Russian Science and Russian State: Image of a Scientist in Modern Russian Cinema
https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2014-2-35-184-192
Abstract
The article analyses the image of a scientist represented in recent Russian movies. The article discusses two groups of questions: (1) nature and role of popular science in the life of society; (2) national features of scientific cultures. The article agues that popular science should not be conceived as a week copy of the real science. On the contrary, modern models of science communication assume that popular science have its own value and is able to influence scientific practices. Simultaneously we assume, that since popular science is less integrated with international scientific norms, it can easer reveal national traditions of scientific life. As a result, the analyze of recent Russian movies shows that the tradition established in Peter I times for Russian scientists to work out their self-identity in concern with Russian state still exists (scientist- state supporter/scientist- oppositionist). Actually the modern interpretation of dilemma between state patriotism and liberalism given by modern movies shows that Russian scientist don't have real choice, because they loose anyway whereas the state always wins. So owing to recent movies this representation of hopeless destiny of a scientist is becoming widespread in Russian public culture.
References
1. Erekson M. Science, culture and society: understanding science in the 21st century. Malden, Policy Press. 2005. 224 p.
2. Gregory J. Miller, S. Science in public: communication, culture, and credibility. Cambridge, Basic books, 2000. 304 p.
3. Science and the media. Kennedy D. and Overholser G. (Eds). Cambridge, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2010. 96 p.
4. Handbook of public communication of science and technology. Bucchi M, Trench B (Eds.). London and New York, Routledge, 2008. 14 p.
5. Danwoody S. Science Journalism. Handbook of public communication of science and technology. Bucchi M, Trench B (Eds.). London and New York, Routledge, 2008. p. 15-26.
6. Cloitre M., Shinn T. Expository practice: social, cognitive and epistemological linkages./ Shinn, T. and Whitley, R. (eds) Expository Science. Forms and Functions of Popularization. - Dordrecht: Reidel, 1985, 31-60.
7. Поппер К. Предположения и опровержения. Рост научного знания. М.: АСТ, 2004. 640 с.
8. Kuhn T.S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962. 264 p.
9. Фуко М. Слова и вещи. Археология гуманитарных наук. М.: Прогресс, 1977. 488 c.
10. Bloor D. Knowledge and Social Imagery. 2nd edition. Chicago, Chicago University Press, 1991. 203 p.
11. Latour B. Science in action. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard university press, 1999. 288 p.
12. Knorr-Cetina K. Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999. 352 p.
13. Knowing and living in academic research: Convergences and heterogeneity in European research cultures. Felt, U. (Ed.). Prague, Czech Academy of Sciences, 2009. 242 p.
14. Коннов В.И. Влияние культурного контекста на развитие науки в России: социально-психологический взгляд //Вестник МГИМО-Университета. 2012. № 6. С. 242-249.
Review
For citations:
Medvedeva S.M. Russian Science and Russian State: Image of a Scientist in Modern Russian Cinema. MGIMO Review of International Relations. 2014;(2(35)):184-192. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2014-2-35-184-192
Views:
929
Email this article 