19 December 2016

The Guardian: Tragedy or triumph? Russians agonise over how to mark 1917 revolutions

“There is no officially approved narrative of 1917; it’s too difficult and complicated,” said Mikhail Zygar, the journalist who is running the reconstruction project. “But it’s a very important period to help understand what’s happening in Russia now, and very important for the national consciousness.” [...]

During his long years in power, Putin has used history to help create a sense of national destiny and unity in Russia, most notably elevating victory in the second world war to something close to a national cult. More recently, figures from the distant past have also been co-opted into the narrative, including Vladimir the Great, the prince of Kiev who adopted Orthodox Christianity in 988, whose monument was erected outside the Kremlin last month. A monument has even been unveiled to Ivan the Terrible, a ruthless ruler who killed his own son, on the basis that he doubled Russia’s territory.Under Putin, Russians are encouraged to see history as a long list of achievements, with darker elements such as Stalin’s purges and the Gulag brushed to one side.

In this context, 1917 is problematic. On the one hand, the Soviet state that came from the revolution was the one that won the war and whose military and scientific achievements Putin thinks should be venerated. But on the other hand Putin has elevated “stability” to being one of the key tenets of his rule, and as such celebrating a revolution goes against the very grain of his political philosophy.


No comments:

Post a Comment