Vol. 1(1). 2018
  


        . . .   ,  , .





Vol. 1(1). 2018



   



ISBN978-5-4490-9687-6

     Ridero




 / EDITORIALTEAM


  /

International Editorial Council

Noel Carroll, USA/

 ,

Antanas Andrijauskas, Lithuania/

 , 

Peng Feng, China/

 , 

Beata Frydryczak, Poland/

 , 

Mateusz Salwa, Poland/

Ma , 

Christoph Wulf, Germany/

 , 

 , /

Marat Afasizhev, Russia

Marija Vabalaite, Lithuania/

 , 



 /

Editorial Board

 ,  /

Sergey Dzikevich, Editor-in-Chief

 , 

 /

Yevgeniy Kondratiev, Deputy

Editor-in-Chief

 /

Elena Bogatyreva

 /

Elena Romanova

 , -/

Yevgeniy Dobrov, Editorial Secretary




   





 













  

  / 

(    )

  Ƞ 

  / 

(       )











   Π Ƞ

  / 

(       )











Ơ

 Ƞ:  

 1.   :  

.   / 











    

(젖   /    ... .: -, 2017)

  / 











 .  

  / 

(       )





READ INTHIS ISSUE





Theory





THE MIMETIC CREATION OFTHE IMAGINARY

Christoph Wulf / Germany

(Full text inEnglish and Russian languages)

NATURE OFTHE AESTHETIC AND BECOMING OFART

Marat Afasizhev / Russia

(Full text inRussian with information inEnglish)





History





AESTHETICS AFTER DEBATES ABOUT MODERNISM AND POSTMODERNISM

Elena Bogatyreva / Russia

(Full text inRussian with information inEnglish)





Translations





GEORGE DICKIE.

ART AND THE AESTHETIC: AN INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS

CHAPTER 1. WHAT ISART: AN INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS

Translated into Russian bySergey Dzkevich





Reviews





SYMBOLISM INFUNDAMENTAL ANALYSIS

(Symbolism New Perspectives / Ed. by I.E.Svetlov. Moscow: Kanon-Plus, 2017)

Sergey Dzikevich / Russia





Practices





NINA SIMON. PARTICIPATORY MUSEUM. REWIEW

Alyona Grigorash / Russia

(Full text inRussian with information inEnglish)





 


       ࠫAesthetica Universalis ( ),             .

 Aesthetica Universalis,          ..,     ,       ,   ,     .     ,         .           ,       ,   .

  ,   Aesthetica Universalis,     ,             .      :  (   );  (- );  (     );  ( ,   );  (    ).

      c   .

 :    (  );   (  ); , ,   ;   ( );   200300 ( );   ( , 57  );   (  );  ;    .

 : aestheticauniversalis@gmail.com



 ,
  Aesthetica Universalis




Editorial


With this issue we start publishingAesthetica Universalis, thetheoretical journal established byDepartment ofAesthetics at Philosophy Faculty ofLomonosov Moscow State University. We suppose our journal tobe included into largest international data bases.

The content ofevery issue will be divided into the following sections: THEORY (the aesthetic field from contemporary theoretical points ofview); HISTORY (appearance, transformations and adventures ofaesthetic ideas indifferent times and within different cultures); TRANSLATIONS (significant aesthetic sources translated into Russian); REVIEWS (expositions ofremarkable publications, dissertations and conferences on aesthetics); PRACTICES (descriptions ofaesthetic experience ofdifferent kinds).

Our journal is bilingual(English and Russian), it means that all texts will have this quality intheir structure. If you write inEnglishyou do your work the main part ofyour work (your name, your affiliation, the title, annotation, key words, the very text body, references) inthis language but after these mentioned parts you add Russian details ofapparatus (the name, the title, annotation and key words). If you write inRussian you do the same job but vice-versa. Yourtext must be ofno less than 20000and no more than 40000charactersincluding spaces, English and Russian parts intotal.

Your text must be organized inthe following order:

1. You must put your nameand your affiliationbefore your text inthe language ofthe main part ofyour publication, and e-mail.

2. Then you put the titleinthe same language.

3. Then the annotationinthe same language follows, it must consist of200300words.

4. Then you put the key words (710ones) inthe same language.

5. Thenreferences inthe language ofthe main text are going. Our journal supports Harvard styleofreferences.

6. Then you put annotation inthe language oftranslation(200300words). Than you put the key words inthe language oftranslation.

Your file must be saved inRich Text Format (rtf), font Book Antiqua, 12for main the main part ofthe article (the name, the title, the body ofthe text) and Book Antiqua, 10for the apparatus (annotations, key words, references). Please, make margins as inthis letter and paragraphs as inthe model that is following.

Editorial e-mail:

aestheticauniversalis@gmail.com



SERGEY DZIKEVICH,
Aesthetica Universalis Editor-in-Chief




THEORY / 





ChristophWulf[1 - Christoph Wulf is Professor ofAnthropology and Education and amember ofthe Interdisciplinary Centre for Historical Anthropology, the Collaborative Research Centre (SFB, 19992011) Cultures ofPerformance, the Cluster ofExcellence Languages ofEmotion (20072012) and the Graduate School InterArts at Freie Universit?t Berlin. His books have been translated into more than 15languages. He is Vice-President ofthe German Commission for UNESCO. Research stays and invited professorships have included the following locations, among others: Stanford; Tokyo, Kyoto; Beijing; Shanghai; Mysore, Delhi; Paris, Lille, Strasbourg; Modena; Amsterdam; Stockholm; Copenhagen; London; Vienna; Rome, Saint Petersburg, Moscow, Kazan; Sao Paulo. Major research areas: historical and cultural anthropology, educational anthropology, rituals, gestures, emotions, imagination, intercultural communication, mimesis, aesthetics, epistemology. Christoph Wulf is editor, co-editor and member ofthe editorial staff ofmany international journals, and also amember ofAesthetica Universalis International Editorial Council.]





THE MIMETIC CREATION OFTHE IMAGINARY. ANTHROPOLOGICAL PREREQUISITES OFMIMETIC PROCESSES


Abstract

Young children learn tomake sense ofthe world through mimetic processes. These processes are focused tobegin with on their parents, brothers and sisters and people they know well. Young children want tobecome like these persons. They are driven bythe desire tobecome like them, which will mean that they belong and are part ofthem and their world. Young children, and indeed humans ingeneral are social beings. They, more than all non-human primates, are social beings who cannot survive without the Other. Inmimetic processes the outside world becomes the inner world and the inner world becomes the outside world. The imaginary is developed and the imaginary develops ways ofrelating tothe outside world. Inamimetic loop, this inturn affects the inner world ofthe imaginary. These processes are sensory and governed bydesire. All the senses are involved which means that the imaginary has multiple layers. Since there is an intermingling ofimages, emotions and language, these processes are rooted inthe body and at the same time transcend the body as they become part ofthe imaginary. Human beings create images ofthemselves inall cultures and historical periods. They need these images tounderstand themselves and their relationship toother human beings and todevelop social relations and communities. Images ofthe human being are designs and projections ofthe human being and his or her relationship toother people and tothe world. They are formed tovisualize representations ofindividuals or aspects ofthem. They arise when we communicate about ourselves. They supportus tolive with diversities and todevelop similarities and feelings ofbelonging with other people. They are the result ofcomplex anthropological processes, inwhich social and cultural power structures play an important role.



Key words

Mimesis, images, the imaginary.



Young children learn tomake sense ofthe world through mimetic processes. These processes are focussed tobegin with on their parents, brothers and sisters and people they know well. Young children want tobecome like these persons. They are driven bythe desire tobecome like them, which will mean that they belong and are part ofthem and their world. Young children, and indeed humans ingeneral are social beings. They, more than all non-human primates, are social beings who cannot survive without the Other. There are several anthropological conditions behind this.

One ofthese is neoteny, or the fact that human beings are born at an embryonic stage intheir development. Inother words human beings are born unfinished or incomplete. Their development has totake place once their life has started, and for this tohappen they need people who are close tothem, people they desire and who they want tobe like. Unlike other non-human primates and animals, children are not governed bytheir instincts. They are equipped only with residual instincts which are not strong enough for them tobe able tosurvive if they are not kept alive bythe people close tothem.

We can see this clearly if we compare ayoung child toafoal. Afoal is capable ofliving just afew hours after its birth, whereas it takes young human beings years toreach that stage. Neoteny and the decrease inthe instincts are inextricably linked. As Philosophical Anthropology has also indicated, this explains why human beings are able tograsp the suchness (Sosein) ofphenomena, inother words the world, whereas animals are only able toperceive an environment determined bytheir instincts (Wulf 2013a, chap.2)

It is through mimetic processes that children make their early discoveries ofthe world. It is not only that children try tobecome like other people whom they desire. It is also their discovery ofthe world that is mimetic. These early processes ofperceiving the world that are ofsuch central importance inthe development ofthe imaginary, are frequently mimetic. Inother words, at avery early stage young children develop an active relationship tothe world. They adopt relationships toobjects which are conveyed tothem largely bythe people whom they desire toemulate. For example children follow adults movements when adults give them abottle filled with tea. They perceive the objects bottle and tea and the movement ofthe person they love giving them something todrink. As children mimetically appropriate the way the adults they love give them the tea, they feel and appropriate both the act ofgiving the tea and also the warmth and caring this expresses, over and above the act oftea giving. As children appropriate the action there is an interplay between the object that quenches their thirst (the bottle) and the childs appropriation ofthe emotional aspect ofthe action, the caring. Young children perceive these processes at an early age, and at this point it is the receptive aspect that is dominant. It is the adults who perform the actions and the children who perceive them. Afew months later this changes and the active side ofperception becomes more important. Achilds perception ofthe world is socially transmitted very early on. Since the medium for this is culture, the child becomes encultured while very young. This happens via the movements ofpersons close tothe child. These movements convey meanings, even if these are not yet conveyed inwords. Children understand the gesture ofsomeone giving them tea (Wulf, and Fischer-Lichte 2010). It contains ameaning, even though this meaning is not articulated verbally. This is because gestures, as non-verbal acts, still convey meaning. What conveys the meaning here is the movement ofthe body, driven bythe senses, which children perceive at avery early age and then repeat, also very early on, inmimetic processes (Gebauer, and Wulf 2018).

It is inmimetic processes that children discover the sense ofgestural actions, asense that is implicit and often does not even need tobe conveyed because it is has already been conveyed bythe body. Such gestural actions form part ofour vast silent knowledge, which is so very important inhuman life but which is often accorded little value incomparison with scientific knowledge which society reveres (Kraus, Budde, Hietzge, and Wulf 2017). Ryle clearly identified the different nature ofthe knowledge that manifests itself inactions ofthe body inhis distinction between knowing how and knowing that (Ryle 1990). Learning toride abike is agood illustration ofthis. Ican read awhole treatise about what you have todo when riding abike, but it will be ofvery little help tome when learning. Learning toride abike does not involve knowing that but knowing how. Ineed tobe able todo it, and have tolearn it practically, byusing my body. There is no other way Ican acquire this knowledge, that is far more an ability. Here too, learning toride abike is the result ofmimetic processes, processes that have torelate toother people but above all tothe movements ofour own bodies. This is akind ofmimesis ofourselves where we develop amimetic relationship toour own behaviour inorder toimproveit.

Now toreturn tothe mimetic processes that take place inyoung children, bymeans ofwhich they develop their imaginary. Even before they reach the age ofone, they are able tounderstand the intentions ofthe people close tothem. If someone points at something, for example, then they follow the gesture ofpointing, not stopping at the finger itself, but grasping that the aim ofthe pointing is an object and not the finger itself. (Tomasello 1999). It is already apparent inone year olds that they are beginning touse mimetic processes tomake sense ofthe world and gradually transform it into their imaginary. Through mimetic processes the outside world becomes their inner world. As non-verbal actions addressed bysubjects towards objects, gestures play an important role inconveying emotional caring and attachment. This is because they are demonstrative and at the same time directed towards the other person. Inamimetic process they convey apositive social relationship and arelationship tothe objects ofacultural world. Both ofthese become absorbed into achilds imaginary inthe mimetic process, resulting inacomplex interlinking ofacultural object (abottle), the adults act ofcaring and the meaning ofthis interplay for the child.

Inhis autobiography, Berlin Childhood around 1900, Walter Benjamin (2006) illustrated how children incorporate their cultural environments inprocesses ofassimilation. Inthe course ofthese processes, children assimilate aspects ofthe parental home, such as the rooms, particular corners, objects and atmospheres. They are incorporated as imprints ofthe images and stored inthe childs imaginary world, where they are subsequently transformed into new images and memories that help the child gain access toother cultural worlds. Culture is handed on bymeans ofthese processes ofincorporating and making sense ofcultural products. The mimetic ability totransform the external material world into images, transferring them into our internal worlds ofimages and making them accessible toothers enables individuals todevelop their imaginary and toactively shape cultural realities (Gebauer, and Wulf 1998, 2018; Wulf 2002; Wulf, and Zirfas 2014).

Even at the age ofone, children develop aconsiderable ability, though the fact that they are very active, toabsorb the world around them inmimetic processes. The ability ofachilds body tomove around plays an important role inthis. This physical moving enables them toalter their relationship toobjects inthe outside world. Their perspective on the world changes as they move. This applies tothe corners where the objects are perceived and even more tothe changing bodily encounters with the world. The world is touched bythe childs hands and often bythe childs whole body. As they gradually feel their way around the world children experience two things. One is the active childs experience oftouching the objects. But it is also the discovery that, through the act oftouching, the world itself replies. Children now feel the differences inmaterial objects and at the same time experience the world outside them. This dual experience oftouching objects and being touched bythem is ofcentral importance inthe development ofthe very first elements ofasense ofachilds identity. The child now has the dual experience ofbeing active and passive at the same time, an experience which characterises mimetic processes. Children touch the world and are touched back byit. This becomes acyclical process ofmutual discovery, and Icannot overstate how important this is for the development ofthe childs imaginary.

Inmimetic processes the outside world becomes the inner world and the inner world becomes the outside world. The imaginary is developed and the imaginary develops ways ofrelating tothe outside world. Again inamimetic loop, this inturn affects the inner world ofthe imaginary. These processes are sensory and governed bydesire. All the senses are involved which means that the imaginary has multiple layers. Since there is an intermingling ofimages, emotions and language, these processes are rooted inthe body and at the same time transcend the body as they become part ofthe imaginary (Wulf 2014; H?ppauf, and Wulf 2009; Paragrana 2016).

As we read works ofliterature, it is mimetic processes that bring tolife an assemblage ofnon-sensory words into sensory ideas and emotions and give them meaning. (Benjamin 1980a, 1980b). It is the same with other products ofculture that also require mimetic processes for them tocome alive. Such processes are particularly important inthe transfer ofthe cultural imaginary from one generation tothe next, since these processes require ametamorphosis tokeep forms ofliving, knowledge, art or technology alive. As mimetic processes are not simply methods ofcopying or producing worlds that have already been symbolically interpreted but also consist inour taking and then incorporating impressions ofthese worlds, these mimetic relationships always contain creative aspects which alter the original worlds. This creates acultural dynamism between generations and cultures which constantly gives rise tonew things.




IMAGES OFTHE HUMAN BEING: THE VISUALISATION OFTHE INVISIBLE


It is inmimetic processes that images ofthe outside world are transferred toour imaginary. Our imaginary constructs images which shape the outside world (Wulf 2018). These images also include those we make ofourselves, images inwhich and bymeans ofwhich we try tomake sense ofourselves. People create images ofthemselves inall cultures and historical periods. They need these images tocommunicate about themselves and tounderstand themselves. Images ofthe human being are designs and projections ofthe human being. They are formed inorder tovisualise representations ofthe human being or individual aspects ofaperson. These representations are simplifications ofhuman diversity and complexity inillustrations. Aproductive moment is portrayed here inthese representations, as the discussion about the Laocoon statue shows. Historical developments and interpretative variants are not displayed insuch iconic productive moments. The special nature ofan image lies inthe concentration on one moment and inthe suggested evidence, but the limits ofthe iconic representation are also revealed therein. Human images are always simplifications, which, despite their simplifying character, are extremely effective. The power structures ofasociety which are often difficult tosee are incorporated inthe construction ofthe human images. Human images are the result ofdifferentiated inclusion and exclusion processes. Desires, norms and values are conveyed inhuman images. Human images are aimed at the normalisation ofpeople. Social and cultural institutions, as well as religions, utopias and world views, use human images toportray their conceptions ofhumans and toembed their ideas inthe imaginary and inthe actions ofhumans.

Such human images are clearly expressed, for example inthe sculptures ofAncient Greece, inwhich the ideal ofthe good and beautiful, the Kolokagathia, the unit ofphysical beauty and spiritual quality, is expressed. Also inthe Christian Middle Ages there are human images inwhich the devout, godly person is represented. The biblia pauperum inthe churches ofthe Middle Ages show this clearly. We find representations ofgodly people subdivided according tostatus into monks, nobles and peasants, inwhich the hierarchical structures ofthe society are also reflected. Nationalism inthe 19th century and inthe first half ofthe 20th century highlighted numerous idealising images of, for example, the Germans and the French, which became role models for education and an honourable life. Socialism inthe Soviet Union and inEastern Europe also tried toembed acertain human image inthe imagination ofthe young generation. Today the European Union also endeavours toachieve the human image ofafree, independent democratic citizen as amodel ofhuman development and education inEurope (Wulf 1995, 1998).




THE IMAGE OFASUSTAINABLE HUMAN BEING


After the period for the realisation ofthe millennium objectives set for the developing countries expires in2015and succeeds inreducing poverty and illiteracy inmany parts ofthe world, the community ofnations is currently working intensively on developing sustainability goals (for the World Summit inautumn 2015). Inthis process there are philosophical and anthropological analyses ofthe ethical questions associated with sustainability, the development and discussion ofthe feasibility ofthe sustainability goals, the clarification ofthe concepts and the consistency ofthe argumentation and the methodical and argumentative approach. Development is sustainable when it secures the quality oflife ofcurrent generations without compromising the ability offuture generations toshape their life (DUK 2014). The sustainability objectives arising from this definition are interrelated with aculture ofpeace and human rights, cultural diversity and democratic participation and the rule oflaw. Aculture ofsustainable development is necessary for the transformation ofthe economy and society. Future-oriented models, ideas, norms and forms ofknowledge are required for its development. These should be supplemented bythe development ofsustainability values and corresponding attitudes and ways oflife. The education for sustainable development also plays an important role here. Without it the initiation ofindependent action is not possible. The international community ofstates is looking for ahuman image, on which representatives from all societies and cultures can agree and which can span the cultural differences as arole model. It is currently not clear whether such ahuman image is possible and whether such an image would destroy the cultural diversity between the parts ofthe world. There is also reasonable doubt as towhether and towhat extent such images can be used tolevel cultural differences between the geographical regions ofthe world without cultivating tension between them.




DEVELOPMENT AND POWER OFIMAGES OFTHE HUMAN BEING


Why do we assume that images ofthe human being and images produced bythe human being are so effective? Why do they have such an influence on the development ofsocieties, communities and individuals? Ibelieve three reasons are ofparticular importance here:

1) Cultural learning takes place using mimetic processes, i.e. processes ofcreative imitation (Wulf 2013a; Gebauer and Wulf 2018, 1998). Images play an important role here. This includes images ofother people, images ofthe living environment and human images occurring gradually insynthetic processes. Human images give orientation and meaning. They are shared with other people and create feelings ofbelonging and togetherness. Herein lies the sustainability oftheir effect. Images are not easily adopted, but lived and internalised with other people and their interpretations. They occur inaction and language games. Incontrast tothe instincts ofanimals, they are historically and culturally determined and can be changed.

2) Human images have profound effects because they occur at least partly inchildhood and create asense ofbeing part ofacommunity. They occupy the imaginary and become part ofthe imagination. They influence our perception ofthe world, culture and other people and our own self-perception. Human images become part ofthe person and his imagination and have an influence on his emotions. They are repeated and consolidated bythe rhythms and rites oflife. Like plants with extended roots, particular and universal human images are fixed inthe imagination and gain effect from the connection with already existing ideas and images (H?ppauf, and Wulf 2009).

3) As images ofthe imagination and the imaginary, human images become part ofthe body (Wulf 2018; Pragrana 2016). They are inherent and therefore can be difficult tochange. Often they consist not only ofindividual images, but ofpicture sequences, even ofpicture networks, with which heterogeneous, sometimes even paradoxical images are captured. As aresult, existing human images are repeatedly confirmed and their importance is reinforced (Wulf 2014).




THE WORLD BECOMES AN IMAGE


Acharacteristic ofmodernity is the fact that the world is opposite toman and is perceived as an object and an image. Inancient times, people, animals and the environment were part ofliving nature, the Physis. They were generally perceived as similar toeach other. They were stimulated bythe power, the dynamis ofnature, the Physis. This relationship ofpeople tothe world was retained inthe Middle Ages. Animals, people and world are created byGod and have acommon creatureliness. Inthe modern era this relationship ofthe (Western) human being tothe world, toother people and tothemselves changes. Nature is no longer experienced as animated. It becomes the object. The people are no longer part ofnature or the world created byGod, but are opposite it; they measure it and register it as object. Inthis process the world becomes an image. With the development ofnew media this trend increases. Not only the world and the other people are perceived as images, we ourselves are also increasingly perceiving ourselves inthe mode ofimages. The widespread use ofdigital photography ineveryday life and especially the sefies are proof ofthis (Kontopodis, Varvantakis, and Wulf 2017). Using electronic photos or films we create all important events, and ultimately create an image ofourselves (Wulf 2013a, 2013b).

Human images show the central role images play, and with them the imagination and the imaginary world, for the constitution ofthe person and his education. They also make it clear how strongly the images are defined bytheir respective historical and cultural character and how important their research is within the framework ofanthropology. Human images are images which the person creates ofhimself, and whose significance must be understood for his perception ofthe world, his memories and his future projections. They are generated bysocial and cultural practices ofeveryday life and bythe arts. Human images become part ofthe collective and individual social and cultural imaginary world and thus play apart inshaping human activities. The creation ofimages is afeature, which we share as human beings, whose form, however, is very different inhistory and indifferent cultures. As the images and the imaginary world visualise something, which would otherwise remain invisible, their research is an important area ofanthropology.

What we describe as an image is different, meaning that the spectrum ofthe term is broad and requires arange offurther clarification. Sometimes we mean the result ofvisual perception processes. Under the influence ofneuroscience and its visualisation strategies, the results ofthe perception with other senses are often even described as images. We then speak about mental or inner images, which bring tomind something which is not actually present. These include, for example, souvenir pictures, which differ tothe perceptions due totheir vagueness. The same applies tosketches or drafts offuture situations, todreams, hallucinations or visions. Many aesthetic products also take the form ofimages. They are products ofaprocess aimed at the creation ofan image. As metaphors, they are ultimately aconstitutive element oflanguage. Creating images, recognising images as images, dealing with images using ones imagination, is auniversal capability ofhumans (Wulf 2014, 2018). However, it varies depending on the historical period and culture. Because which images we see and how we see images is determined bycomplex historical and cultural processes. How we perceive images and deal with them is also influenced bythe unique nature ofour life history and subjectivity.

Like all images, human images are the result ofenergetic processes. They transform the world ofobjects, actions and other people into images. Using the imagination they are imagined and become part ofthe collective and individual imaginary world. Many ofthese processes are mimetic and result inan assimilation toother people, environments, ideas and images. Inmimetic processes the outer world becomes the inner world, which is aworld ofimages (Gebauer and Wulf 2018. 1998). This world ofimaginary images plays apart inshaping the outer world. As these images are performative, they contribute tothe emergence ofactions and tothe production and performance ofour relationship toother people and toour surrounding world. The imaginary world is the place ofthe images as such, the destination ofthe imagination process generating the images. At the same time, it is the starting point ofthe mimetic and performative energies ofthe images.




  .


   .

   ,     (https://www.litres.ru/sergey-anatolevich-dzikevich/vol-1-1-2018/)  .

      Visa, MasterCard, Maestro,    ,   ,     ,  PayPal, WebMoney, ., QIWI ,       .



notes








1


Christoph Wulf is Professor ofAnthropology and Education and amember ofthe Interdisciplinary Centre for Historical Anthropology, the Collaborative Research Centre (SFB, 19992011) Cultures ofPerformance, the Cluster ofExcellence Languages ofEmotion (20072012) and the Graduate School InterArts at Freie Universit?t Berlin. His books have been translated into more than 15languages. He is Vice-President ofthe German Commission for UNESCO. Research stays and invited professorships have included the following locations, among others: Stanford; Tokyo, Kyoto; Beijing; Shanghai; Mysore, Delhi; Paris, Lille, Strasbourg; Modena; Amsterdam; Stockholm; Copenhagen; London; Vienna; Rome, Saint Petersburg, Moscow, Kazan; Sao Paulo. Major research areas: historical and cultural anthropology, educational anthropology, rituals, gestures, emotions, imagination, intercultural communication, mimesis, aesthetics, epistemology. Christoph Wulf is editor, co-editor and member ofthe editorial staff ofmany international journals, and also amember ofAesthetica Universalis International Editorial Council.


