dialectics of freedom and necessity, a comparative historical method, elements of a structural and functional approach were used.

In the course of the study, a number of theoretical concepts formed in modern philosophy and the theory of culture were used: "Remedistine Economics" (K. Polania), "Economics individuals"((Kleiner)," Cultural Warvarization "(Y.Hayazing)," Archaic Capitalist "(M. Deber and Yu.Davydov)," Prohibition standards "(Y.Lotman)," Cultural Constant "(Equilor), etc.

Scientific noveltythe dissertation is determined by the fact that in it: - the need to introduce into the circulation of theoretical cultural research of the problems of cultural norms of restriction and prohibition as cultural constants regulating the economic activity of individual and society is substantiated;

The specifics of cultural prohibitions have been revealed. in .. ladder modern societiesassociated with the processes of sacralization, secularization in the economic sphere and technocratic innovation of society;

the sociocultural mechanisms of "shame" and "fear" as limiters of economic activity are recorded;

the historical dynamics of negative cultural estimates of a number of economic phenomena are traced;

It is shown "that the processes of degradation and" archaeization "of culture
include cultural anomy (destruction not only social
meaningful, positive, but also forbidden norms) and are necessary
the context of the "archaeization" of the economy during the crisis period;

the concept of "social responsibility" of the entrepreneur "is determined - a sustainable regulatory and value structure, which includes cultural prohibitions as a" lower boundary ";

the need for the formation of social and meaningful individualism as an "internal limiter" is shown. russian entrepreneurs In the context of the specifics of the historical formation of economic culture in our country

The following main provisions are made on the defense:1. Dichotomy "Positive" - \u200b\u200b"prohibitive" culture rate is a universal dual opposition, which makes the economic sphere of the life of society "understandable" people, it forces "economically", immersing them in a certain "semantic field". In traditional society, the economy did not exist in "pure form", for it was inextricably linked with the world of culture, first of all - with a sacred, religious world, where various kinds of ritual prohibitions played a major role. In the economy "Dara" and "Carnival", economically acquitted prohibitions were periodically filmed during the festive mysteries, representing blood-related relationships in the exchange acts between the "manufacturer" and "consumer", etc. Cultural ban on accumulation, turns around here by approving the primacy of ritualized consumption before production.

In the redistribution economy where political interests

dominate the economic, prohibitions of ideological and

the political sense "enter" economic activity into the world

"High political culture."

In a market economy, an individual acting as a rational independent being is based on a bare idea of \u200b\u200bprofits and is beyond the values \u200b\u200band norms of a sacred or political nature. Unlike traditional society, where there is a whole system of "cost-counterweights" in the form of religious rites, customs, ritual forms of communication, etc., regulating the acts of trade exchange, industrial society with market economies with such prohibitive mechanisms does not possess. Of course, there is a developed system of law, which, however, is an externally controlling force in relation to the economic element. The absolutization of the liberal principles of the capitalist economy leads to the elimination of the cultural and restraining principle.

2. Cultural prohibitions are implemented mainly due to two sociocultural mechanisms - shame and fear. The fundamental confrontation "We" and "they" (B.Porshnev) identifies, determines and formats the human activity, as a result of which, within the framework of the social community, "we" act primarily by the mechanisms of shame, and in relation to "they", regulation occurs through "fear". The methodological approach It is quite suitable for determining the prohibitive sociocultural regulators of individual behavior in the economic and economic sector. In certain historical conditions, the dominant sociocultural and psychological mechanism regulating economic relations becomes fear. This is typical of totalitarian type societies: where government restrictions on economic activity are strong, and for society located in the situation of the devastating crisis.

13 Of course, no "fear economy" nor the "shame economy" in pure form does not exist, but at various stages historical Development This or another psychological and sociocultural regulatory can prevail.

In general, the pre-industrial society represented by its leading ideologues has negatively related to income related activities. It was assessed by both an anticultural or, at least, and exercise and existed on the periphery of both ancient and Christian cultural worlds.

4. Modern economic innovation process develops *
antique way. His external knowledge-rational component and
Based on it. Actually social activities by. Implementation
innovations are in contradiction with the current steadily
The motivational system of an individual, based primarily
on self-identification. As a result, an innovative phenomenon arises

14
anomy, that is, the discrepancies of social and value in the process
innovation of innovations. The essence of innovation we consider from the standpoint
Dynamic procedural conflicting interaction

social and cultural elements of innovation. Socio-cultural innovation is what is being implemented successful (or unsuccessfulwise) in society, producing one or another socio-cumulative effect. Modern civilization It is characterized by the prevailing of the innovations of the information plan at the explicit degradation of the prohibiting, valuely prescriptive sphere. This circumstance is one of the most important brakes in the implementation of economic innovations.

5. Archaicization is a sociocultural process of simplifying, to prejudice the complex social system, which, having reached the extreme point of the peak of the crisis, rapidly degrades to those forms of social and cultural life, which would seem to have long been traveled.

One of of essential factors, "Provoking" appearance
The capitalist of the archaic type is in the field of "nanoeconomics", in
Personal, cultural and determined behavior of managers
enterprises. It is the features of this behavior and determine in
Solving the specifics of the Russian economy on modern
f-stage as a kind of "economy of individuals", in which interests

the leaders of various ranks caused by their institutional regulations play a subordinate role in relation to their own interests as individuals.

It is in this field that cultural and historical factors cause the economic behavior of the individual are a special role. Moreover, in the context of the processes of the archaeization of the culture, the inconspicuous base system of values \u200b\u200band ideals, the orientation of individualism and the situational moral choice of "prohibitive" culture function weakens, which leads to negative consequences.

6. In terms of degrading society, succeeds, as a rule,
People who have an archaic mental constitution. They seek
Success due to its moral "thick", moral
Failure to lack a sustainable ethical and psychological structure
Personality. They confess the principles of "situational ethics", where good and evil with
Easily change in places depending on their ideas about the benefit
For themselves, for them, in principle, there are no cultural norms of prohibition, even though
Somehow limiting behavior based on principles
individual "benefit". Another thing - people who have high
moral and mental constitution containing deep and most
Significant cultural layers, internal peripity heritage
Past eras. They are not capable of frank sociocultural reduction
its moral nature, for human development in this case
Exercises itself as a degenerate property of an individual, system
clearly established cultural prohibitions, through which he stopped not
can.

7. Measure of the social responsibility of the entrepreneur as
Socio-cultural regulatory stabilizes the existence of this
societies optimizes the social behavior of active subjects
management legitimizes in public consciousness Institute
Entrepreneurship through the establishment of a certain sustainable
Regulatory value structure. The latter includes the lower
The limit (cultural ban), medium (norm) and upper (ideal). On the
Quantitative "scale" Social Responsibility Measures
entrepreneur can be allocated (depending on the approach to
the lower mark or to the upper, ideal state) different points,
characterizing the amount, intensity _ and depth .Osocial
responsible factor in business people.

8. The concept of "Social Responsibility of the entrepreneur" is wearing
internally contradictory, since the entrepreneur always

is an individualist building its life and economic
Strategy depending on its own goals and tasks. Individualism I.
Responsibility in this case is the identity of the opposites,
Interconnecting and mutual each other. Formal
"Easy" denial of social responsibility stands

"Social irresponsibility", and dialectical - social freedom.

9. Cultural restrictions acting in the form of auxiliary accumulation that has lost their religious and value character, can act as an antithesis by the basic moral, cultural, social values \u200b\u200bof Russians.

The concept of "social individualism" most accurately characterizes the essence of the social responsibility of the entrepreneur of the Epoch of the Postindustrial Society with its reorientation to meet the diverse and all the time of changing human needs. The basic feature of the presentation of the modern entrepreneur is social individualism, which involves the formation of a "internal policeman", a conscious system of cultural prohibitions, self-restraints and conscious orientation on socially significant goals, during the implementation of which capital works and as a means of meeting the public needs, and as a means of self-realization of creative " I, "an active business entity and profit as fixing the success of entrepreneurial activity.

The drama of the modern becoming Russian capitalism is that the capitalism is in many respects wearing wild, uncivilized character, which, naturally, is denied both by the world community and the Russian people himself.

Scientific and practical significance of the study.The results of the dissertation work allow to deepen theoretical ideas in the field of the theory of culture, social philosophy and economic theory associated with the problems of cultural regulation of the economic sphere

17 societies, finding ways to renew Russian society. The results obtained can be used in teaching common and special courses on cultural studies, social philosophy. They matter for practical activities of politicians and managers. various levels.

Approbation of work.The main provisions and conclusions of the dissertation study were reported and discussed at scientific conferences of various levels, published during 1997-2004. In 18 scientific papers (including in two monographs).

The dissertation structure.The text of the work consists of an introduction, five chapters, including 13 paragraphs, conclusions and a list of used literature.

link1 Culture and Economy Type Link2

The problem of the relationship between the economy and culture is old as the world and one of the main conclusions, to which modern humanitarianism comes, the following: these two spheres, the parties of the existence of a public person do not just affect each other, they can only exist through synthesis, one thing - through another. "There is no history of the economy ... if the economy ... is not in the" meaning field ", making the economy with understandable people as it is the" economy "and allowing them to act accordingly" economically ". But this "semantic field" is induced by moral practitioners, its "power lines" is asked by the general concepts that "good" and that "badly", that "desirable" and that "disgusting" that "permissible" and that "is notacle ", Which are entirely leaving the moral definitions of people as people. And only then and only due to this, the definitions of people as the "merchant", "buyer" are formed.

Based on this, Alain Tour Rosen put the task "to rescue modernity from its own historical tradition, which reduced it to (instrumental) rationalization, and introduce the subject of a personal subject and subjectivation."

If you take modern eraYou can, of course, talk about a special type of historical and cultural consciousness, arising from the number of links in relation to modern public institutional orders. However, this type of consciousness in no way cannot be replaced by the "institutional history" of capitalism or the economy. Important role Here: Plays: Dynamics of contradictions tool and regulatory. rationality. Therefore, the history of modernity cannot be adequately represented in the form of "Phiization of ethical ideas" and their progressive stroke. The history of culture is not a cumulative process of accumulation and "purification" from contradictions and illusions of a certain value content, leading ultimately to the ideal. New cultural sense accumulate not only and, perhaps, not so much by the Gegelian method of "removal" of old, and as a result of the reaction to the occurrence of threats to the moral core of society by instrumental rationality as in the economy, so by other areas. This, in fact, the inecilious contradiction is not overcome by the final way by destroying one of its parties, but is permitted by restoring its parties at the new level.

Cultural analysis of economic problems spent famous philosopher J. Batay, who founded his research on the "theory of general economy". As a basis of reasoning, he elects the problem of the specifics of the use of the surplus product and cultural and determined forms of its consumption. It determines his economy law: "The society as a whole always produces more than necessary to maintain his life, it has an excess. And the essence of society is due precisely how it uses this excessive: an excess becomes the cause of unrest, structural changes and the basis for the entire history of society. " The French researcher shows that there were no particularly distinguished areas of the sphere that operates according to its own laws, which is called economically oriented scientists as an economy, where economic laws actually operate. Outstanding Russian cultural scientist M.L. Bakhtin at one time drew attention to the carnival character medieval culture. Carnival is before, all, exemption from the former official prohibitions and the sphere of free gaming and creative culture. In a society, where labor productivity was extremely small and there was a clear need for saving and accumulating economic wealth, the spirit of the removal of economic prohibitions and unrestrained consumption during the period of carnival mysteries was dominated. In large cities of Western Europe, two thirds of the annual cycle were occupied by various kinds of carnivals. "The festival (anything) is a very important primary form of human culture. I cannot withdraw and explain from the practical conditions and goals of social labor or is an even more vulgar form of explanation - from the biological (physiological) need for periodic rest. The festival has always had a significant and deep semantic, minor-precision content. No "exercise" in organizing and improving the socio-labor process, no "game in labor" and no vacation or passage in labor themselves can never become festive. So that they become festive, they should join something from the other sphere of being, from the sphere of spiritual and ideological. They should receive a sanction not from the world of funds and required conditions, and from the world of the highest goals of human existence, that is, from the world of ideals. Without this there is no and there can be no festivity. "

Cultural prohibitions in the economic sphere of traditional society

The idea of \u200b\u200bwealth and poverty is a dualary couple of opposites, evolutionary cultural constants, which characterizes the state of the spiritual world of any era. Recall, for example, the Homeric "oriad", where the characteristics of the main acting persons They are carried out including on the basis of the principle of possessing a large or smaller number of ships. Hence, the richest king - Agamemenon becomes the leader, the "king of the kings", the head of the raid on Troy. It can be said that the dispute of Achille and Agamemnon on the possession of deserved or undeserved military prey (Chrysides and Brisadis) is one of the first in history european Culturewhere the problem of the equitable distribution of property and the intervention of power in the process of this distribution is solved. It is primarily not just about the beautiful women, but about the possibility of material ransom, because beauty in the representation of the ancient Greek included not only the harmony of forms, but also possession of its material equivalents in the form of a ransom, family wealth, weapons, etc. However, already at Ovid we encounter reflections on the controversy of human nature, which may not resist the temptation of wealth and power. Lucretia in the poem "On the nature of things" speaks of the wrong wealth, for everyone during the military hike is enough prey arbitrarily, caring only about himself. .

Antique thinkers comprehend new economic phenomena primarily through the category of measures. When Plato says that wealth corps people's luxury souls, and poverty communicates to shamelessness, he thinks here first of all as a social philosopher. From his point of view, everything is given by the nature of man, and his misfortune is that it becomes insatiable, and not in the number of property. In the same spirit, Cicero and Seneca, talking about the benefits of leaning - "not to be waste - income", "Higher Wealth is the lack of greed." It is not important for the socio-economic status of an individual, not the size of his property, but the violation of harmony and the measures of human life, which consists in non-life, the thirst is increasingly more and more luxury. No wonder Epicur said: "My contentment is the greatest of all wealth."

In antiquity, special attention is paid to the cultural foundations of the "perverted" economic situation. It turns out that a violation of the measure (in this case - possession of something over the measure) creates a special, nasty human nature type of activity and the crown, aimed at senseless gaining everything more Goods, pleasures, meaningless accumulation of money. IN literary works The antiquity of the thirst for super defeat becomes the belonging of a farce hero, which lives on the principle of the proclaimed Horacie - "with the growth of wealth and concern" 48. A similar rich is not sleeping at night, for protects the house from robbers, tertolizes and drives his children to the street, deprives them of inheritance. For modern Western European culture, the opposition of two cultural images is characterized by a hero and antihero, a bourgeois-entrepreneur who has an employment ethos, and lazy-grab. We do not find anything like that in antiquity. Both poverty and wealth are equally condemned, are forms of deviant behavior within the framework of this culture that violates harmony and measure.

In general, the pre-industrial society represented by its leading ideologues has negatively related to income related activities. It was evaluated as an anticultural or, at least, the total activity, and. Sovage on the periphery_ as an ancient, -. So. and the Christian cultural worlds. Recall the "most versatile head among the ancient Greeks" - Aristotle, who clearly divided the "Crystics" and

Antique aphorisms. Minsk, 1987. P.76. Actually "economy". Creation as economic activities related to making a profit is considered a unworthy free citizen. Another business is an economy defined by stabita as an art of meeting the natural needs of the individual and his family. By nature, its person has its own way to produce food. Each living creature also provides its own vital needs in its own way. Some of the people are professionally engaged in hunting, fishing, agriculture or war. This corresponds to human nature, where the desire for acquisition is limited by the natural borders of consumption.

A fundamentally different character is trembling, since it is aimed at enrichment without any limits. There is a kind of "bad infinity", where the purpose of the activity is not to ensure their life and the lives of loved ones, and the infinite accumulation of money. By itself, the exchange act of exchange is not an anti-cultural act, but it is from here that the crevices grow - "the art of tositive the state" is absurd and anticultural essentially. Aristotle wrote: "The art of supporting the condition is two: on the one hand, it belongs to the field of trade, on the other hand, to the field of household, and the latter is due to the need and deserves praise, the exchange of justice activity causes reasons as an activity due to non-natural causes. .. "49. Thus, in the ancient era, entrepreneurial activity turned out of the cultural continuum of society, was evaluated negatively. The cultural and developed individual of that time is the one who, in fact, ceases to engage business activities, For onalochellastic nature. "

Cultural norms of prohibition and sociocultural degradation

Modern social science focuses on their attention on the problems expressing destruction, degradation, threats and fears associated with the "transit-revolutionary" state of the Russian society. Culturalists, political scientists and sociologists are concerned about the creation of the concept of national security, discuss the problems of "social pathology" and indicate the "epidemiological" level of fear. In cultural and sociological literature, terminology borrowed from the medical spheres and the theory of catastrophes is increasingly used.: "Progressive paralysis" (Y.Davydov), "Decay", "Agony" (N.Miseyev), "Bifurcation", "Chaos" ( V.Ilin), "Social Pathology", "Mutnight", "Disintegration" (A.Aakhezer), "Fear", "Catastrophic Consciousness" (L.Gudkov, V.Subkin, V. Ladov), "Asthenic syndrome" ( Y.Levada). All this terminological manifold is associated with the borrowing of the commodities of the necessary concepts from other areas of knowledge, caused by the lack of general theoretical developments according to these issues.

The term "degradation" itself comes from the lat. Degredior (Degradior) and literally means "go down, descend, go out, deleted." From here, it stems its main importance in Russian: "Gradual deterioration, reduction or loss positive qualities"(See: Soviet Encyclopedicia" - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia, 1980) .. This term has no direct antonym, as, for example, the concepts of progress "and" regress ", although it is meaningful to describe the process of gradual improvement and acquisition of positive qualities. . With this understanding, the concept under consideration is substantially close to the term "degeneration" used in biology, psychology and psychiatry.

However, there are also serious meaningful differences between the concepts of "crisis" and "degradation". In most social science, the crisis is understood from the standpoint of a dialectical tradition laid by Gegel. The crisis is a natural and essential attribute of social development. It contains not only the processes of destruction and destruction, but also the emergence of a qualitatively new, progressive, is essentially its jump from one qualitative state to another.

This plan is interesting for the work of Psorozin, devoted to the problems of sociocultural dynamics. He, continuing a dialectical tradition and enriching her deep knowledge of cultural changes in Russia and in the West, considered a crisis not as a finite, but as a transitional state in the development of culture. In this case, he contrasted his conceptual vision of sociocultural development to the ideas of Oshpenger, who seen in the crisis of culture, her agony, death, destruction and disintegration.

In the philosophical sense, the opposite of the degradation process is improvement, movement to the ideal, higher form of harmonization of social and cultural. If perfection (like any ideal) is a goal, then the process of improvement is infinite (in the framework of the life of a separate person and humanity as a whole). This process can be implemented only in activities, because the process of improving being is carried out through the desire for activities. Of all the benefits, to which a person seeks, one is improved by his body, others are improving his knowledge and mind. But a special place among them occupies a moral good, for it improves the essence of a person, awakens sleeping in

Degradation in society occurs both at the level of lowering the objective status of a person, its place in the social relationship system (loss of work, imprisonment or to a concentration camp, forced migration, etc.) and at the level of its spirit (the loss of cultural prohibitions, moral lows and norms learned in the process of primary socialization of values, values, meanings of their own existence). Both are reflected in the methods, means, forms of external behavior. Whatever the primary in these processes, they are inextricably linked and in fact the two sides of the single process are mutually determined and reinforcing each other. This process is the reality of modern life. Thus, the analysis is derived from the level of society.

If you turn to the history of sociological thought, then the closest to such an understanding of the degradation P.Sorokin, which allocates its two signs is: lowering the rank and destruction of the unity of this group. The opposite of social degradation is social promotion103.

The concept of "degradation" is close in meaning to the concept of "deviant", but contains a fundamental difference. The term "deviant" means a social phenomenon expressed in relatively mass and sustainable forms of human activity that are not relevant to the norms and expectations in this society. The question arises: what is the criterion of deviation and what is its focus? From the point of view of Ya.I. China, deviating behavior can be both with a "minus" sign (negative, negative) and with a "plus" sign (positive: for example, scientific, artistic, technical creativity, requiring significant intellectual, emotional efforts which is not able to "medium" man) 104. Degradation is the process and the result of devianity with the "minus" sign, which includes the process of the destruction of the prohibitions existing in society. It is the characteristics of devianity ... serve as an indicator, a "mirror" of public life and "quality" of the population.

"The combination of humiliation with certain spiritual qualities is mainly as we will see further, with a falling out of the cultural tradition, leads to the fact that the desire to humiliate another is complemented by the desire to destroy. Here is such a complex that we often observe - meaningless destruction. [...]

M. Gorky It has repeatedly emphasized that the root of hooliganism is in boredom, and boredom is generated by non-recognition. The combination of inviolability with social abandonment, with humiliation generates a "slum complex" - a complex destructive; It breaks out in the form of rudeness. [...]

Culture - the thing is very good, of course, but she always shine us: do not do that, do not do it, it's a shame to do. After all, where does the culture begins? Historically - from prohibitions.

The law arises in society, and the first law: it is impossible to marry the sister and mother - it is physically possible, but culture prohibits. It is impossible, let's say something, suppose, is prohibited, in the Bible, there are rabbits. In some countries, there are devoted eggs, and in others it is forbidden to eat rotten eggs, but still something is prohibited.

You see, what a strange thing: the most necessary, simple, natural things - food and sex, and the ban is imposed on them. Here the culture begins with this.

Of course, the farther, the fact that the culture requires large bounces, great constraints, it reflects the feelings and turns just a person in an intelligent person. And therefore, certain people, especially people, by small cultural or oppressed their gray, social humiliation, really want to reset it all. Then there appears what appeared in the 20th century is the interpretation of freedom as complete freedom from human limitations. This is rudeness. [...]

For people with intelligent psychology, the regulatory property is shame, and for people the shameless regulatory property is fear: I do not do because I'm afraid.

So I would hit the child, but I am afraid that the policeman will be near, or I am afraid that someone else will hit me even more.

Shame is a feeling of a free man, and fear is a feeling of slave. Both belong to ethical feelings, to the sphere of prohibitions. But fear is a forced ban, external, and shame is a voluntary ban.

When people of privileged classes rise to the level of high intelligence and understand that they do not behave anything that would satisfy their mental and moral level, they are ashamed. Their existence is sent by a sense of guilt, guilt before those who feed them, guilt before the story, in front of the country, before themselves. By the way, a developed sense of shame is the damn of the noble intelligentsia, this is one of the best psychological traits that were created by culture.

Very often a man coming out of the people was permeated with demanding - I did not give me, I'll get, I'll get out, I would get barriers on my way. An intelligent, high-cultural person from the noblestone thought, and very early (often since childhood), that this is unfair that he enjoys what he was not right, and he became ashamed. The feeling of shame regulated a lot as we will see. It determined the courage of people going to death, in particular, and military courage. "

Lotman Yu.M., cycle of lectures "Culture and intelligence", lectures 1-6, cited by: personality psychology / ed. Yu.B. Hippenrater et al., M., "AST"; "Astrel", 2009, p. 563 and 569.

"Cultural prohibitions"

cultural Concept Sigmund Freud

Freud notes that it is impossible not to notice one of the most important properties Cultures - As far as culture is built on the refusal of impulse, it is so prerequisite for its dissatisfaction with powerful impulses. These "cultural prohibitions" dominate the huge area of \u200b\u200bsocial relations between people. It is known that they are the cause of hostility that all cultures are forced to fight. It is not easy to understand that in general to force the attraction to deviate from satisfaction. This is completely unsafe: if there is no economic compensation, then you can wait for serious violations.

The trend towards the restriction of sex life from the culture is manifested no less clearly than another tendency leading to the expansion of the cultural circle. Already the first phase of culture, Phase Totemisism, brought a ban on a bleeding ban with him - the ban, which probably, probably, the very deep wound of the human love life of a person. Through taboos, law, customs are introduced further restrictions on both men and women. The economic structure of society also affects the measure of remaining sexual freedom. Culture acts with the coercion of economic necessity, thereby takes away from sexuality a significant part of the mental energy, which culture takes advantage of its own purposes. The fear of the oppression of oppressed forces to introduce strictest precautions. The highest point of such development is found in western European culture. Bans and restrictions succeed only in organizing the unimpeded flow of sexual interests on permissible channels. Modern culture clearly makes it clear that sexual relations are allowed only in the form of a single and unspoken relationship between one man and one woman. Culture does not want to know sexuality as an independent source of pleasure and is ready to endure it only as an indispensable means of reproduction.

Culture is not satisfied by existing unions, it wishes to associate the members of the community libidonozno, uses for this purpose any means, encourages the establishment of strong identifications between community members. Culture mobilizes all the forces of the Libido inhibitors to reinforce the public unions of friendship relations. To fulfill this intention, it inevitably limits sex life.

Since culture requires a sacrifice to victim not only of sexuality, but also the aggressive tenders of a person becomes clearer, for which people are not easy to consider themselves to be "occasional". Cultural man Protected part of his possible happiness on partial safety. However, it should not be forgotten that in a primitive family only her head enjoyed such freedom to satisfy the impulse, all other lived enslaved. The contrast between enjoying the benefits of culture by the minority and deprived of these benefits was the majority, therefore, the maximum at the beginning of cultural existence. A thorough study of the tribes living in the primitive state, according to Freud's remark, it suggests that the freedom of their impulses will not envy: it is subject to restrictions of another kind, but perhaps even more stringent than that of a modern cultural person.