In the last quarter of the 20th and early 21st centuries, happiness has become the object of analysis in numerous sociological, anthropological, and cultural studies. Within this “happiness turn”, the idea that happiness depends on the level of economic well-being has long prevailed. But several theoretical problems have attracted particular attention from researchers in recent years. First of all, the temporal components of happiness: the decline of the aspiration to the future and the growth of retrotopic nostalgia and presentism. Happiness turns out to be increasingly dependent on the “archives of happiness and unhappiness” — a vast complex of ideas, narratives, images—a wide range of everyday practices and interactions — that determine the space of our experience. Secondly, the interconnection of happiness with a large complex of negative emotions and feelings (primarily fears and anxieties), for which the normative model of happiness as wellbeing acts as a therapeutic “antidote”. Thirdly, for critical studies of happiness, it is important to find an adequate language for describing emotions and to recognize the need for its constant clarification. In this sense, the “happiness turn” acts as a performative — actions that establish new connections between words and feelings, between the past and a possible future. An important task of the dialogue between social theory and applied sociological and anthropological research is to determine the markers of verification of these hypotheses and their validity for different communities and generations.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the OGAS system developed by the Soviet cyberneticist Viktor Glushkov. This system was understood by him not only as a radical new step in the management of the planned Soviet economy, but also as a moral and educational machine of subjectivation, producing a “happy” subject through cybernetic feedback mechanisms. According to Glushkov, abundance is a historical concept determined by libidinal dynamics: needs are constantly growing, which means that their complete and final satisfaction is unattainable. Scarcity is characteristic of all types of human society, including, apparently, the communist one. And resources will always and everywhere be limited. This means that it is necessary to educate such a subject in whom “consciousness” will work as a built-in defense against libidinal “surplus”. This subject must be freed from the frustration of insatiable desire, while simultaneously receiving a new technical opportunity to seek those areas of activity in which they could most fully deploy the wealth of their abilities. The creative realization of abilities and non-authoritarian regulation of needs constitute the formula of "happiness". However, here we are still dealing with a subject who is happy but still controlled. Unlike the classics of Marxism, Glushkov assumed that in the communist future, society will control not only things, but also people — even if this will be indirect control (and also without a repressive component), but through influencing the environment — or rather, the complex interweaving of various environments, primarily technical and social. The structure and effects of Academician Glushkov's communist techno-governmentality will be the focus of the study.

The article focuses on the study of perceptions of happiness among 4 generations of Russians. It also considers the differences in their “request for stability”, voiced while discussing the role of the state and social institutions in achieving happiness and planning the future. Based on 130 interviews, similarities and differences in the perceptions of happiness among representatives of different generations were revealed. The results obtained were interpreted through the lens of the AGIL functional theory of T. Parsons. It was revealed that the internal mechanisms of societal regulation (L and I), functioning in the institutions of family and culture, stably transmit values and sources of happiness — close relationships, family, and material well-being. At the same time, there is a similarity of requests in relation to the state — a request for social stability and peace. The results of the analysis of external mechanisms of societal regulation (A, G), functioning within the framework of economic and political institutions, reveal contradictions in the expressed means and goals of achieving happiness, as well as different expectations towards the state among 4 generations of Russians. Representatives of all generations formulate requests to the state aimed at ensuring the foundations of happiness, using the word “stability”. However, they interpret this concept in different ways: as maintaining a balance between social guarantees and non-interference in private “quiet” life (boomers); as a basis for legitimising their ideas about social justice (generation X); dissatisfaction with ongoing conflicts (millennials), decline in technological progress, and the limitation of their opportunities for self-realisation (zoomers). As a result, this conventional word allows different social groups and generations to legitimise their demands and expectations through external assent to a normative cultural attitude that is endowed with different socio-communicative meanings.

The article is devoted to the theoretical understanding and empirical analysis of the temporality of happiness. The relevance of the work lies in the insufficient attention paid to the allocation of temporal resources for happiness in scientific research, even though latent temporal aspects are evident in most approaches to understanding happiness. The theoretical consideration of the temporal resources of happiness in the conceptualization, measurement, achievement, and construction of happiness has made it possible to identify key aspects of temporality that shape differences in ideas about happiness across generations. The author proposes a model of delayed happiness as an alternative temporal strategy. The empirical basis was the results of a multi-method sociological study of Russian residents aged 18-60: a standardized survey of three generations (n=1170) using an online questionnaire and a series of in-depth interviews (n=30) conducted in July–November 2024 in capital cities (Moscow, St. Petersburg), a metropolis (regional center, Yekaterinburg), and cities of the Sverdlovsk region. The novelty of the study lies in identifying subjective assessments of happiness across generations over time and the presence of an upward trajectory toward more positive assessments of subjective well-being in the future. The temporality of happiness involves contradictions between assessments of peak moments and current levels of happiness, as well as between expectations of a better future and the uncertainty of its realization. Narrative interviews allowed us to identify temporal paradoxes of happiness and the mechanisms for achieving happiness based on them, and to describe metaphorical images of the temporality of happiness. Conclusions are drawn about the manifestation of nonlinearity of time in the formation of multiple models of happiness, and the reflection in these models of generational characteristics of the perception of happiness.

According to Hannah Arendt, a hallmark of the modern era is the alienation of the individual from the world, understood, in part, as a loss of interestin the common thingsthat mediate political process. Оne ofthe origins of modernalienationwasforArendtthe discovery oftheNewWorld and the ensuing explosion of cartography. This article attempts to demonstrate the political potential of maps as a means of “re-engaging with the world”. Following Bonnie Honig, it can be argued that the pre-modern tradition of participatory cartography couldhave suchpotential. Reconnectionproposed by thistradition could lie in the transformation of the world reflected on the participatory map into a thing that can serve as a subject of discussion and a basis for the self-identification of the collective. As a positive illustration of the work of participatory cartography today, the article turns to the late work of Bruno Latour. Seeing modern cartography as a means of reproducing the erroneous notion of the Earth as a closed totality of the Globe, Latour proposes as an alternative other principle of cartography appropriate to the age of the new climatic regime. Some of these principles, in particular the identification of intangible and not always visible agents of territory on cartographic projections, formed the basis of hislatest experiment Où Atterrir? In it, the final maps of territories produced by the research participants become a means of making the public’s concerns visible, ensuring the sustainability and accessibility of the politicalspace.

Imagining a cosmic future touches on many topics — but typically avoids the topic of death, burial, and attitudes toward deceased ancestors. Most of these developments concern life-support systems. This article analyzes the debate between American anthropologist Elizabeth Povinelli and Russian cosmists. The subject of this debate is immortality and attitudes toward ancestors in the context of space exploration. Povinelli analyzes Russian cosmism in the context of her experience researching and living with Australian Aborigines. For the cosmists, space colonization was a high priority. Russian visionary philosopher Nikolai Fedorov believed that it was necessary to leave Earth, firstly, to resurrect ancestors — it was necessary to collect particles from across the universe. Secondly, space exploration was necessary to disperse resurrected ancestors to other galaxies: there wouldn't be enough room for everyone on the spaceship Earth. In contrast, Povinelli's geontological concept suggests "not looking up." The researcher opposes the colonization of space, as her model of immortality presupposes the localization of descendants. This immortality is based on mutual material exchange between ancestors and descendants. People "feed" their ancestors with their excrement, and in return, receive assistance from the spirits in their local existence. In this sense, all failures and obstacles are explained by the intervention of ancestors. The article proposes resolving this aporia by reconciling two models of relationships with ancestors — that of cosmism and that of Povinelli's anthropology. Currently and in the near future, space exploration takes place within the closed circuits of space stations, ships, and settlements. In such biospheres, releasing the deceased into outer space would be practically disadvantageous. Most likely, ancestors and descendants will feed each other, and funeral rituals and exchanges with ancestors could become part of the maintenance of the biospheres of space settlements.

Imagining a cosmic future touches on many topics, but typically avoids the topic of death, burial, and attitudes toward deceased ancestors. Most ofthese developments concern life-supportsystems. This article analyzesthe debate between American anthropologist Elizabeth Povinelli and Russian cosmists. The subject of this debate is immortality and attitudes toward ancestors in the context of space exploration. Povinelli analyzes Russian cosmism in the context of her experience researching and living with Australian Aborigines. For the cosmists, space colonization was a high priority. Russian visionary philosopher Nikolai Fedorov believed that it was necessary to leave Earth, firstly, to resurrect ancestors—it was necessary to collect particles from across the universe. Secondly, space exploration was necessary to disperse resurrected ancestorsto other galaxies: there wouldn’t be enough room for everyone on the spaceship Earth. In contrast, Povinelli’s geontological concept suggests “not looking up.” The researcher opposes the colonization of space, as her model of immortality presupposes the localization of descendants. This immortality is based on mutual material exchange between ancestors and descendants. People “feed” their ancestors with their excrement, and in return, receive assistance from the spiritsin theirlocal existence. In thissense, all failures and obstacles are explained by the intervention of ancestors. The article proposesresolving this aporia by reconciling two models ofrelationships with ancestors—that of cosmism and that of Povinelli’s anthropology. Currently and in the near future, space exploration takes place within the closed circuits of space stations, ships, and settlements. In such biospheres, releasing the deceased into outer space would be practically unprofitable. Most likely, ancestors and descendants will feed each other, and funeral rituals and exchanges with ancestors could become part ofthe maintenance ofthe biospheres of space settlements.

According to Hannah Arendt, a hallmark of the modern era is the alienation of the individual from the world, understood, in part, as a loss of interest in the common things that mediate political process. Оne of the origins of modern alienation for Arendt was the discovery of the New World and the ensuing explosion of cartography. This article attempts to demonstrate the political potential of maps as a means of “re-engaging with the world”. Following Bonnie Honig, one could argue that the pre-modern tradition of participatory cartography has such potential. The reconnection proposed by this tradition could lie in the transformation of the world reflected on the participatory map into a thing that can serve as a subject of discussion and a basis for the selfidentification of the collective. As a positive illustration of the work of participatory cartography today, the article turns to the late work of Bruno Latour. Seeing modern cartography as a means of reproducing the erroneous notion of the Earth as a closed totality of the Globe, Latour proposes as an alternative other principles of cartography appropriate to the age of the new climatic regime. Some of these principles, in particular the identification of intangible and not always visible agents of territory on cartographic projections, formed the basis of his last experiment ‘Où Atterrir?’. In it, the final maps of territories produced by the research participants become a means of making the public's concerns visible, ensuring the sustainability and accessibility of the political space.

This study analyses artist residencies in Russia as institutions that assemble the artists, local context, and stakeholders. The main focus is on three key aspects: strategies for institutional positioning in the field of art and in relation to stakeholders, residents’ practices in working with the local context, and the interaction between residencies and local residents. The process of institutionalising artist residencies unfolds through several mechanisms: integration into the ‘creative economy,’ balancing between autonomy and stakeholder interests, and the differentiation of the residencies themselves. Inclusion in the field of contemporary art plays an important role. Artist residencies reproduce its key trends: a shift towards participatory practices, an emphasis on the process of creating a work and its narrativisation, and a research-based approach to art. Participatory practices allow for more horizontal interaction between the author and the audience, and involving the audience in the creation of the work strengthens their connection with the final object. However, the success of this practice may be undermined by the difficulties associated with the institution’s dominance in organizing interactions with the audience, including with regard to the relevance and justification of incorporating participation into art practice. The more reflexive character of practice in art, manifesting itself in the spread of the 'artistic research' model, makes it possible to level this problem out to a certain degree, attenuating hierarchy through an understanding of the author's role as a mediator, including in participatory practices. The study revealed that employees and residents of artist residencies consider it important to involve the local community in their activities, but in practice, face limited opportunities for such cooperation. The limitations of such interactions stem from both the residents’ level of practice and the artist residency as an institution. The multi-stage character of practices involves a chain of translations, phased in research, conceptualization, and materialisation, necessitating the inclusion of an intermediary who (or which) would carry out the reverse translation from the object to the locality. In seeking to strengthen its position in the art field, the institution unintentionally reproduces the boundaries between art and audience.