Home Releases 2022, №3 (43)


Philosophy of Culture , UDC: 17.02/.03 + 7.011 DOI: 10.25688/2078-9238.2022.43.3.5


  • Babitskaya Olga Petrovna
  • Serenkov Yurij Sergeevich Doctor of Cultural Studies, Associate Professor


The article outlines a range of issues related to the dynamics of the conceptual transformation of creative talent, genius and, more broadly, the patterns of creativity and genius in the context of historical and national civilizational paradigms. Assuming the importance of the presence of so-called ambivalent geniuses in national cultures who realize their scientific and practical productivity in two or more activity spheres, the authors characterize the emerging cultural situation in a post-information/ post-consumer society, justifying the urgent need of social systems for the appearance of people who incorporate the genius of a scientist, an artist, a public figure etc. Based on the research of domestic and foreign scientists, the authors outline points that can become a reference in the perspective of reviewing the criteria of genius in the society of people whose personality formation occurred during the conditional period of the so-called generation Z. Without setting the task of identifying the national-geographical component of the genius-ambivalent, the authors, nevertheless, turn to the latest cultural history of Finland in search of a figure that meets the criterion of genius in the actual sense of the word. Analyzing the career of Erkki Kurenniemi as a physicist, art critic, composer, entrepreneur, thinker-philosopher, the authors show the genius of Kurenniemi as a characteristically Finnish cultural phenomenon. Relying on the provisions of the theory of regional cultural texts, humanitarian geography, the theory of national mentalities and the philosophy of decostructivism, the authors come to the conclusion about the absolutization of the dependence between the stable development of the social system and the formation of new local brands, original products, determined, in turn, by the appearance and manifestation of genius — both at the regional and global levels.

How to link insert

Babitskaya, O. P. & Serenkov, Y. S. (2022). A GENIUS IN THE INTERIOR OF NATIONAL CULTURE Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 2022, №3 (43), 57. https://doi.org/10.25688/2078-9238.2022.43.3.5
1. 1. Babickaya, O. P., & Serenkov, Yu. S. (2018). K voprosu o nauke kak chasti kul`tury` i nauke kak kul’ture v sobstvennom smy`sle slova [On the question of science as part of culture and science as culture in the proper sense of the word]. Culture and Civilization, 8 (5 А), 21–29. (In Russian).
2. 2. Cheng, L, Wang, M., Chen, Y., Niu, W., Hong, M., & Zhu, Y. (2022). Design My Music Instrument: A Project-Based Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics Program on The Development of Creativity. Frontiers in Psychology. January, 12, article 763948. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.763948
3. 3. Duran, V., & Ersanli, E. (2021). Psychological traits of geniuses and its implications for curriculums for «gifted individuals». Antalya. ILTERG Conference Proceeding, 2019, April 8–10 In Liu, Ch., & Wu, Ch. STEM without art: A ship without a sail. Thinking Skills and Creativity, November 23, 1–12.
4. 4. Galinskaya, I. L. (2001). Nauka i hudozhestvennoe tvorchestvo. Suggestivnaya sila iskusstva [Science and artistic creativity. The suggestive power of art]. Man, image and essence, 1 (12), 48–62. [in Russian].
5. 5. Getashvili, N. (2022). «Eternal Images» of Antiquity: Functional Analysis in the Scope of the Late 20-th – Early 21-st Centuries Visual Culture. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, № 15 (1), 9–22. DOI: 10.17516/1997-1370-0873
6. 6. Grotjahn, R., & Iffland, J. (2018). Digitale Musikedition und die Wissenschaft der Popularen Musik. Center of Musik Edition. Pandeborn. January 2018. Musikforchung, 71 (4), 379–303. DOI: 10.52412/mf2018.H4.296
7. 7. Hasbi, A., & Ratih, C. (2019). Preservation of Local Genius Culture as Efforts to Maintain Nation Existence. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 7, issue 6S5, April, 1416–1422.
8. 8. Hollingshaus, W. A. (2019). Literary (Techno) science. The Silent Speech of Erkki Kurenniemie’s 2048 Performance. Nordic Theatre Studies, 31, 1, 58–72.
9. 9. Karanfilova, E. V. (2017). Ambivalentny`e harakteristiki genial`nosti v filosofskom osmy`slenii [Ambivalent characteristics of genius in philosophical comprehension]. Sciencetheoretical almanac “Grani”, 20, 2 (142), 92–96. [in Russian].
10. 10. Krysa, J., & Parikka J. (2015). Writing and Unwriting (Media) Art History: Erkki Kurenniemi in 2048. The MIT Press, Cambridge MAS, London. 340 р.
11. 11. Liu, Ch., & Wu, Ch. (2021). STEM without art: A ship without a sail / Thinking Skills and Creativity. 23 November. 1–12. Parameswara, А., Saskara I., Utama, M., Setyari, N. The Role of Place Identity, Local Genius, Orange Economy and Cultural Policies for Sustainability of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Bali. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning, 16, 8, December, 1551–1561.
12. 12. Lyutikova, G. V. (2018). Genij-mesto-genij mesta (k postanovke problemy) [Geniusplace-genius of place (to the formulation of the problem)]. Geography and tourism, (1), 143–149. [in Russian].
13. 13. Marcov, B., & Yarochkin, D. (2021). Music Against the Challenges of Digital Society. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, 14 (6), 810–821. DOI: 10.17516/1997–1370–0762
14. 14. Ojanen, M., Suominen, J., Kallio, T., & Lassfolk, K. (2007). Design Principles and User Interfaces of Erkki Kurenniemi’s Electronic Musical Instruments of the 1960’s and 1970’s. Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME07) (pp. 88–93). New York.
15. 15. Petuhova, A. Yu. (2013). Obraz doma i obraz goroda v knige P. Vajlya «Genij mesta» (k voprosu o hudozhestvennom hronotope) [The image of the house and the image of the city in P. Weil’s book “The Genius of the Place” (on the question of the artistic chronotope)]. Scientific potential: works of young scientists. Far Eastern Federal University, (2), 272–275. (In Russian).
16. 16. Segalin, G. V. (1922). Osnovny`e zadachi e`vriko-patologii, kak ucheniya o patologii genial`nosti i patologii tvorchestva. [The main tasks of eureko-pathology, as the doctrine of the pathology of genius and the pathology of creativity]. Ural doctor, (3), 62–67. (In Russian).
17. 17. Segalin, G. V. (1925). Patogenez i biogenez velikih i zamechatel`ny`h lyudej [Pathogenesis and biogenesis of great and remarkable people]. Clinical Archive of Genius and giftedness (Evropathology), 1, 1, 273. (In Russian).
18. 18. Siregar, H., Natalivan, P., & Ekomadyo, A. (2018). Cultural Assemblage as Genius Loci: Character Analysis of Medan City Center District. SHS Web of Conferences 41.04011 (2018). DOI: 10.1051/shs.conf20184104011
19. 19. Villajns, Z. (2019). Kreativnost` na pereput`e. Kak ambivalentnost` osvobozhdaet vash razum [Creativity is at a crossroads. How Ambivalence Frees Your Mind]. Our Psychology. (In Russian). Retrived from https://www.psyh.ru/kreativnost-na-pereputekak-ambivalentnost-osvobozhdaet-vash-razum
20. 20. Voroshin, S. (2022). Reflection of the Spiritual World of Nikita Grigorievich Stroganov in Church Art. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, 15 (1), 141–152. DOI: 10.17516/1997-1370-0884
21. 21. Wright Ch. (2020). The nature of Genius, City University of New York. 2020. January 21. Retrived from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338711020_The_Nature_of_Genius?enrichId=rgreq-d112769b1b5fdf32474450d11fd591d4-XXX&enrichSource =Y292ZXJQYWdlOzMzODcxMTAyMDtBUzo4NDk2NjE4MTIyODU0NDBAMTU3OTU4NjU3MDUzNg%3D%3D&el=1_x_2&_esc=publicationCoverPdf
22. 22. Zamyatin, D. N. (2013). Genij i mesto: uskol`zayushchaya so-v-mestnost`. [Genius and place: an elusive co-locality]. Social Sciences and modernity, (5), 154–165. (In Russian).
23. 23. Zhu, D. (2010). Mozg: nauka i iskusstvo [Brain: Science and art]. Nature, (7), 93–96. (In Russian).
Download file .pdf 375.28 kb