2026, Vol. 17, No. 2. - go to content...

Permanent address of this page - https://sfk-mn.ru/en/11klsk226.html

Метаданные этой статьи так же доступны на русском языке

DOI: 10.15862/11KLSK226 (https://doi.org/10.15862/11KLSK226)

Full article in PDF format (file size: 512.7 KB)

For citation:

Rodin N.S. [Toward an attempt to determine the true residence of mr. D. Diderot in St. Petersburg: a cultural analysis of the memorial plaque] World of Science. Series: Sociology, Philology, Cultural Studies, 2026, Vol. 17, No. 2. Available at: https://sfk-mn.ru/PDF/11KLSK226.pdf (in Russian). DOI: 10.15862/11KLSK226

Toward an attempt to determine the true residence of mr. D. Diderot in St. Petersburg: a cultural analysis of the memorial plaque

Rodin Nikita Stanislavovich
Russian State Hydrometeorological University, Saint-Petersburg, Russia
E-mail: rodinns@mail.ru
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-3040-3320
RSCI: https://elibrary.ru/author_profile.asp?id=1156420

Abstract. The article presents a cultural analysis of the case concerning the memorial plaque to Denis Diderot in St. Petersburg, installed in 1991 at 9 Isaakievskaya Square, whereas historical documents indicate a different probable location of the philosopher’s residence — 12 Vladimirsky Avenue, which was the subject of a separate study in 2005 by local historian E.I. Krasnova. The author of the article poses the question: why was the «erroneous» plaque not only never removed but also became an integral part of the urban landscape? The research employs Yuri Lotman’s semiotic approach to urban space, Pierre Nora’s concept of «lieux de mémoire», and methods of imagological analysis. The study compares the two addresses — the ceremonial center (Isaakievskaya Square) and the former noble periphery (Vladimirsky Avenue) — as distinct semiotic registers. The author examines the hypothesis that the choice of location in 1991 was not accidental: against the backdrop of the Soviet Union’s collapse, the need for symbolic reaffirmation of ties with the European Enlightenment became acute, and the figure of Diderot — a friend of Catherine the Great — was incorporated into the imperial narrative. The author interprets this error not as negligence but as a manifestation of cultural memory’s selectivity, which subordinates facts to current meanings. It is concluded that the memorial plaque functions as an autonomous cultural text: its symbolic significance may prevail over documentary accuracy. The article contributes to the understanding of the mechanisms of urban identity construction and the mythologization of the past in the post-Soviet space.

Keywords: Denis Diderot; memorial plaque; cultural memory; lieux de mémoire; urban semiotics; architecture; cultural space; mythologization; Pierre Nora; Yuri Lotman

Download article in PDF format