Ludmila B. ZUBANOVA Chelyabinsk State University
129 Kashirinykh Brothers St., Chelyabinsk, 454001, Russian Federation
Faculty of Journalism, Professor of Media Theory Department
Doctor of Sciences (Cultural Studies)
Professor
e-mail: milazubanova@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0001-6081-5568
Sergey B. SINETSKYChelyabinsk State Institute of Culture
36 A Ordzhonikidze St., Chelyabinsk, 454091, Russian Federation
Rector
Doctor of Sciences (Cultural Studies)
Associate Professor
e-mail: sbs62@mail.ru
ORCID: 0000-0000-0000-0000
Sergey S. SOKOVIKOV Chelyabinsk State Institute of Culture
36 A Ordzhonikidze St., Chelyabinsk, 454091, Russian Federation
Faculty of Cultural Studies, Department of Philosophy and Cultural Studies
PhD (Pedagogical Sciences)
Associate Professor
e-mail: sokovik49@mail.ru
ORCID: 0000-0002-2151-2684
Zubanova, L., Sinetsky, S., Sokovikov, S. (2026) Metamodernism and the Transitive Methodology of Cultural ResearchAbstract: This article advances a comprehensive framework for a transitive methodology in the analysis of contemporary culture. Methodology: The research is grounded in conceptual-comparative analysis, functional and conceptual modeling, and theoretical synthesis with elements of a paradigmatic approach. It also incorporates case study methods and interpretative strategies based on ethnographic fieldwork. Responding to the increasing complexity, heterogeneity, and volatility of today’s cultural landscape, the authors identify a pressing need for research approaches that are both structurally isomorphic to contemporary cultural dynamics and capable of interpreting their inherent indeterminacy. Such approaches, they argue, must be sensitive to context, open to multiplicity, and oriented toward the zones of uncertainty that characterize late modernity and its aftermath. The concept of transitivity is developed at the intersection of two key cultural-logical categories: transitionality, denoting the shifts in cultural patterns and configurations, and hybridization, referring to the intermixing of cultural elements. Together, these notions encapsulate the core dynamics of the current socio-cultural milieu and its symptomatic instability. The authors systematize a set of principles drawn from recent cultural theory –assemblage, relationality, heterogeneity, openness to transformation, and the synthesis of diverse research paradigms – as foundational to this methodological turn. In addition to these, the article introduces several novel principles that further define a transitive approach:
• A prioritization of processuality over structural stasis;
• The role of subjective and creative agency in constructing cultural reality;
• Performative entanglement between the researcher and the social actors embedded within the field of study.
The productive integration of heterogeneous theoretical constructs within this framework is interpreted through the lens of metasystemic theory, which enables a flexible yet coherent epistemological grounding for analyzing cultural phenomena in flux. A central focus of the article is the application of the transitive methodology to the study of metamodernism, which is conceptualized both as a cultural formation in its own right and as a source of epistemological and methodological tools. The authors place particular emphasis on the metamodern logic of oscillation –a dynamic interplay between polarities such as irony and sincerity, detachment and engagement, fragmentation and reconstruction. This oscillatory logic is proposed as a potent analytical lens for grasping the unstable, transitional nature of contemporary cultural processes. The article concludes with an illustrative case study: an analysis of the memorial landscape of Arkaim, an archaeological and cultural heritage site in the Southern Urals. Through this example, the authors demonstrate the heuristic power of the transitive methodology in situ, showing how it enables a multilayered reading of cultural sites where myth, history, identity, and ideology converge in hybrid and performative configurations.
Key words: contemporary culture; transitivity; methodology; multiparadigmaticity; metamodernism; Arkaim.
References:
- Freinacht, H. You’re not metamodern before you understand this. Part 2: Proto-Synthesis// Metamoderna: 15.03.2015. URL: https://metamoderna.org/youre-not-metamodern-before-you-understand-this-part-2-proto-synthesis-2/?lang=en (Accessed: 24.07.2025).
- Zubanova, L. B. (2019). Tranzitnaia metodologiia v issledovaniiakh mediakul’tury: ot potrebleniia – k setevoi solidarnosti [Transit methodology in media culture studies: From consumption to network solidarity]. In L. B. Gubanova, N. L. Zykhovskaya et al. (Eds.), Orientiry kul’turnoi politiki XXI veka: aktual’nye napravleniia issledovanii [Landmarks of cultural policy of the 21st century: Current research trends] (pp. 121–140). Cheliabinskii gosudarstvennyi institut kul’tury. (In Russian)
- Waldenfels, B. (2002). Odnovremennost’ neodnoznachnogo: sovremennyi poryadok v zerkale bol’shogo goroda [Simultaneity of the heterogeneous: The modern order in the mirror of the big city]. Logos, (3–4), 332–350. (In Russian)
- Guseltseva, M. S. (2018). Metamodernizm v psikhologii: novye metodologicheskie strategii i izmeneniia sub’’ektivnosti [Metamodernism in psychology: New methodological strategies and changes in subjectivity]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Ser. Psikhologiia, 8(4), 327–340. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu16.2018.402 (In Russian)
- Storm, J. A. J. (2021) Metamodernism: the future of theory. Chicago ; London : The University of Chicago Press. XIII; 360 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226786797.001.0001
- Martsinkovskaia, T. D. (2023). Istoriko-geneticheskii podkhod k issledovaniiu sovremennogo tranzitivnogo mira [Historical-genetic approach to the study of the modern transitive world]. In A. L. Zhuravlev, E. A. Sergienko, & G. A. Vilenskaia (Eds.), Nauchnye podkhody v sovremennoi otechestvennoi psikhologii [Scientific approaches in modern domestic psychology] (pp. 212–226). Institut psikhologii RAN. https://doi.org/10.38098/thry_23_0465 (In Russian)
- Venkova, A. V. (2018). Politiki identichnosti v iskusstve metamodernizma [Identity politics in metamodernist art]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Kul’turologiia i iskusstvovedenie, 32, 203–213. https://doi.org/10.17223/22220836/32/20 (In Russian)
- Luhmann, N. (2005). Real’nost’ massmedia [The reality of mass media] (A. Iu. Antonovskii, Trans.). Moskva: Praksis. (Original work published 1996). (In Russian)
- DeLanda, M. (2018). Novaia filosofiia obshchestva: teoriia assamblazhei i sotsial’naia slozhnost’ [A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity] (K. S. Maiorova, Trans.). Sankt-Peterburg: Gileia. (Original work published 2006). (In Russian)
- Schäfer, H. (2017) Relationality and Heterogeneity: Transitive Methodology in Practice Theory and Actor-Network Theory // Methodological Reflections on Practice Oriented Theories: Eds. Jonas, M; Littig, B; Wroblewsky, A. Springer International Publishing. 35–46.
- Karpov, A. V. (2023). Sushchnost’ i soderzhanie metasistemnogo podkhoda [The essence and content of the metasystem approach]. In A. L. Zhuravlev, E. A. Sergienko, & G. A. Vilenskaia (Eds.), Nauchnye podkhody v sovremennoi otechestvennoi psikhologii [Scientific approaches in modern domestic psychology] (pp. 314–349). Institut psikhologii RAN. https://doi.org/10.38098/thry_23_0465 (In Russian)
- Egorov, D. I. (2022). Istorizatsiia metamodernizma [Historization of metamodernism]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Ser.: Istoriia i politicheskie nauki, (4), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.18384/2310-676X-2022-4-82-90 (In Russian)
- Morozov, A. V. (2019). Ostorozhno, metamodern: sovremennost’ kak zontik i maianik [Caution, metamodern: Modernity as an umbrella and a pendulum]. Galactica Media: Zhurnal issledovanii kul’tury i medii, 3, 238–249. https://doi.org/10.24411/2658-7734-2019-10032 (In Russian)
- Turner, L. The Metamodernist Manifesto // Luke Turner. 02.03.2011. URL: https://luketurner.com/the-metamodernist-manifesto (Accessed: 26.07.2025)
- Vermeulen, T., Akker, R. Misunderstandings and clarifications // Notes on Metamodernnism. 03.06.2015. URL: https://www.metamodernism.com/2015/06/03/misunderstandings-and-clarifications/ (Accessed: 26.07.2025).
- Drobysheva, E. E. (2024). Proto/meta/ul’tra/post: Sovremennaia sotsiogumanitaristika v poiskakh kontsepta [Proto/meta/ultra/post: Modern social sciences and humanities in search of a concept]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta kul’tury i iskusstv, 3(119), 6–13. https://doi.org/10.24412/1997-0803-2024-3119-6-13 (In Russian)
- Mureiko, L. V. (2023). “Novaia iskrennost’” i “novaia chuvstvitel’nost’” v epistemologicheskoi strategii metamodernizma [“New sincerity” and “new sensitivity” in the epistemological strategy of metamodernism]. Nauchnoe mnenie, (11), 37–43. https://doi.org/10.25807/22224378_2023_11_37 (In Russian)
- Zagidullina, M. V. (2024a). “Osparivaemye territorii”: o padenii natsional’noi pretsedentnoi bazy [“Contested territories”: On the decline of the national precedent base]. Filologicheskii klass, 29(4), 48–56. https://doi.org/10.26170/2071-2405-2024-29-4-48-56 (In Russian)
- Sokolovikov, S. S., & Kaminskaia, E. A. (2023). Spontannaia ierotopiia v sovremennom mifotvorchestve: sluchai Arkaima [Spontaneous hierotopy in contemporary myth-making: The case of Arkaim]. Observatoriia kul’tury, 20(6), 658–668. https://doi.org/10.25281/2072-3156-2023-20-6-658-668 (In Russian)
- Zagidullina, M. V. (2024b). Gibridnye epistemicheskie ubezhdeniia: ob osobennostiakh turisticheskogo osvoeniia Arkaima [Hybrid epistemic beliefs: On the features of tourist development of Arkaim]. Gorizonty tsivilizatsii, 15(2), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.47475/2413-0125-2024-15-2-19-28 (In Russ.).
- Dwyer, O. J., Alderman, D. H. (2008) Memorial landscapes: analytic questions and metaphors. GeoJournal, (73), 173. DOI: 10.1007/s10708-008-9201-5.
For Citation: Zubanova, L., Sinetsky, S., Sokovikov, S. (2026) Metamodernism and the Transitive Methodology of Cultural Research. International Journal of Cultural Research, 1 (62). 78–94. DOI: 10.52173/2079-1100_2026_1_78
DOI: 10.52173/2079-1100_2026_1_78
