ТРАНСФОРМАЦИЯ РИТУАЛОВ В УСЛОВИЯХ РАЗВИТИЯ ИНТЕРНЕТ-ТЕХНОЛОГИЙ
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17213/2075-2067-2020-6-120-126Keywords:
ritual, ; polystylistic culture, ; transformations, ; Internet technologies, ; wedding, ritual; polystylistic culture; transformations; Internet technologies; weddingAbstract
The purpose of the research is to substantiate the influence of modern information technologies on changes in ritual practices during the implementation of ceremonial and ritual actions, in particular, on the interpretation of the meaning of marriage in modern mass culture.
The methodological basis of the research is the sociological theory of monostylistic and polystylistic culture by L. G. Ionin, the theory of interactive ritual by I. Hoffman, and the ideas of famous thinkers of our time U. Eco, Y. Habermas, necessary for understanding the issues under consideration. The research is also based on the research of ritual by the Russian scientist A. K. Baiburin, as well as on a number of modern works of Russian scientists who consider the transformation of rituals in the context of the development of Internet technologies.
Research result. The transition to polystylism in the production of cultural forms, the demonopolization of the sphere of creativity of cultural norms, the expansion of technical conditions for cultural creativity of citizens regardless of their level of cultural competence, the active inclusion of a wide layer of Internet users in this activity – all these conditions lead to the emasculation of the sacred core of cultural rituals. Most of the younger generations – Internet users – are actively involved in the destruction of rituals of this kind. But at the same time, the ritual is preserved as an external form of everyday activity – as a ceremonial or as a stereotypical form of behavior in specific situations.
The perspective of the research is a further sociological analysis of the transformation of rituals in the modern information society.
References
Гидденс Э. Социология. Изд. 2-е, . – М.: Едиториал УРС, 2005.
Ионин Л. Г. Социология культуры. – М.: Изд. Дом ГУ ВШЭ, 2000.
Breslow H. Civil Society, Political Economy, and the Internet // Virtual Culture: Identity and Communication in Cybersociety. – London: Sage. , 1997. – CP. 236–257.
Lievrouw L., Livingstone S. The Handbook of New Media: Social Shaping and Social Consequences of ICTs. – London: Sage. , 2006.
Статистика авторов социальных сетей [Электронный ресурс] // Brand Analytics. – Режим доступа: - https://br-analytics.ru/statistics/author/.
Бейненсон В. А. Актуальные проблемы медиапсихологии в условиях системы Web 2.0 // Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н. И. Лобачевского. Сер. Социология. Психология. Философия. – 2014,. – № №1(2). – С. 407- – 415.
Мельников М. В., Моисеева З. Ф. Граница между личным и публичным пространством и ее особенности на примере социальной сети Instagram // Теория и практика общественного развития. – 2016,. – № №10. – С. 31- - 39.
Эко. У. Утраченная укромность частной жизни // Эко У. Полный назад! ««Горячие войны»» и популизм в СМИ,. - – М.: Эксмо, 2007.
Байбурин А. К. Ритуал в традиционной культуре. Структурно-семантический анализ восточнославянских обрядов. – СПб: Наука. , 1993.
Гоффман И. Представление себя другим в повседневной жизни. – М.: Канон- – Пресс, 2000.