Kuleva_summary in english (Труд творческих работников России структурные условия, профессиональные идентичности и карьеры), страница 2

Bourdieunot only points out the principles of the functioning of these fields but also challenges the positionsof the cultural production fields in the socio-stratification structure of society. N. Heinich sets themethodological grounds for studying the transformation of systems of cultural production in time,using the paradigmatic approach of T. Kuhn. In particular, N. Heinich names the artistic paradigmsof classical, modern and contemporary art24.Summarizing the above, in the second half of the 20th century, specific research opticsemerged, representing culture and creativity as a special kind of production / industry.Nevertheless, labour in cultural / creative industries as a research problem was not raised at thisstage of cultural production study.

Two factors contributed to the development of the field ofcreative work research in the 1990s: the research interest in (new) de-standardized forms ofemployment, and the policy of supporting creative industries as promising labour markets, capablein the future to become the drivers of national economies, implemented in Britain and otherEuropean countries.18idem, p. 157Becker H. S. Art as collective action //American sociological review. – 1974.

– С. 767-776; Becker H. S. Artworlds. – Univ of California Press, 1982.20It is necessary to note that Becker points out the plurality of art-worlds and conventions used for them. The authormentions the "professional art world" similar to the cultural industries but being only one of the multiple varieties ofthe art world.21Peterson R. A. Production of culture. – SAGE Publications, Incorporated, 197622Bourdieu P. The field of cultural production: Essays on art and literature.

– Columbia University Press, 1993.23Bourdieu P. The market of symbolic goods //Poetics. – 1985. – Т. 14. – №. 1-2. – С. 13-44.24Heinich N. Practices of contemporary art: a pragmatic approach to a new artistic paradigm //Sociologia &Antropologia. – 2014. – Т.

4. – №. 2. – С. 373-390; Heinich N. Slava Van Gogha: Opit antropologii voskhishenia.M.: V-A-CPress, 2014.196The agenda of industrial sociology has undergone significant changes in recent decades,primarily due to the reflection of the 1990s and 2000s, inspired by the challenges of the transitionto the postindustrial era. The concepts of "flexible accumulation of capital" (Harvey 199025),“brave new world of work" and "risk society" (W. Beck)26, "fluid modernity (Bauman 2008)27,"end of work" (Rifkin 199528) became dominant and reflect global changes in the economy. Inparticular, they include rapid scientific and technological development, which leads to thesimilarly rapid decline in jobs, which in turn leads to unemployment, but, more importantly, tofragmentation and de-standardization of labour.

In the new world of uncertainty, classical careers,which are the basis of biographies, sustainable professional identities are not applied anymore.According to some of the work futurologists, the social structure is also fundamentally changing,the informatization eliminates the need for manual labour, that leads to the elimination of theworking class itself (Gorz, 1997)29. In addition to the new technical conditions, it is necessary tomention such global processes as the emergence of neoliberal political regimes (Harvey 200730),globalization, new modifications of the capitalist system (R. Sennett31, E. Amin, L.

Boltanski andE. Ciapello32). The indicated transformations have a different force of influence, they varydepending on the national, geographical context and sector of the economy, however, thesetheoretical developments undoubtedly expand the agenda and shift the emphasis in labourresearch, introducing new topics and problems. From this point of view, people working in thesphere of culture and creativity are of particular interest, since they faced the challenges of "newwork" earlier than others: A. McRobbie, in particular, calls artists and other creative workers"pioneers of the New Economy”33.Another challenge to the research on creative workers was a number of popular research works,representing the creative economy as a win-win for revitalizing urban areas, as well as a promisingand highly profitable area of employment (first of all, it is important to mention R.

Florida, Ch.Landry, Ch. Leadbeater). Thus, A. Zhelnina writes about the success of the "Creative City" by25Harvey D. Flexible accumulation through urbanization reflections on" post-modernism" in the American city//Perspecta. – 1990. – С. 251-272.26Beck W. Obshestvo riska. Na puti k drugomu modernu. Monografia. – Progress-Traditsia, 2000;Beck U. The brave new world of work. – John Wiley & Sons, 2014.27Bauman Z. Tekuchaia sovremennost. – Piter, 2008.28Rifkin J.

The End of Work - The Decline of the Global labour Force and the Dawn of the Post-Market Era,Tarcher/Putnam, New York, 1995293031Gorz A. Farewell to the working class: an essay on post-industrial socialism. – Pluto Press, 1997.Harvey D. Kratkaia istoria neoliberalisma. – 2007.Sennet R.

Korrozia kharaktera. M. – 2004.Boltanski L., Ciapello E., Novi dukh kapitalisma. – M: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2011.33McRobbie A. "Everyone is Creative": Artists as Pioneers of the New Economy?//Leger, M. (ed.) Culture andContestation in the New Century, Bristol: Intellect, 2011.327Charles Landry (2000) among city officials: "The book by Charles Landry ... turned into a deskreading of city officials of different levels who perceived "creativity "as a kind of a panacea forthe economic crisis”34.Numerous empirical studies of creative workers, which in the 2000s merged into the researchdirection of critical creative labour studies, convincingly showed disparities and new types ofinequalities that stand behind the seemingly attractive and full of freedom bohemian way of lifeshown by the adepts of the creative economy.In particular, A.

McRobbie reveals the hidden sides of the careers of fashion designers, theserious limitations, risks and sacrifices they are forced to undergo35. McRobbie is also the authorof several works on gender discrimination in creative industries36. Many researches focus onunpaid work, risks and peculiarities of pre-employment in visual arts and media. In particular, H.Steyerl pays attention to the phenomenon of "second, monetary work", an uncreative employment,through which professional artists support their own artistic activity37. Most of the publishedstudies note the brevity of labour contracts and high competition for them.

Thus, P. Menger38writes about the fragmentation of the French art market: in conditions of oversaturation of themarket supply. An increased number of artists can get more contracts, but for part-time or shortterm employment. Artists’ careers, therefore, are more likely to be portfolio employment andpresuppose balancing between employment and unemployment, which gives the possibility ofminimal social guarantees, the receipt of benefits.

The most common are the ideas of the"entrepreneurial nature" of creative employment, which initially includes inevitable risks, blurringthe boundaries between work and other life spheres (for example, parties, attending publicevents)39.Creative employment in the field of visual art was hardly ever studied in the Russian andpost-Soviet context, only a few works can be mentioned. In particular, A.M. Khokhlova and A.M.34Zhelnina A.

Tvorchestvo “dlia svoikh”: sotsialnoe iskluchenie i creativnie prostranstva Sankt-Peterburga//Kreativnie industrii v gorode: vizovi, proekti I reshenia: collection of research articles of students and teachers NRUHSE. SPb.: Levsha-Sankt-Peterburg. – 2012. – P. 42.35McRobbie A. British fashion design: rag trade or image industry?. – Routledge, 2003;See, in particular, McRobbie A. Fashion culture: creative work, female individualization //Feminist Review.

–2002. – Т. 71. – №. 1. – С. 52-62.37Steyerl H. Politics of Art: Contemporary Art and the Transition to Postdemocracy // A. Vidokle,A. Vidokle, B. K. Wood (eds.) Are You Working Too Much?: Post-Fordism, Precarity, and the labour of Art.Berlin: Sternberg, 2011 – p. 32.38Menger P. M. Artistic labour markets and careers //Annual review of sociology. – 1999. – Т. 25. – №. 1. – С.541-574.39Neff G., Wissinger E., Zukin S. Entrepreneurial labour among cultural producers: “Cool” jobs in “hot” industries//Social semiotics. – 2005. – Т. 15. – №.

3. – С. 307-334.368Pivovarov analyze the participation of artists in a group work (art group) using the concept of riskbehaviour of "walking around the edge" by S. Ling40. The author of the activist studies E.Abramova 41 conducted 15 interviews with Moscow artists and curators, which were published onthe Polit.ru portal. Commenting on the results of the project, Abramova mentions the significantinformality of labour relations, difficulties in solidarizing and autonomization of cultural workers.Despite the fact that this research is important for understanding creative work in Russia, it seemsnecessary to mention some limitations of the chosen methodology, for example, the chosen formatof the interview (the need for publication) could affect both the course of the interview and theselection of informants.Despite the fact that the Russian studies of creative work itself are still scarce, research inrelated areas is actively developing, the results of these studies have been taken into account whileworking on this thesis.

In particular, Russian labour studies actively research the problems ofprecarious employment. In particular, there are both quantitative and qualitative studies offreelancers, and some of the groups studied can be attributed to creative workers (D.O. Strebkov,A.V. Shevchuk)42: for example, they studied such professional groups as designers, illustrators,copywriters and translators, architects43. Also, there are Russian studies of the IT sector, adjacentto the creative industries: O.I. Shkaratan, S.A.

Iniasevsky and Т.S. Lyubimova44, L.Zemnukhova45. There are also researches on unique groups that are not often the subject ofseparate analysis, for example, agency work studied by I.M. Kozina46.40Pivovarov A.M., Khokhlova A.M. Riski tvortcheskoi deiatelnosti khudozhnikov: “Za” i “Protiv” utchastia v artsoobshestvakh // Zhurnal Sotsiologii i Sotsialnoi Antropologii. – 2014. – V. 17. – №. 1. – P. 139-154.41Abramova E. Uslovia truda tvorcheskih rabotnikov: itogi proekta. 2013 [online] Available at:http://polit.ru/article/2012/09/30/altvorrabotnyki/ (access date: 16 October 2016)42Strebkov D. O., Shevchuk A. V.