HISTORICAL MEMORY AND ETHNICITY IN THE URBAN ARCHITECTURAL ENVIRONMENT AS A FACTOR OF SOCIAL IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION IN THE CAPITALS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION REPUBLICS ON THE EXAMPLE OF IZHEVSK AND SARANSK

Abstract

The article analyzes the social practices of memorization and ethnicization in the process of post-Soviet transformation of the architectural landscape of the capitals of the Finno-Ugric republics, by the republican elites with the aim of constructing a stable regional identity of the capital’s population on the example of the Republic of Mordovia and the Udmurt Republic. The purpose of the study is to identify the basic social technologies for using the cultural and symbolic aspects of the urban architectural environment, including the historical and cultural heritage, and the newly created elements for the purpose of “memorial management” and to give ethnic flavor, the trends in their evolution and the main results of using such technologies in the post-Soviet period. Based on the data of standardized observation, the intensity of the concentration of ethnicization of the urban architectural environment is compared, the main places of concentration of signs of ethnicity and historical memory in the urban space of Izhevsk and Saransk, common features, strategic features, results and limitations in the research perspective of sociological concepts of identity politics, historical politics, city sociology, public spaces, “places” and “non-places” are identified. The main verbal (language of signs, slogans), monumental (sculpture, commemorative signs, architectural decoration of buildings, stairs, fountains, etc.), visual (social advertising, ethnic symbols in illuminations, holiday decoration of buildings) means of ethnicization of urban environment design are described, as well as architectural images that indicate alternative ethnic strategies for the formation of the capital’s identity. The general trends and problems associated with the redevelopment of the urban environment and the transformation of “arrogant” Soviet public spaces into places of recreation and communication are revealed. Among the limitations of the effectiveness of the historical policy and the policy of ethnicization of urban spaces, the author considers the conscious implementation of alternative strategies for the formation of urban identity by various social actors, the binding of iconic architectural objects to “empty” pseudo-public spaces or sports facilities that are not “anchor” objects, the creation of symbolic transit spaces in the status of “non-places”, the visual ethnic specificity of which is not available to those who use them.