Urban mediation as a format of post-tour representations of urban culture
EDN: PWTRNS
Abstract
The article examines the concept of urban mediation as a form of guided activity that takes the shape of a walk involving active audience participation. It offers a brief history of the notion of mediation in cultural contexts and considers the applicability of this approach to guided tours. The purpose of urban mediation is defined as the opposite of a conventional tour: not to convey factual information but to stimulate personal engagement with and interpretation of a place. The article draws on the author’s own experience of conducting urban mediation and outlines its key principles, including the prioritization of discussion, the flexibility of the route, and the careful balance between intervening in and refraining from altering the environment under study. It also critically examines several common tour-related objectives, such as the desire to charm participants with selected sites, the pursuit of creativity and interactivity, and attempts to adapt urban mediation to a mass audience.
Urban mediation practices show that the need for mediating interventions arises primarily in spaces lacking an obvious historical narrative, where analytical interpretation is more in demand than a story of the “history of the place”. At the same time, mediation is rarely formulated as a clear request from the general public. The majority of participants (about two-thirds) find it difficult to shift from passive perception to open discussion, and this often results in dissatisfaction with the perceived lack of information. Simultaneously, an active minority emerges that responds positively to the discussion-based format and emphasizes its value. Reflections on the criteria of success reveal that an emphasis on quantitative indicators tends to redirect attention toward mass tourism, whereas the more “elitist” discussion-driven approaches, appreciated by a minority of participants, offer greater substantive value for the practice of urban mediation.
About the Author
I. V. MaslovaRussian Federation
Irа V. Maslova
Moscow
References
1. Afanasiev, O. E., Afanasieva, A. V. (2024). Innovative Technologies in the Excursion Industry. Moscow: Knorus. (In Russian).
2. Debord, G. (2017). Psychogeography. Moscow: Ad Marginem Press. (In Russian).
3. Emel’yanov, B. V. (2009). Excursion Studies. Moscow: Sovietskii Sport. (In Russian).
4. Freire, P. (2018). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Moscow: KoLibri; Azbuka-Attikus. (In Russian).
5. Mersch, K. (2012). Time (for) Cultural Mediation. Zürich: Pro Helvetia. (In Russian).
6. Piaget, J. (1994). Speech and Thinking in the Child. Moscow: Pedgogika-Press. (In Russian).
7. Rogers, C. (2002). Freedom to Learn. Moscow: Smysl. (In Russian).
8. Romanova, M. (2023). Methodological Guide for the Development and Implementation of Mediation Programs. Moscow: Garazh. (In Russian).
9. Vygotsky, L. S. (1926). Educational Psychology. Moscow: Rabotnik Prosveshcheniya. (In Russian).
Review
For citations:
Maslova I.V. Urban mediation as a format of post-tour representations of urban culture. Urban Folklore and Anthropology. 2025;7(4):128-143. (In Russ.) EDN: PWTRNS



















