This research examines the theoretical and practical challenges faced by Russian-Chinese transcultural art education as a bearer of cultural dialogue in the context of globalization. By analyzing the differentiated trajectories of modernization transformation int the traditional culture in both countries and identifying gaps in the existing theoretical framework, the necessity of forming a transcultural interpretive community is substantiated. From the integrated positions of cultural communication studies, educational anthropology, and hermeneutics of cultural heritage, a comparative analysis of systemic models of cultural heritage transmission and professional training models in both countries is conducted, revealing methodological complementarity and common structural contradictions. Paths for the formation of the interpretive community are proposed across three dimensions: practical, theoretical, and operational, including mechanisms such as mutual artist visits, collaborative creativity, and other elements of a common system, as well as the development of a synergistic model that unites digital cooperation, integration into education, and youth training. This research employs an interdisciplinary research approach that integrates comparative studies, literature analysis, and theoretical construction. Through systematic analysis of theories in cultural communication, educational anthropology, and hermeneutics of cultural heritage, an analytical foundation is established. The study combines theoretical integration with practical orientation and aims to build a systemic structure for a transcultural interpretive community. The novelty of this research lies in the systematic proposal and development of the theoretical structure of the "community of interpretation of cultural heritage within Russian-Chinese transcultural art education." The research overcomes the limitations of analysis within a single cultural context by integrating the science of cultural communication, pedagogical anthropology, and heritage hermeneutics. By comparing various approaches in China and Russia to education in cultural heritage—"systematic transmission" and "professional training"—their deep complementarity is revealed. The findings demonstrate that the establishment of this community not only effectively addresses common issues of cultural heritage preservation in both countries and strengthens cultural identity but also, through a profound synergy in artistic education, imparts sustainable dynamics to Russian-Chinese relations and creates an exemplary model for inter-civilizational dialogue within the framework of the "Belt and Road" initiative.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhuoying et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: