# 3(36)2019
Issued 1.10.

# 2(35)2019
Issued 1.07.

# 1(34)2019
Issued 1.04.

# 4(33)2018
Issued 1.01.

# 3(32)2018
Issued 1.10.

# 2(31)2018
Issued 1.07.

# 1(30)2018
Issued 1.04.

# 4(29)2017
Issued 1.01.

# 3(28)2017
Issued 1.10.

# 2(27)2017
Issued 1.07.

# 1(26)2017
Issued 1.04.

Google Scholar


Call For Papers


# 4 (37) 2019: After Post-Photography

Guest Editors

pict Maria GOURIEVA
PhD in Philosophy, Assistant Professor, St. Petersburg State Institute for Culture; Senior Lecturer, St. Petersburg State University
Saint Petersburg, Russia
Co-Organizer of After Post-Photography International Conference.
pict Friedrich TIETJEN
PhD in Art History, Independent Researcher and Curator, Vienna/Leipzig; Lecturer at Department of Art History, University of Vienna
Vienna, Austria
Co-Organizer of After Post-Photography International Conference.

The term ‘post-photography’ has circulated in academic literature since W.J.T.Mitchell’s «The Reconfigured Eye: Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era» (1992). Although, Mitchell considered primarily the consequence of the advent of the digital in photography, the further use of the term was circulated in a wider field where rethinking of photography and its cultural context was not always connected with distinguishing the ‘post-photography’ by emphasizing the digital technology as its main feature. Often ‘post-photographic’ discussions would concern cultural practices of creation/dissemination/use of both digital and analogue photography as well as new methodologies in research of photography’s history. Fruthermore, the ‘post-photographic’ discourse includes the criticism of juxtaposing the digital and analogue: how serious is the change introduced by digital technologies is still a question. It is likely, however, that the advent of the digital has inspired the re-consideration of problematics that had been addressed already with ‘pre-digital’ photography. One of these important questions is the photographic truth, the connection between photograph and referent: with all that we know about photography being able not only to register but to create realities, still part of our everyday experience is closely connected to trusting photographs as documents and witnesses. One other important problem of the ‘post-photographic’ discourse is the inflation of archives and intensification of exchange of images as well as the search for methods to study the massive collections of images available in digital format and the practices of digital visual communication. As ‘before digital’, it is important that photography formats the cultural experience by adjusting the optics of the mindset and prescribing the visual rhetoric of communication.
We invite authors to an interdisciplinary discussion shaped around, but not limited to, the following topics:

  • looking back: revisiting the history of photography
  • social and anthropological meanings of photography
  • photography and memory
  • photography and histories/politics of gaze/spectacle/vision
  • photography as agent and agency of collective and private histories
  • photography without referent: computer games, AR, VR
  • private photography: topoi, identities, practices
  • true/false witness: photography and the regimes of truth
  • the interdisciplinary field of photography studies and its actual problematics
  • hybrids of photographic and non-photographic practices
  • history and theory of photographic optics
  • history and theory of photo-chemistry.

* used for pictures of guest editors are images of non-existent faces produced by Nvidia’s StyleGAN algorithm on

Deadline for submissions: 30 November 2019.


№ 1 (38) 2020: Anthropology ad Marginem

Guest Editor

pict Yuri A. RAZINOV
Doctor of Science in Philosophy, Assistant Professor
Professor of the Samara National Research University named by S.P. Korolev, Samara, Russia

Marginality is not only a concept of scientific and philosophical discourse, which describes the phenomenon of borderline and extremity. Marginality increasingly becoming a feature of mentality, a model of social life and cultural activities. The modern world is fundamentally marginal because it is characterized by transboundariness, nonlinearity, openess, heterogeneity and transgressivity. It is a complex multi-level system with moving boundaries and a non-localizable center and periphery.
The postmodern situation is characterized by the decentralization and segmentation of the entire field of normativity, the establishment of separate rules for each local segment, and as consequence, the problematization of the idea of the marginality of a particular area, which is built relative to the boundary. As a result, the former criteria for distinguishing boundary and transboundary phenomena, and accordingly, different types of extremities, deviations, and perversions are lost.
The topicality of the problem of marginality is determined by the fact that the traditional concept of science of a marginal group, mode of life, behavioral style or mental activity no longer corresponds to reality, since it was born in a culture of rigidly structured boundaries and oppositions. Today we should talk about two trends. On the one hand, there is an inversion of the normative and marginal spaces, the center and the periphery, when the marginal becomes mainstream, and the normative is penetrated into the marginal, i.e. the opposition members change places, but the opposition itself remains. On the other hand, there is a diffusion of marginal to the area of normative-conventional forms up to the complete erasure of boundaries, when the common cultural space is so diversified and segmented that the opposition of the normative and marginal itself is eliminated. Thus, there are two problems. On the one hand, there is a frontal crisis of identities and a normative image of a person, which raises the question of his symbolic safety and hygiene. On the other hand, there is a crisis of conceptual basis for distinguishing the normative and marginal, which raises the question of determining the content and status of these concepts.
This circumstance requires the reconfiguration of traditional research optics towards boundary phenomena, since the historically established approaches to the phenomenon of marginality no longer respond to either the spirit or the challenges of the times. First of all, it refers to philosophical anthropology as an academic discipline. Being engaged in the study of “main phenomena” and cultivating the normative image of a person (M. Heidegger, J.-P. Sartre, E. Fink, and others), she did not pay enough attention to marginal phenomena, many of which are in the context of “serious” philosophical discourse not even themed. At the same time, it is obvious that marginality is not only a section of social life, a characteristic of a social group, or a certain constellation of behavioral traits. This is, above all, a way of being a person in the world and realizing his own essential forces. The human world, especially the modern one, is extremely diverse, and therefore must be represented in its many manifestations, including such as laziness, drunkenness, idleness, pilgrimage and hermitry, illness and death, etc., in relation to which local «human worlds» are built. Only in this way – by moving “at the edges of a person,” one can understand the arrangement of its symbolic center.

Suggested issue topics:

  • Primary and marginal phenomena of human existence: the problem of demarcation
  • Ontology of marginality: boundary and limit as ontological categories of marginality
  • Marginal spaces: terra nullius, heterotopies, “gray zone”, zones of alienation, slums, limes, borderzone
  • Marginal time: work and leisure, laziness and idleness; residual time, lost time, empty time, boredom; marginal age
  • Marginal phenomena of social existence: pilgrimage, hermitry, homelessness, homelessness, depravity, god's fool, drug addiction, drunkenness, crime, etc.
  • Limits of desire and marginal gender
  • Boundary experience of death: death and near-death. "The Living Dead": vampires, zombies
  • Marginalization of philosophical discourse: philosophy of marginality and marginality of philosophy
  • Marginal phenomena of consciousness: psychopathy, accentuation, borderline states, psychosis, trance, hypnosis, dream, intoxication
  • Border situations: fear, longing, horror, ecstasy.

Deadline for submissions: 15 January 2020



К проблеме наездницы русского постмодернизма

Sunday, 22 September 2013 | Olga Kirillova
Посвящается В. Л. Рабиновичу Насмерть загоню? Не бойся — ты же, брат, не Брут: Смерть мала и ненадолго, Цезарь...
Comment: 1

Рецензия на книгу: Попова Д.Л Сакральная семиосфера северного города. - Архангельск, 2015

Saturday, 28 October 2017 | Alexander Lyusiy
Сакральная семиосфера северного города: монография/Д.Л.Попова; М-во образования и науки Российской Федер,...
Comments: 0

Арзрум, да не тот. Империобол как предчувствие футболистической революции

Tuesday, 26 June 2012 | Alexander Lyusiy
В основе материала — выступление автора на Международном конгрессе «Россия и Польша: память...
Comments: 0

Reminder about Humbert

Thursday, 05 April 2012 | Alexander Lyusiy
There are no translations available yet.
Comments: 0

There are no translations available yet

Friday, 01 July 2011 | Irina Sokolova
There are no translations available yet
Comments: 0

Oil — a metaphor for culture

Tuesday, 15 November 2011 | Anna Rileva
There are no translations available yet
Comments: 2

The Chronotope of Illustrated Magazine

Friday, 14 January 2011 | Margarita Gudova
The article deals with the industry glossy magazines as an agent of modernization of consciousness and the transition from the patriarchal and industrial models to the identification of...
Comments: 3

There are no translations available yet

Tuesday, 15 November 2011 | Alexey Krivolap
There are no translations available yet
Comment: 1