UDC

394.014(045)

DOI

https://doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-V531

Authors

Svetlana S. Kasatkina^1* – Dr. Sci. (Philos.), Assoc. Prof., Prof. at the Department of History and Philosophy
Anastasiya N. Makarova² – Postgraduate student at the Department of History and Philosophy
^{1, 2}Cherepovets State University, Cherepovets, Vologda region, Russia,
¹SvetlanaCH5@rambler.ru*, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0946-3875
²anmakarova@chsu.ru, https://orcid.org/0009-0000-6188-8152

Abstract

The article discusses the issues of musealisation of the space of Russian cities as an urban phenomenon of modern society. The idea of “musealisation of the city”, which acquired its features since the 1930s has transformed over time. While the initial approach was centered on the adaptation of individual buildings and their conservation as architectural landmarks with museum significance, the current focus has shifted towards the creation of renovated public spaces. These include thematic pedestrian streets, historic courtyards, art districts and clusters that are united by a common historical and cultural heritage, a coherent architectural style, urban planning integrity and a unifying philosophical framework that establishes a connection with the past. The aim of this article is to specify the concept of “musealisation of urban space”. The main objective is to substantiate the phenomenon under consideration in socio-philosophical terms through the application of a systemic-semiotic approach. The article introduces the author’s concept of “musealisation of urban space” and analyses the specific features of musealisation of urban locations depending on their historical, architectural, and social context. The authors argue that the musealisation of the urban environment is underpinned by a system comprising three components: the concept (the underlying meaning of the transformations), the structure (the social activity of citizens), and the substrate (the landscape in the context of the preservation or absence of historical environment). Musealised locations transform into sought-after social spaces, enhance the urban aesthetic, provide resources for tourism development, and constitute the sociocultural potential of society. Examples of the musealisation process include public space development projects in Rybinsk, Kaliningrad, Velikiy Ustyug, and Arkhangelsk. Any practices of musealizing urban territories carry, above all, a socio-philosophical meaning; therefore, the authors consider the purpose and development prospects of urban musealisation as an organic phenomenon of the socio-cultural evolution of modern society. The musealisation of urban spaces reflects social interests in shaping national identity by engaging citizens both at the stage of preparing project proposals for environmental transformation and in the use of opportunities offered by the renovated territories after their redevelopment.

For citation: Kasatkina S.S., Makarova A.N. Musealisation of Urban Space: Social and Philosophical Context. Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2026, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 86–94. https://doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-V531

Keywords

musealisation of urban space, local identity, social transformation of the city, sociocultural evolution, urbosphere, city philosophy

References

1. Antsiferov N.P. Ways of Studying the City as a Social Organism. The Experience of an Integrated Approach. Leningrad, 1926. 155 p. (in Russ.).

2. Lynch K. The City Image and Its Elements. Cambridge, 1960. 103 p.

3. Gehl J., Svarre B. How to Study Public Life. Washington, 2013. 179 p.

4. Kaulen M.E. Musealization of the Historical and Cultural Heritage of Russia. Moscow, 2012. 432 p. (in Russ.).

5. Mastenitsa E.N. Museum Potential in Preserving Lost Cultural Heritage. Cultural Space: Genesis and Transformations: Proceedings of the 8th All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference in Memory of Professor Ikonnikova N.S. October 25–26, 2023. St. Petersburg, 2023, pp. 44–45 (in Russ.).

6. Glatolenkova E.V., Ivanova A.P. Architectural Heritage of Eastern Russian Railways. Urbanistika, 2021, no. 4, pp. 35–54 (in Russ.).

7. Guseva M.A., Komissarov V.V. Protection and Reconstruction of Medieval Cities: Domestic Realities and Foreign Experience. Vestnik Ivanovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye nauki, 2021, no. 4, pp. 90–96 (in Russ.).

8. Konovalova N.A. Preservation of the Historical Appearance of Small Towns in Japan Effective Strategies of Recent Years // A City Fit for Life: proceedings of the 7th International Scientific-practical Conference. Krasnoyarsk, November 20–22, 2024. Krasnoyarsk, 2025, pp. 362–367 (in Russ.).

9. Duan Z., Maistrovskaya N.T. Cultural Heritage and the Exposition of the Space of the Structural Components of the Museum City. Kul’tura i tsivilizatsiya, 2023, vol. 13, no. 3A-4A, pp. 23–31. (in Russ.).

10. Farstova D.A. Review of Domestic and Foreign Experience in Preserving Cultural Heritage. Arkhitektura. Restavratsiya. Dizayn. Urbanistika, 2025, no. 1, pp. 238–249 (in Russ.).

11. Ermolaeva E.I., Maynicheva A.G. The Experience of Using BIM Technology in Teaching, Creating and Museifying Buildings and Structures in Russia. Balandinskie chteniya, 2020, vol. 15, pp. 460–470 (in Russ.).

12. Astaf’eva A.L. Soft Museumification as a Method of Preserving Cultural Heritage. Preservation and Actualization of Cultural Heritage: Proceedings of the All-Russian Museum Forum, Kemerovo, May 28–30, 2025. Kemerovo, 2025, pp. 109–111 (in Russ.).

13. Alasmar R. Philosophy and Perception of Beauty in Architecture. Am. J. Civ. Engineer. Spec. Issue: Aesthetics and Perception of Beauty in Architecture, 2019, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 126–132.

14. Wang Q., Zhao M., Zhao L. Visual Analysis of Landscape Aesthetic Evaluation Based on Bibliometric Methods. Am. J. Civ. Engineer., 2021, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 63–69.

15. Lian J., Liao M. National Archaeological Site Park Planning Based on Landscape Archaeology. Am. J. Civ. Engineer., 2021, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 74–83.

16. Loudaoui T. The Architecture of Post-Independence Tourism: Early “villages de vacances” on the Tetouan Coast (1965–1970). ABE J., 2025. https://doi.org/10.4000/14vh9

17 Andersson C. Public Space And the New Urban Agenda. Public Space Reader. Routledge, 2016, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 5–9.

18. Osipova M.M. Museification In the City: From Objects To Space. Works of St. Petersburg State Institute of Culture, 2015, vol. 212, pp. 140–146 (in Russ.).

19. Maksimova A.S. Forms and Consequences of the Museumsification of a Small Town: The Case of Myshkin and Kargopol. Labirint Journal of Social and Humanitarian Research, 2014, no. 5, pp. 15–24 (in Russ.).

20. Kolodin K.I., Cherepanov P.D., Skurlatova E.A. Fundamentals of the Forming of a Pedestrian Street as an Object in the Form of a Multifunctional Complex. Urbanistika, 2022, no. 3, pp. 8–23 (in Russ.).

21. Kasatkina S.S. Urbosphere: Practices of Understanding Urban Space. Cherepovets, 2018. 159 p. (in Russ.).

22. Al’zemeneva E.V., Mamaeva Yu.V. Identity of the Urban Environment. Inzhenerno-stroitel’nyy vestnik Prikaspiya, 2021, no. 2, pp. 40–47 (in Russ.).

23. Sharon Z. The Cultures of Cities. N. Y., 1995. 322 p.