Contemporary geniuses of place as a phenomenon of urban development
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
PAPER • OPEN ACCESS
Contemporary geniuses of place as a phenomenon of urban
development
To cite this article: E Markwart et al 2021 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 740 012013
View the article online for updates and enhancements.
This content was downloaded from IP address 46.4.80.155 on 19/09/2021 at 12:18Scientific and Practical Conference «CITIES AS DEVELOPMENT CENTERS» IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 740 (2021) 012013 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/740/1/012013
Contemporary geniuses of place as a phenomenon of urban
development
E Markwart, I Vinogradov and G Guryanov
Spatial Development Department Named After V. Glazychev, Institute for Social Sciences
of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
(RANEPA), Moscow, Russia
E-mail: sluzhebnyem@mail.ru
Abstract. The concept of genius loci has been widely studied in the scientific literature, mainly in
relation to the "spirit of place" concept, and outstanding personalities of the past. The paper examines
the phenomenon of the "genius of place" as a living person acting here and now, and highlights a
specific role he plays in the development of "place". The authors argue that the role of the "geniuses"
is especially noticeable in small towns and settlements. A number of studied cases allow us to
identify found "geniuses of places" mostly as "varangians" (outlanders). The paper draws initial
conclusions regarding the interaction of "genius" and "place", formulates possible hypotheses and
directions for further research.
Key words: genius loci, genius of place, spatial development, interaction of genius and place, development
of small towns
The concept of genius loci is widely known and has a long history, the origins of which go back to the times
of Ancient Rome, the term itself originated in this culture. The Romans had this name for special spirits –
patrons and guardians of geographical objects: streams, groves, stones. In the Russian-speaking tradition,
genius loci is translated in two ways: the "spirit of place" and the "genius of place". Both translation options
are correct, but not equivalent: intuitively, they have different content. If "spirit of place" is a special unique
atmosphere inherent in a certain location, then "genius of place" is called an outstanding person – artist,
writer, politician, scientist, who greatly affected the place, who gave this place a special (sometimes new)
quality. The concept of "spirit of place" is widely used in modern professional literature dedicated to the
development of cities and territories, and is the key for a number of influential international documents. It
is often implied that the concept of "genius loci" is encompassed by the broader concept of "spirit of place"
and is its component1.
Within the framework of this study, the authors consider that it is important to derive the phenomenon
of "genius loci" from its subordinate position, to give it an independent subjectivity in relation to the place
1
Most foreign researchers use the Latin term "genius loci" to encompass both intangible and "human" manifestations
of this phenomenon, preferring to leave the term itself without translation.
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1Scientific and Practical Conference «CITIES AS DEVELOPMENT CENTERS» IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 740 (2021) 012013 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/740/1/012013
and to formulate the scientific content of the term in regard to this new role. It is quite obvious that the
existence of the "genius loci" can be (and often is) extremely important for the development of the place
itself ("the territory of presence"). From a wide range of possible interpretations for the concept of " genius
loci" in the applied sense, we are interested in the one that means an acting actor actively affecting the place
here and now. In this regard, its locality becomes an obligatory attribute of the genius of the place. We are
interested in cases when a "genius": a) is physically present in a "place" - at least he regularly appears in it;
b) purposefully interacts with a "place", i.e. the place is in the focus of his attention. This was the starting
point for the study carried out by the authors in the research team in January-June 20201.
The authors see the applied significance of the study for the tasks of managing the development of
territories in the following:
a) to single out a special group of "geniuses of place", including local actors acting here and now;
b) to explore the effects of the mutual influence of "genius" and "place";
c) to identify effective strategies and tactics used by "geniuses of place", and further explore the
possibilities of their replication;
d) to identify the forms of interaction of local government authorities and local communities with
"geniuses of places" and, if any, the correlations of these forms of interaction and effects of influence;
e) to develop approaches to building mutually beneficial partnerships with the "geniuses of place",
involving them as allies and agents of influence in the implementation of spatial development projects.
Genius loci as a philosophical concept was developed in detail and in many ways by many outstanding
thinkers and theorists; the history of the issue has been studied for at least 50 years. The starting point, the
foundation of the genius loci concept, is the place. Studies of the nature of "place" are largely based on the
works of philosophers-phenomenologists. Martin Heidegger believes that the "thing", which is actually a
manifestation of the phenomenon of place, and the “place” itself are necessarily in a relationship of
interconnection and mutual influence [1]. Thus, the emergence of "places" is associated with the creative
activity of people. The outstanding researcher of the "genius of the place" phenomenon Christian Norberg-
Schulz postulated the idea that people “identify themselves in space by things created by other people” [2].
According to Schulz, if a person's external environment is filled with meaning for him, then inside this
place he feels at home. [2]. A similar thought was expressed by the sociologist Michael Bell, who wrote
that understanding a place and its spirit depends on how much we can identify the presence of this spirit in
a particular place [3]. Kevin Lynch characterizes such symbolism in the space of the urban fabric as "the
readability of the image". Lynch correlates the readability and identifiability of images with the utilitarian
task of urban navigation [4]. The possibility of orientation in the urban space with the help of iconic public
buildings and houses of prominent people was identified by Harvey Warren Zorbo, who noticed in such
objects "the condensation of traditions, rituals and the support of the identity of society" [5].
At the same time, the practice of interaction and the role of "genius" for the development of "place" have
not yet become the subject of special consideration. The reason for this, as we see it, is that until now a
fairly narrow cohort of personalities has been endowed with the right to be considered a "genius of the
place" - outstanding creators (of the past), whose work was highly appreciated outside the place and to a
certain extent canonized. This is the interpretation of the term that we find, for example, in D. Zamyatin,
who studied the relations Andrei Tarkovsky - Yuryevets, Boris Pasternak - Balashov, Kuzma Petrov-
Vodkin - Khvalynsk. In all these cases, the creativity of the "genius" is directed outward in relation to the
1
The study was carried out by Master's students of the program "Management of spacial development projects" of
the Department of Spatial Development named after V.L. Glazychev, Institute for Social Sciences RANEPA: Ilya
Vinogradov, Grigory Guryanov, Gleb Lapin, Olga Sudomoina, Artem Tutynin and Grigory Yakovlev under the
guidance of Professor Emil Markwart.
2Scientific and Practical Conference «CITIES AS DEVELOPMENT CENTERS» IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 740 (2021) 012013 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/740/1/012013
"place", and, moreover, is complete, belongs to the past [6]. Here a genius becomes a constituent part of
the symbolic capital of the place, enters it in the form of a myth [7]. However, this approach overlooks
local, less visible and (yet) non-canonized actors, whose active influence on the place today may be greater
and more real than that of recognized celebrities.
A different model of the relationship between a "genius" and a "place" is described in the study of the
architect Kuba Snopek, who tells how the meaning and value of the existence of the Moscow residential
area Belyaevo became something more than mere utilitarianism [8]. Unexpectedly for the researcher, the
intangible content of the faceless space of the Soviet panel microdistrict, devoid of individuality, turns out
to be surprisingly rich and multidimensional. The source of this hidden wealth is the figure of the artist and
poet Dmitry Prigov, whose work, which has an artistic significance on a national scale, turns out to be
essentially connected with Belyaevo. It is intended primarily for this particular area, and is geographically
rooted in its space1. Today the figure of Prigov has partly become the "attraction" of the place. Nevertheless,
the cultural processes taking place in the area (the activities of the Belyaevo gallery, the opening of the
Identity Center, the Belyaevo Development program) testify that Prigov gave the starting impetus to the
formation of the local identity of the area precisely as a living local actor, a genius of the place in the sense
that is of greatest interest to us.
As noted above, this aspect as the active influence of a "living" genius on the development of the place
has not attracted much attention of researchers so far. In this context, the results of three "cases" selected
by the research group for in-depth qualitative research are of particular interest2: Borovsk (Vladimir
Ovchinnikov, lone artist), Torzhok (Tatyana Sokolova, founder of the excursion and educational project
"Expeditions to Torzhok", city activist), Nikola-Lenivets (Nikolay Polissky, artist, founder of the Land Art
Park and the "ArchStoyanie festival"); a little later the city of Uryupinsk was added to them (Vasily
Dubeykovsky, head of a city branding firm, city activist).
The selected cases turned out to be quite different in terms of the relationship between the genius and
the place. If the interaction between Nikola-Lenivets and his genius, the artist Polissky, can be considered
as unconditionally positive (recognition and assistance to the creator from both local and regional
authorities and residents, reciprocal active and constructive interaction from a "genius of the place"), then
the relationship of Borovsk and its genius, the artist Ovchinnikov, can rather be called uneven, turning at
times into rejection and attempts to destroy the work. Tatyana Sokolova, the hero of the third case studied
by us, is also aware of such risks and negative consequences, and prefers to publicly act in her native
Torzhok with maximum discretion.
One of the "side" practical effects of immersion in the proposed research questions could be increased
attention of public authorities (first of all, of course, local government authorities) to identifying the very
"geniuses of the place" on their territories: if new "third places" appear and develop on the territory, points
of attraction of people and social groups, new meanings and images of places, it is possible that here a
"genius of the place" is born, who, in the process of “symbolic appropriation” of a territory, (who, by the
way, can go along with the preservation of the old symbolism and meanings) transforms it more and more.
1
Prigov, also known as "Duke Belyaevsky", claimed that the borders of his possessions lay an hour's walk from his
house [8].
2
At the initial stage of work, the group studied a large number of open sources (including social networks, local and
regional media, interviews on the internet, etc.); based on the results, a primary "long list of geniuses of place" was
formed, which became the basis for the selection of pilot "cases". In the course of further selection, it was taken into
account that: a) the acting "genius of the place" must be closely connected with the place including residing and
working on this territory; b) the fact of the positive influence of the "genius of the place" on the development of the
territory should be obvious; c) the "genius of the place" is not an official (power holder). In addition, time and cost
constraints required taking into account transport accessibility.
3Scientific and Practical Conference «CITIES AS DEVELOPMENT CENTERS» IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 740 (2021) 012013 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/740/1/012013
Another important aspect is the correlation between the scale of a "genius" and his environment
("territory of presence"). Initially, the study included settlements with a population not exceeding 50
thousand people. On the one hand, in a small town it is easier for a researcher to identify the activity of a
"genius of the place": its effects are more noticeable, and the resonance is greater than in a megalopolis. On
the other hand, in a small town there is less competition in different types of activity, which means more
opportunities to become the first in something. Small towns allow interacting directly with both government
officials and active citizens to promote their ideas. Julius Caesar is credited with the statement he uttered
while passing through a small alpine town: "I would rather be the first here than the second in Rome." It
can be assumed that small towns generally build opportunities for “geniuses of places”, attracting them
with the possibility of self-realization.
In this context, another aspect of research is of particular interest, that is the origin of "geniuses of the
place”. If we leave the question of the possibility of purposefully influencing this process beyond the scope
of consideration1, the authors see two possible options of "genesis". The first is the actors who grew up in
their "place" and at a certain stage of their life became the leaders of the processes of its transformation.
The second is outlanders who arrived in a place from the outside and actively joined the life of the place,
or even (more likely) brought with them a new agenda. The first cohort will conditionally be called "ours",
the second also will conditionally be called "Varangians". Obviously, each of the options supposes a
different specifics of building relationships by "geniuses" with both the place and its inhabitants, the local
community. It is logical to assume that the attitude of the community to “theirs” will be qualitatively
different from that to "Varangians".
An analysis of the studied cases easily reveals "Varangians" in Nikola-Lenivets (Nikolai Polissky is an
artist, a Muscovite who chose Nikola-Lenivets as the territory that inspires him to create land-art objects)
and Uryupinsk (about his hero - Vasily Dubeikovsky, see below). In the case of Torzhok, Tatyana Sokolova,
although she is a native of the city, left it for a long time in her youth, returning years later as a person who
had been formed in the cultural mainspring of Moscow. Tatiana notes that local residents, especially in
conflict situations, call her a "Muscovite". Vladimir Ovchinnikov moved to live in Borovsk, his father's
hometown, only after retiring. The above allows us to classify these two "geniuses", albeit with certain
reservations, to the same cohort of "Varangians". The hero of our fourth case, Vasily Dubeykovsky (a native
of Yekaterinburg, studied and then successfully worked in Moscow for several years, settled in Uryupinsk)
is professionally engaged in creating brands for cities. Replacing Moscow with the "capital of the Russian
province", he created a public space in the "third place" format, in which he transfers his competences for
the implementation of urban projects to residents. For Uryupinsk, Dubeykovsky is a "Varangian", which
acts as an "gathering point" for an active urban community. The above examples show that a "genius of the
place", regardless of origin, is, first of all, the holder of new competencies for his place of residence.
So, somewhat unexpectedly for the authors, the pilot cases did not reveal "ours" among "geniuses of places".
Does this mean that "local geniuses" in real life are predominantly or even exclusively "Varangians"? If the
further study of the issue on the material of a wider sample confirms this hypothesis, does this mean that
the presence of external experience, the ability to look from the outside and freedom from the framework
of local stereotypes are necessary prerequisites for the success of a "genius of the place"? In the framework
of further studies, the authors also consider it important to establish whether there are certain prerequisites
that turn this or that "place" into a relatively stable ground for the activity of "geniuses", as well as to
1
In this part of the reasoning, we proceeded from the fact that the appearance of a genius in one place or another is
quite accidental. The hypothetical possibility of artificial "incubation" of geniuses of the place seems to the authors
rather speculative. Probably, the general attractiveness of this or that place can become a factor influencing the choice
of people who were not born, but consciously chose the place to apply their forces; but it is hardly possible to
purposefully influence the choice of a place by a genius.
4Scientific and Practical Conference «CITIES AS DEVELOPMENT CENTERS» IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 740 (2021) 012013 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/740/1/012013
formulate and test hypotheses about various aspects of the mutual influence of "geniuses" and "places".
One of the possible practical results of the work is the development of interaction tools in order to enhance
the positive influence of a "genius of the place" on territorial development.
References:
[1] Heidegger M 2020 Bauen, Wohnen Denken (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta) p 336
[2] Norberg-Schulz C 1975 Genius Loci. Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture (Edinburgh:
Edinburgh college of art library) p 210
[3] Bell Michael Mayerfeld 1997 The Ghosts of Place Theory and Society 26, no. 6 pp 813–836. JSTOR,
www.jstor.org/stable/657936. Accessed 6 Nov. 2020
[4] Lynch K 1982 The Image of the City (Moscow: Stroyizdat) p 382
[5] Zorbo H W 2004 City and Slums (Selected Chapters) / Zorbo H.W. Humanities and Social sciences
abroad Series 11 Sociology. No. 3. pp 115-54. No. 4 pp 140-178
[6] Zamyatin D N 2015 Geocultural branding of cities and territories: from the genius of a place to an
image resource Modern problems of service and tourism 9. № 2 pp 25-31
[7] Zamyatina N Yu and Zamyatin D N 2007 The genius of the place and the city: options for interaction
Bulletin of Eurasia No. 1 (35) pp 62–87
[8] Snopek K 2013 Belyaevo forever: Preserving the Unremarkable (Moscow: Strelka press) p 112
5You can also read
