Ethno reviewEthno reviewЭтнографическое обозрение0869-54153034-6274The Russian Academy of Sciences67244810.31857/S0869541524040033AZAXNUSpecial Theme of the Issue: Anthropology of Affective AtmospheresСпециальная тема номера: Антропология аффективных атмосферResearch ArticleTouching the City: Tactility and Affect of Public ArtКасаясь города: тактильность и аффект публичного искусстваRadchenkoDaria A.РадченкоДарья Александровна
Russian Federation

Institute for Social Sciences

Школа актуальных гуманитарных исследований Института общественных наук

darradchenko@gmail.comRussian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public AdministrationРАНХиГС при Президенте РФ251020244395527022025Copyright ©; 2024, Russian Academy of SciencesCopyright ©; 2024, Российская академия наук2024Russian Academy of SciencesРоссийская академия наукhttps://journals.eco-vector.com/0869-5415/article/view/672448

Touching objects of public art is one of the most frequently recorded and at the same time superficially described practices of interaction with the urban environment. I propose to look at this practice through the lens of the “affective atmospheres” approach, which allows us to problematize tactile contact as a means and result of affective attunement with space. Analyzing the affective-discursive canon, emerging around the interaction with a new art object (the sculpture “Big Clay No. 4” in Moscow), I demonstrate how, on the one hand, the transition from digital to visual and tactile interaction with the materiality of space creates collective affect online; on the other hand, how this affect is transmitted to social media, making the public art object the center of a phygital hybrid space.

Прикосновение к объектам публичного искусства – одна из самых часто фиксируемых и при этом поверхностно описанных практик взаимодействия людей с городской средой. В этой статье предлагается взглянуть на эту практику через оптику подхода “аффективных атмосфер”, что позволяет проблематизировать тактильный контакт как средство и результат аффективной сонастройки с пространством. Анализируя аффективно-дискурсивный канон, складывающийся вокруг взаимодействия с новым арт-объектом (скульптура “Большая глина № 4” в Москве), мы покажем, как переход от цифрового к визуальному и тактильному взаимодействию с материальностью пространства создает коллективный аффект онлайн и как этот аффект транслируется и распространяется в онлайн-среде, делая публичное искусство центром фиджитального гибридного пространства.

affective atmosphereaffecthaptictactile perceptiontouchsocial mediapublic arturban spacedigital environmentаффективная атмосферааффекттактильное взаимодействиеприкосновениесоциальные медиапубличное искусствогородская средацифровая средаМинистерство науки и высшего образования Российской ФедерацииMinistry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation075–15–2022–326Antonov, D. 2018. Dva “tela” ikony: obshchenie s obrazom kak apropriatsiia sily [Two “Bodies” of an Icon: Communication with an Icon as Appropriation of Power]. Vestnik RGGU. Seriia: Literaturovedenie. Yazykoznanie. Kul’turologiia 7 (40): 9–34.Антонов Д. Два “тела” иконы: общение с образом как апроприация силы // Вестник РГГУ. Серия: Литературоведение. Языкознание. Культурология. 2018. № 7 (40). C. 9–34.Bareither, C. 2021. Capture the Feeling: Memory Practices in between the Emotional Affordances of Heritage Sites and Digital Media. Memory Studies 14 (3): 578–591.Лоу С. Пространственное воплощение культуры. Этнография пространства и места. М.: НЛО, 2024.Bille, M., and K. Simonsen. 2021. Atmospheric Practices: On Affecting and Being Affected. Space and Culture 24 (2): 295–309.Кормина Ж. Святая энергетика “намоленного места”: о языке православных паломников // Natales grate numeras? Сборник статей к 60-летию Георгия Ахилловича Левинтона / Ред. А.К. Байбурин, A.Л. Осповат. СПб.: Изд-во ЕУ СПб., 2008. С. 251–265.Candlin, F. 2017. Rehabilitating Unauthorised Touch or Why Museum Visitors Touch the Exhibits. The Senses and Society 12 (3): 251–266.Куприянов П.С., Лурье М.Л. “Вот этот вот дух, когда он есть, это всегда очень здорово…”: как работают культурные атмосферы и за что их любят // Шаги/Steps. 2022. Т. 8. № 4. С. 248–275.Classen, C., and D. Howes. 2006. The Museum as Sensescape: Western Sensibilities and Indigenous Artifacts. In Sensible Objects: Colonialism, Museums and Material Culture, edited by E. Edwards, C. Gosden, and R. Phillips, 199–222. Oxford (NY): Berg.Петров Н.В. Памятники в пространстве Москвы // Живая старина. 2018. № 2. С. 44–48.de Souza e Silva, A. 2004. Mobile Networks and Public Spaces: Bringing Multiuser Environments into the Physical Space. Convergence 10 (2): 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/135485650401000203Самутина Н., Запорожец О. Свой среди других: антропология нормы в пространстве царицынского парка // Царицыно. Аттракцион с историей / Под ред. Н.В. Самутиной, Б.Е. Степанова. М.: НЛО, 2014. С. 143–187.Griffero, T. 2013. The Atmospheric “Skin” of the City. Ambiances. Environnement sensible, architecture et espace urbain. https://doi.org/10.4000/ambiances.399Сивак Е. “Одна карта, много маршрутов”: навигация в парке Царицыно и режимы восприятия пространства // Царицыно. Аттракцион с историей / Под ред. Н.В. Самутиной, Б.Е. Степанова. М.: НЛО, 2014. С. 188–214.Griffero, T. 2014. Atmospheres and Lived Space. Studia Phaenomenologica 14: 29–51.Bareither C. Capture the Feeling: Memory Practices in between the Emotional Affordances of Heritage Sites and Digital Media // Memory Studies. 2021. No. 14 (3). P. 578–591.Griffero, T. 2019. Is there Such a Thing as an “Atmospheric Turn”? Instead of an Introduction. Atmosphere and Aesthetics: A Plural Perspective, edited by T. Griffero and M. Tedeschini, 11–62. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.Bille M., Simonsen K. Atmospheric Practices: On Affecting and Being Affected // Space and Culture. 2021. № 24 (2). P. 295–309.Jackson, P., and J. Everts. 2010. Anxiety as Social Practice. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 42 (11): 2791–2806.Candlin F. Rehabilitating Unauthorised Touch or Why Museum Visitors Touch the Exhibits // The Senses and Society. 2017. No. 12 (3). P. 251–266.James, M.M., and J.F. Leader. 2023. Do Digital Hugs Work? Re-Embodying Our Social Lives Online with Digital Tact. Frontiers in Psychology 14: 910174.Classen C., Howes D. The Museum as Sensescape: Western Sensibilities and Indigenous Artifacts // Sensible Objects: Colonialism, Museums and Material Culture / Eds. E. Edwards, C. Gosden, R. Phillips. Oxford (NY): Berg, 2006. P. 199–222.Kinnunen, T., and M. Kolehmainen. 2019. Touch and Affect: Analysing the Archive of Touch Biographies. Body & Society 25 (1): 29–56.de Souza e Silva A. Mobile Networks and Public Spaces: Bringing Multiuser Environments into the Physical Space // Convergence. 2004. No. 10 (2). P. 15–25.Kormina, J. 2008. Sviataia energetika “namolennogo mesta”: o yazyke pravoslavnyh palomnikov [Saint Enegetics of Prayed Place]. In Natales grate numeras? Sbornik statei k 60-letiiu Georgiia Ahillovicha Levintona [Natales Grate Numeras? Essays in Honour of 60th Anniversary of Georgy Akhillovich Levinton], edited by A.K. Baiburin and A.L. Ospovat, 251–265. St. Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo Evropeiskogo universiteta v Sankt Peterburge.Griffero T. The Atmospheric “Skin” of the City // Ambiances. Environnement sensible, architecture et espace urbain. 2013. https://doi.org/10.4000/ambiances.399Kormina, J., and S. Luehrmann. 2017. The Social Nature of Prayer in a Church of the Unchurched: Russian Orthodox Christianity from Its Edges. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 86 (2): 394–424.Griffero T. Atmospheres and Lived Space // Studia Phaenomenologica. 2014. No. 14. P. 29–51.Kupriyanov, P.S., and M.L. Lurie. 2022. “Vot etot vot duh, kogda on est’, eto vsegda ochen’ zdorovo…”: kak rabotaiut kul’turnye atmosfery i za chto ih liubiat [“This Spirit, when You Feel It, It is Always Very Cool…”: How Cultural Atmospheres Work and Why Do We Like Them]. Shagi/Steps 8 (4): 248–275.Griffero T. Is There Such a Thing as an “Atmospheric Turn”? Instead of an Introduction // Atmosphere and Aesthetics: A Plural Perspective / Eds. T. Griffero, M. Tedeschini. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019. P. 11–62.Low, S. 2024. Prostranstvennoe voploshchenie kul’tury. Etnografiia prostranstva i mesta [Spatializing Culture: The Ethnography of Space and Place]. Moscow: NLO.Jackson P., Everts J. Anxiety as Social Practice // Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space. 2010. No. 42 (11). P. 2791–2806.Merleau-Ponty, M. 1968. The Visible and the Invisible: Followed by Working Notes. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.James M.M., Leader J.F. Do Digital Hugs Work? Re-Embodying Our Social Lives Online with Digital Tact // Frontiers in Psychology. 2023. No. 14. 910174.Michels, C. 2015. Researching Affective Atmospheres. Geographica Helvetica 70 (4): 255–263.Kinnunen T., Kolehmainen M. Touch and Affect: Analysing the Archive of Touch Biographies // Body & Society. 2019. No. 25 (1). P. 29–56.Panchenko, A.A. 2012. How to Make a Shrine with Your Own Hands: Local Holy Places and Vernacular Religion in Russia. In Vernacular Religion in Everyday Life: Expressions of Belief, edited by M. Bowman and Ü. Valk, 54–74. New York: Routledge.Kormina J., Luehrmann S. The Social Nature of Prayer in a Church of the Unchurched: Russian Orthodox Christianity from Its Edges // Journal of the American Academy of Religion. 2017. No. 86 (2). P. 394–424.Paterson, M. 2005. Affecting Touch: Towards a Felt Phenomenology of Therapeutic Touch. In Emotional Geographies, edited by J. Davidson, L. Bondi, and M. Smith, 161–176. Aldershot: Ashgate.Merleau-Ponty M. The Visible and the Invisible: Followed by Working Notes. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1968.Paterson, M. 2006. Feel the Presence: Technologies of Touch and Distance. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 24 (5): 691–708.Michels C. Researching Affective Atmospheres // Geographica Helvetica. 2015. No. 70 (4). P. 255–263.Paterson, M., M. Dodge, and S. MacKian. 2012. Introduction: Placing Touch within Social Theory and Empirical Study. In Touching Space, Placing Touch, edited by M. Paterson, M. Dodge, and S. MacKian, 1–28. London: Ashgate Publishing.Panchenko A.A. How to Make a Shrine with Your Own Hands: Local Holy Places and Vernacular Religion in Russia // Vernacular Religion in Everyday Life: Expressions of Belief / Eds. M. Bowman, Ü. Valk. N.Y.: Routledge, 2012. P. 54–74.Petrov, N.V. 2014. Pamiatniki v prostranstve Moskvy [Monuments in the Space of Moscow]. Zhivaia starina 2: 44–48.Paterson M. Affecting Touch: Towards a Felt Phenomenology of Therapeutic Touch // Emotional Geographies / Eds. J. Davidson, L. Bondi, M. Smith. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005. P. 161–176.Samutina, N., and O. Zaporozhets. 2014. Svoi sredi drugih: antropologiia normy v prostranstve tsaritsynskogo parka [Own between the Others: Anthropology of Norm in the Space of Tsaritsyno Park]. In Tsaritsyno. Attraktsion s istoriei [Tsaritsyno: Attraction with History], edited by N.V. Samutina and B.E. Stepanov, 143–187. Moscow: NLO.Paterson M. Feel the Presence: Technologies of Touch and Distance // Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. 2006. No. 24 (5). P. 691–708.Scriven, R. 2019. Touching the Sacred: Sensing Spirituality at Irish Holy Wells. Journal of Cultural Geography 36 (3): 271–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/08873631.2019.1632404Paterson M., Dodge M., MacKian S. Introduction: Placing Touch within Social Theory and Empirical Study // Touching Space, Placing Touch / Eds. M. Paterson, M. Dodge, S. MacKian. L.: Ashgate Publishing, 2012. P. 1–28.Sivak, E. 2014. “Odna karta, mnogo marshrutov”: navigatsiia v parke Tsaritsyno i rezhimy vospriiatiia prostranstva [“One Map, Many Routes: Natigation in Tsaritsyno Park and Regimes of Space Perception]. In Tsaritsyno. Attraktsion s istoriei [Tsaritsyno: Attraction with History], edited by N.V. Samutina and B.E. Stepanov, 188–214. Moscow: NLO.Scriven R. Touching the Sacred: Sensing Spirituality at Irish Holy Wells // Journal of Cultural Geography. 2019. No. 36 (3). P. 271–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/08873631.2019.1632404Stewart, K. 2011. Atmospheric Attunements. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 29 (3): 445–453.Stewart K. Atmospheric Attunements // Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. 2011. No. 29 (3). P. 445–453.Townsend, A. 2008. Augmenting Public Space and Authoring Public Art: The Role of Locative Media. ArtNodes E-Journal 8.Townsend A. Augmenting Public Space and Authoring Public Art: The Role of Locative Media // ArtNodes E-Journal. 2008. No. 8.Urry, J. 2016. The Place of Emotions within Place. In Emotional Geographies, edited by J. Davidson, 77–83. Milton Park: Routledge.Urry J. The Place of Emotions Within Place // Emotional Geographies / Ed.J. Davidson. Milton Park: Routledge, 2016. P. 77–83.Walkerdine, V., and L. Jimenez. 2012. Gender, Work and Community after De-Industrialisation: A Psychosocial Approach to Affect. New York: Springer.Walkerdine V., Jimenez L. Gender, Work and Community after De-Industrialisation: A Psychosocial Approach to Affect. N.Y.: Springer, 2012.Wanner, C. 2020. An Affective Atmosphere of Religiosity: Animated Places, Public Spaces, and the Politics of Attachment in Ukraine and Beyond. Comparative Studies in Society and History 62 (1): 68–105.Wanner C. An Affective Atmosphere of Religiosity: Animated Places, Public Spaces, and the Politics of Attachment in Ukraine and Beyond // Comparative Studies in Society and History. 2020. No. 62 (1). P. 68–105.Wetherell, M. 2013. Affect and Discourse – What’s the Problem? From Affect as Excess to Affective/Discursive Practice. Subjectivity 6: 349–368.Wetherell M. Affect and Discourse – What’s the Problem? From Affect as Excess to Affective/Discursive Practice // Subjectivity. 2013. No. 6. P. 349–368.Wetherell, M. 2015. Tears, Bubbles and Disappointment – New Approaches for the Analysis of Affective-Discursive Practices: A Commentary on “Researching the Psychosocial”. Qualitative Research in Psychology 12 (1): 83–90.Wetherell M. Tears, Bubbles and Disappointment – New Approaches for the Analysis of Affective-Discursive Practices: A Commentary on “Researching the Psychosocial” // Qualitative Research in Psychology. 2015. No. 12 (1). P. 83–90.White, G. 2006. Landscapes of Power: National Memorials and the Domestication of Affect. City & Society 18 (1): 50–61.White G. Landscapes of Power: National Memorials and the Domestication of Affect // City & Society. 2006. No. 18 (1). P. 50–61.Zebracki, M. 2017. A Cybergeography of Public Art Encounter: The Case of Rubber Duck. International Journal of Cultural Studies 20 (5): 526–544.Zebracki M. A Cybergeography of Public Art Encounter: The Case of Rubber Duck // International Journal of Cultural Studies. 2017. No. 20 (5). P. 526–544.Zebracki, M. 2017. Queerying Public Art in Digitally Networked Space. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 16 (3): 440–474.Zebracki M. Queerying Public Art in Digitally Networked Space // ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies. 2017. No. 16 (3). P. 440–474.