“A right to the city”: Kronstadt and its inhabitants
https://doi.org/10.22394/2658-3895-2024-6-1-2-39-57
Abstract
The article examines the social space of modern Kronstadt, a small historical town within the boundaries of St. Petersburg, whose residents still claim to preserve a special collective identity. The work is based on materials collected during interviews with locals in the spring of 2021. Kronstadt’s social space is characterized and described as an assemblage in which heterogeneous forces interact, thereby determining the prospects for the town’s development — both in terms of urban economy and the perception of the townspeople. There are four main elements of the current urban identity—or four components of the “Kronstadt palimpsest”: first, the townspeople’s perception of the town’s status and resource position within the hierarchy of St. Petersburg’s urban environment. Second, the determination of the administrative and “natural” boundaries of the town on the territory of Kotlin Island. Third, the ranking of neighborhoods based on the degree of prestige, along with the folklorization of “disadvantaged” zones. And fourth, the attitude toward the influx of tourists and the perception of “strangers” by local residents, as well as the division of city attractions into “ceremonial” and “personal” ones. It is concluded that the townspeople’s ongoing pursuit of the “right to the city”, based on the history, geographical location of the settlement, and their own ideas about the preferred urban way of life, largely determines the uniqueness of the Kronstadt assemblage. This sets this small town apart from the array of satellite towns around Russian megacities.
About the Author
C. M. Korolev
The Patria Center for History and Culture
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cyril M. Korolev
St. Petersburg
References
1. Agafonova, A. (2015). Relational trend in Urban Studies. Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, XVIII(4), 96–110. (In Russian).
2. Akhmetova, M., Petrov, N., Baiduzh, M. (Eds.). (2018). An Imaginable Territory: from the local identity to a brand. Moscow: Neolit. (In Russian).
3. Arhipova, A., Kirzjuk, A. (2021). Dangerous Soviet Things. Urban Legends and Fears in the USSR. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. (In Russian).
4. Assman, A. (2012). Transformations between history and memory. New literary observer, 116(4), 16–31. (In Russian).
5. Chernysh, M., Markin, V. (Eds.). (2020). The Spatial development of small towns: social strategies and practices. Moscow: Federal Research Sociological Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russian).
6. DeLanda, M. (2006). A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
7. DeLanda, M. (2018). New philosophy of society. Assemblage theory and social complexity. Perm: Gile Press. (In Russian).
8. Farias, I., Bender, T. (2011). Urban assemblages: How actor network theory changes urban studies. London, New York: Routledge.
9. Foucault, M. (2006). Other spaces. In M. Foucault. Intellectuals and Power, 191–205. Moscow: Praxis. (In Russian).
10. Korolev, K. (2023). Kronstadt between remembering and oblivion: Online battles in the year of the 100th anniversary of the Kronstadt uprising. In A. Pavlovsky, A. Miller (Eds.). Memory on the Web: The Digital Turn in Memory Studies, 76–92. St. Petersburg: European University at Saint-Petersburg Publishing House. (In Russian).
11. Krest’yaninov, V. (2002). Kronstadt. The Fortress, the town, the port. St. Petersburg: Ostrov. (In Russian).
12. Latur, B. (2020). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Moscow: Higher School of Economics Publishing. (In Russian).
13. Lefebvre, A. (2015). Production of space. Moscow: Strelka Press. (In Russian).
14. Lubbe, H. (1982). Fortschritt als Orientirungsproblem — Aufklarung in der Gegenwart. Freiburg.
15. Marskamp, M., Paulos, J., Cvetinovic, M. (2016). Assembling cities: Studying planning practices and urban issues with STS. In ETH/EPFL Summer School 2016.
16. Markin, V., Chernysh, M. (Eds.). (2019). Small Towns in the Russian Social Space. Moscow: Federal Research Sociological Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russian).
17. McFarlane, C. (2011a). Assemblage and critical urbanism. City, 15(2), 204–224. DOI: 10.1080/13604813.2011.568715
18. McFarlane, C. (2011b). The city as assemblage. Environment and Planning, 29(4), 649–671. DOI: 10.1068/d4710.
19. Meinig, D. W. (1979). The Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes. New York: Oxford University Press.
20. Mel’nikova, E. The blockade as a focus of public disputes. Neprikosnovennyj zapas, 128(6), 142–156. (In Russian).
21. Milano, C., Novelli, M., Cheer, J. M. (2019). Overtourism and degrowth: A social movement perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2019(27), 18–58.
22. Mkrtchjan, N. (2013). Inner Migrations in Russia. In N. Mkrtchyan, E. Tyuryukanova (Compl). Migration in Russia 2000–2012. Reader in 3 volumes. V. 1: Migration processes and current issues of migration, 589–601. Moscow: Speckniga. (In Russian).
23. Naumova, M. (2020). New public spaces of Kronstadt: effects of museumification of the urban environment: Report at the city anthropological seminar of St. Petersburg. (In Russian).
24. Nora, P. (1999). Between memory and history. Problematics of places of memory. In P. Nora, M. Ozouf, G. Puimegea, M. Winock. France — memory, 17 –50. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg University Press. (In Russian).
25. Panchenko, A. (2015). Anthropology and conspirology. Forum for Anthropology and Culture, 2015(27), 89–94. (In Russian).
26. Podlesnaya, M. (2021). Small town in the context of the formation of agglomerations: a chance to survive or a blow from modernization? Sociologicheskaja nauka i social’naja praktika, 9(3), 184–200. (In Russian).
27. Rosenwein, B. (2008). Emotional Communities in the Early Middle Ages. Ithaca: Cornell University.
28. Savin, S. (2014). Geographic imagination and spatial myths in oral tradition in Kronstadt. Sravnitel’naja politika, 17(4), 80–82. (In Russian).
29. Wertsch, J. V. (2008). Collective memory and narrative templates. Social Research, 75(1), 133– 156.
30. Zamjatin, D. (2000). Space and heterotophy: to the semiotics of meta-geographic imagination. Chelovek: Obraz i suschnost’. Gumanitarnyje aspekty, 41(1), 29–52. DOI: 10.31249/chel/2020.01.02. (In Russian).
31. Zhitin, D., Krish’yane, Z., Seki, G., Berzin’sh, M. (2020). Spatial differences in the post-Soviet era: a comparative study of St. Peterburg and Riga. Baltic region, 12(1), 85–114. DOI: 10.5922/2079-8555-2020-1-6. (In Russian).
Review
For citations:
Korolev C.M. “A right to the city”: Kronstadt and its inhabitants. Urban Folklore and Anthropology. 2024;6(1-2):39-57. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/2658-3895-2024-6-1-2-39-57
Views:
72
Email this article 