|
|
Пишет guralyuk (![[info]](http://lj.rossia.org/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} guralyuk)@ 2006-04-29 16:49:00 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Проф.Григорий Иоффе: "Culture Wars, Soul-Searching, and Belarusian Identity"
Ничего себе, как внимательно меня изучают в Штатах (университет в Рэдфорде)
И это при жизни :)
Очень приятно.
(запустил поиск в Гугле)
Это HTML версия файла http://www.radford.edu/~gioffe/Octo
G o o g l e автоматически генерирует HTML версии документов в то время как мы исследуем интернет.
Используйте следующий адрес для ссылок и закладок на эту страницу: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:3J
Google никак не связан с авторами этой страницы и не несёт ответственности за её содержимое.
Эти слова выделены: shautsou
----------------------------------------
Culture Wars, Soul-Searching,
and Belarusian Identity
“The West has eventually recognized its helplessness vis-à-vis the Minsk riddle.”
– Belorussky Rynok 2001
Multiple and conflicting national ideas delay nation-building
Tuteishiya by Janka Kupala
Diverging trends of language and identity
External impulses of national consolidation
What is prior, nation or nationalism?
Three national projects on Belarus and their core constituencies
Prospects for nation-building
Tuteishiya
15 characters, including 14 local Slavs, 3 of whom are self-described Belarusians
Janka Zdolnik: “They are all tuteishiya but either renegades or degenerates”
Mikita Znosak’s mimicry
Eastern Scientist and Western Scientist
Janka Kupala National Theater
Presidential Administration
Language
Belarusian on stage, Russian in the audience
Random sample of 200 Minsk adults: 1.5% use mainly Belarusian at home
Minsk as home to 25% of all Belarusian speakers
Two groups of Belarusian speakers: rural (receding) and urban (on the rise but still small)
Language and Identity
61% of respondents: ability to speak Belarusian not an important uniting factor; 27% . . . : rather important; 8.5% . . . : very important
71% of respondents: Belarus should remain independent; 12% . . . : Belarus should join Russia
Language and identity live separate lives and evolve in opposite directions
Devotion to Statehood?
November 2003 IISEPS’ national survey: What is more important to you, economic improvement or national independence?
The overall result: 62% vs. 25%; among self-proclaimed supporters of the opposition: 51% vs. 36%
External Impulse of
National Consolidation
Putin: Why not absorb Belarusian regions one by one?
Yaroshuk: Many Belarusians wouldn’t mind
Wake-up call for Lukashenka
19 February 2004: “Act of terror” against Belarusians
Lukashenka as a Belarusian nationalist?
What is Prior, Nation or Nationalism?
Marxist approach: Being determines consciousness, so nation is prior
Modern Western luminaries: “Nationalism is not the awakening of nations to self-consciousness; it invents nations where they do not exist” (Ernest Gellner)
Belarusians-do-exist refrain
Yury Shautsou: “Belarusian identity is there to comprehend, not to manifest”
If nationalism creates nations, then efforts at proving Belarusians’ existence are redundant. One’s got to just focus on the consolidating national idea. But is there such a thing?
Priority Question and Its
Relevance to Belarus
Belarusians are descendants of the Great Duchy of Lithuania and Rzeczpospolita, which waged numerous wars with despotic Russia
Belarusians are inseparable from Russians, and their greatest shared experience was the Great Patriotic War of 1941 – 1945
A split identity disorder?
Could There Be Three
National Projects?
Even two projects are one too many
A lead from Ihar Babkou, the author of “The Genealogy of Belarusian Idea”
Numerous references to Nativist/European, Muscovite Liberal, and Creole projects
Project 1: Nativist/Pro-European
Codified historic narrative (e.g.: Ten Centuries of Belarusian History by Uladzimer Arlou & Genadz’ Saganovich)
Polatsk – Great Duchy – Rzeczpospolita
1772 – 1991: Russia’s colonial domain
Time to undo Russia’s oppressive impact
“I am writing to you in Muscovy” by Arlou
Switching to Belarusian – clear-cut identity – democratization
Project 2: Muscovite
Liberal
Aversion to radicalism of Pazniak vintage and reevaluation of ties with Russia
Yury Drakakhrust: Belarusian nationalism speaks Russian
Beliefs of the nativist community called into question
Core constituency of the project includes Svetlana Alexiyevich
Sharing some nativist beliefs but not anti-Russian sentiment
Project 2: Muscovite
Liberal
Commitment to democracy and civic form of national identity
False dichotomy: Belarusian-speaking-pro-independence-pro-E
Russian-speaking-anti-Lukashenka-and-pro-E
Geneva Convention on culture wars?
Project 1 vs. Project 2:
A Sparring Match
Deutsche Welle’s initiative
Vital Silitsky (08.10.05): D.W.’s decision despicable, amounts to wholesale support for annihilation of Belarusian
Silitsky’s disclaimer: I am not against Russian
Boycott appeal
Lukashenka pleased
Alexander Feduta
If they [nativists] see us as part of the Belarusian context, they would not just bemoan lack of the Nobel Prize for a pro-democracy Belarusian. They would collect all the pieces by Svetlana Aleksiyevich translated into European languages and launch a lobbying campaign. Would they do this, though? No. And if we initiate this, they would say something like “A Nobel for Aleksiyevich is another nail in the coffin for Belarusian.” And there will be another brawl like this one about the Deutsche Welle or worse
Yury Drakakhrust
They [nativists] believed that their Russian-speaking compatriots are beholden to Moscow like Muslims are to Mecca. It turned out that they are also Europeans, and Europe itself does not deny that
A Russian-language national project whose existence [they] doubt, effectively exists. Moreover, in quite a few areas this project is a more serious challenge to influence of Russia [than nativists themselves]
Vadim Kaznacheyev
Remark about a lack of respect for the language of the titular nationality of Belarus does not make sense because the language of the vast majority of this nationality is Russian
You [nativists] publish stern statements. But the very tone of your appeals is a problem. What if you come to power? Will you then resist a temptation to use coercion?
Svetlana Aleksiyevich
Belarusians do not perceive Russian as the language of the occupiers
The people from the ARCHE and Nasha Niva do not represent Belarusian people. They represent their dream about Belarusian people
In my books, I convey in Russian my love to Belarus
Andrei Dyn’ko
Are we going to fight for a democratic Belarus shoulder to shoulder or just side by side?
Whether national discourse in Belarus can be in Russian requires proof. So, go ahead, prove; but this is risky
You are our allies and you are no Moscow stooges; you are part of our world
Every new initiative must be couched in Belarusian; Russian-language projects don’t need help; they will appear on their own
Andrei Dyn’ko (cont)
Let us proceed together, we know where to go
We remain insensitive to Russophiles
They also see themselves as designers of Belarus. Yes, according to their project but Belarus, not West Russia
Our discussions influence the part of social elite loyal to Lukashenka, this third side of the Belarusian triangle
Project 3: Creole
Creole is pre-national consciousness, extrapolation of tuteishasts, i.e., Belarusian variety of localism
Uladzimer Abushenka: For Creoles, things Russian no longer belong in “we,” yet they can’t be assigned to “they;” similar ambiguity typifies their attitude to things Belarusian
Valer Bulgakau: Lukashenka is the president of Creoles
Project 3: “State Ideology of the Republic of Belarus”
Historic attachment to Russia
Role of the Great Patriotic War of 1941 – 1945
Communal ethos
Anti-nationalist sentiment directed squarely against the nativists
Only in this context can one appreciate reference to Lukashenka as “the main anti-Belarusian nationalist of Belarus”(Feduta 2005)
State Ideology under Construction
No codified account of pre-Soviet history
Steering clear of Catholics
Treshchenok about Kalinowski
Anastasiya Slutskaya (2003): Creole movie epic
Slutsk as the USSR light
Lukashenka at Brest State University (09. 04)
Belarus has never ever been part of Western culture and way of life
To the Catholic-and-Protestant . . . civilization, Belarus and Belarusians, who are predominantly Orthodox and for centuries coexisted in the same political setting with Russia and Russians, are alien
I am not afraid of saying this in Western Belarus
Yury Shautsou’s Perspective
Nativist historical myth false
The region was repeatedly ravaged by wars initiated by external powers
Following each war, cultural self-identification of regional political class changed
No cultural form had enough time to crystallize before being replaced by a different form
Only under the Soviets had tuteishiya become Belarusians
Yury Shautsou (cont.)
During the 1940s, Jews and Poles who used to dominate middle and high strata in Belarus vacated their social niches
Lock gates of vertical mobility thrust open for many Belarusians
Consequently, Belarusians had as much of a heyday in post-war Soviet Belarus as did Lithuanians, Latvians, and Estonians during their 1919-1940 independence
Strengths and Weaknesses: Project 1
Tight-knit community united by devotion to the Belarusian language and to fight with Russia’s cultural colonialism
Valyantsin Akudovich: Our ideology is too rigid, we are insulated from larger society, and our wholesale negativism in regard to Soviet period alienates people
Strengths and Weaknesses: Project 2
All bureaucratic, scientific, technological, economic, and much of inter-personal communication is in Russian, using which presents itself as a cultural norm
Lack of convincing explanation of Belarusians’ differences from Russians
Yury Shautsou yet again: Baltic substratum and homegrown Catholicism
Strengths and Weaknesses: Project 3
Broad social base
Sponsorship by the ruling regime
Post-1996 economic success
Alexiyevich: “Belarus is still a country with patriarchal peasant culture . . .I was asked why our own Havel did not emerge in Belarus. I replied that we had Ales’ Adamovich, but we chose a different man. The point is not that we have no Havels, we do, but that they are not called for by society”
Strengths and Weaknesses: Project 3 (cont.)
Glorification of Belarus’ role in the war and of socio-economic success thereafter
Close ties with Russia, yet not to the point of giving up on statehood
Low appeal to highly skilled and educated Belarusians
Creole nationalism helps sustain Belarusians as a demotic ethnie
Concluding Remarks
Miroslav Hroch’s model: the scholarly phase A, the national agitation phase B, and the national movement phase C
Belarusians are still in phase B?
No single internal group around which to “coalesce”
Each national project is more specific in stressing who Belarusians lean to or away from than in asserting who they are
Concluding Remarks
Yury Drakakhrust: this situation is “blissfully medieval”
Ales Chobat: “No nation which has not resolved its inner problems has a chance for political independence and survival of its culture and distinctiveness”
Shautsou’s assertion that “Belarusian identity is there to comprehend, not to manifest” acquires down-to-earth meaning
Concluding Remarks
Mitigating circumstance: Belarus straddles a cultural divide
Clash of civilizations?
Minsk policeman: “President of Belarus should be from Grodno or Brest, not Vitebsk or Mogilev”
Concluding Remarks
Ihar Babkou: Because Belarus straddles a cultural divide, it can develop only as a consciously trans-cultural society
Ihar Babkou: In this trans-cultural tradition “Adam Mickiewicz is a native alien, and Alexander Lukashenka is an alien native”
Synthesis of national projects under civic nationalism umbrella?
Hope remains
THE END!!!
Ничего себе, как внимательно меня изучают в Штатах (университет в Рэдфорде)
И это при жизни :)
Очень приятно.
(запустил поиск в Гугле)
Это HTML версия файла http://www.radford.edu/~gioffe/Octo
G o o g l e автоматически генерирует HTML версии документов в то время как мы исследуем интернет.
Используйте следующий адрес для ссылок и закладок на эту страницу: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:3J
Google никак не связан с авторами этой страницы и не несёт ответственности за её содержимое.
Эти слова выделены: shautsou
----------------------------------------
Culture Wars, Soul-Searching,
and Belarusian Identity
“The West has eventually recognized its helplessness vis-à-vis the Minsk riddle.”
– Belorussky Rynok 2001
Multiple and conflicting national ideas delay nation-building
Tuteishiya by Janka Kupala
Diverging trends of language and identity
External impulses of national consolidation
What is prior, nation or nationalism?
Three national projects on Belarus and their core constituencies
Prospects for nation-building
Tuteishiya
15 characters, including 14 local Slavs, 3 of whom are self-described Belarusians
Janka Zdolnik: “They are all tuteishiya but either renegades or degenerates”
Mikita Znosak’s mimicry
Eastern Scientist and Western Scientist
Janka Kupala National Theater
Presidential Administration
Language
Belarusian on stage, Russian in the audience
Random sample of 200 Minsk adults: 1.5% use mainly Belarusian at home
Minsk as home to 25% of all Belarusian speakers
Two groups of Belarusian speakers: rural (receding) and urban (on the rise but still small)
Language and Identity
61% of respondents: ability to speak Belarusian not an important uniting factor; 27% . . . : rather important; 8.5% . . . : very important
71% of respondents: Belarus should remain independent; 12% . . . : Belarus should join Russia
Language and identity live separate lives and evolve in opposite directions
Devotion to Statehood?
November 2003 IISEPS’ national survey: What is more important to you, economic improvement or national independence?
The overall result: 62% vs. 25%; among self-proclaimed supporters of the opposition: 51% vs. 36%
External Impulse of
National Consolidation
Putin: Why not absorb Belarusian regions one by one?
Yaroshuk: Many Belarusians wouldn’t mind
Wake-up call for Lukashenka
19 February 2004: “Act of terror” against Belarusians
Lukashenka as a Belarusian nationalist?
What is Prior, Nation or Nationalism?
Marxist approach: Being determines consciousness, so nation is prior
Modern Western luminaries: “Nationalism is not the awakening of nations to self-consciousness; it invents nations where they do not exist” (Ernest Gellner)
Belarusians-do-exist refrain
Yury Shautsou: “Belarusian identity is there to comprehend, not to manifest”
If nationalism creates nations, then efforts at proving Belarusians’ existence are redundant. One’s got to just focus on the consolidating national idea. But is there such a thing?
Priority Question and Its
Relevance to Belarus
Belarusians are descendants of the Great Duchy of Lithuania and Rzeczpospolita, which waged numerous wars with despotic Russia
Belarusians are inseparable from Russians, and their greatest shared experience was the Great Patriotic War of 1941 – 1945
A split identity disorder?
Could There Be Three
National Projects?
Even two projects are one too many
A lead from Ihar Babkou, the author of “The Genealogy of Belarusian Idea”
Numerous references to Nativist/European, Muscovite Liberal, and Creole projects
Project 1: Nativist/Pro-European
Codified historic narrative (e.g.: Ten Centuries of Belarusian History by Uladzimer Arlou & Genadz’ Saganovich)
Polatsk – Great Duchy – Rzeczpospolita
1772 – 1991: Russia’s colonial domain
Time to undo Russia’s oppressive impact
“I am writing to you in Muscovy” by Arlou
Switching to Belarusian – clear-cut identity – democratization
Project 2: Muscovite
Liberal
Aversion to radicalism of Pazniak vintage and reevaluation of ties with Russia
Yury Drakakhrust: Belarusian nationalism speaks Russian
Beliefs of the nativist community called into question
Core constituency of the project includes Svetlana Alexiyevich
Sharing some nativist beliefs but not anti-Russian sentiment
Project 2: Muscovite
Liberal
Commitment to democracy and civic form of national identity
False dichotomy: Belarusian-speaking-pro-independence-pro-E
Russian-speaking-anti-Lukashenka-and-pro-E
Geneva Convention on culture wars?
Project 1 vs. Project 2:
A Sparring Match
Deutsche Welle’s initiative
Vital Silitsky (08.10.05): D.W.’s decision despicable, amounts to wholesale support for annihilation of Belarusian
Silitsky’s disclaimer: I am not against Russian
Boycott appeal
Lukashenka pleased
Alexander Feduta
If they [nativists] see us as part of the Belarusian context, they would not just bemoan lack of the Nobel Prize for a pro-democracy Belarusian. They would collect all the pieces by Svetlana Aleksiyevich translated into European languages and launch a lobbying campaign. Would they do this, though? No. And if we initiate this, they would say something like “A Nobel for Aleksiyevich is another nail in the coffin for Belarusian.” And there will be another brawl like this one about the Deutsche Welle or worse
Yury Drakakhrust
They [nativists] believed that their Russian-speaking compatriots are beholden to Moscow like Muslims are to Mecca. It turned out that they are also Europeans, and Europe itself does not deny that
A Russian-language national project whose existence [they] doubt, effectively exists. Moreover, in quite a few areas this project is a more serious challenge to influence of Russia [than nativists themselves]
Vadim Kaznacheyev
Remark about a lack of respect for the language of the titular nationality of Belarus does not make sense because the language of the vast majority of this nationality is Russian
You [nativists] publish stern statements. But the very tone of your appeals is a problem. What if you come to power? Will you then resist a temptation to use coercion?
Svetlana Aleksiyevich
Belarusians do not perceive Russian as the language of the occupiers
The people from the ARCHE and Nasha Niva do not represent Belarusian people. They represent their dream about Belarusian people
In my books, I convey in Russian my love to Belarus
Andrei Dyn’ko
Are we going to fight for a democratic Belarus shoulder to shoulder or just side by side?
Whether national discourse in Belarus can be in Russian requires proof. So, go ahead, prove; but this is risky
You are our allies and you are no Moscow stooges; you are part of our world
Every new initiative must be couched in Belarusian; Russian-language projects don’t need help; they will appear on their own
Andrei Dyn’ko (cont)
Let us proceed together, we know where to go
We remain insensitive to Russophiles
They also see themselves as designers of Belarus. Yes, according to their project but Belarus, not West Russia
Our discussions influence the part of social elite loyal to Lukashenka, this third side of the Belarusian triangle
Project 3: Creole
Creole is pre-national consciousness, extrapolation of tuteishasts, i.e., Belarusian variety of localism
Uladzimer Abushenka: For Creoles, things Russian no longer belong in “we,” yet they can’t be assigned to “they;” similar ambiguity typifies their attitude to things Belarusian
Valer Bulgakau: Lukashenka is the president of Creoles
Project 3: “State Ideology of the Republic of Belarus”
Historic attachment to Russia
Role of the Great Patriotic War of 1941 – 1945
Communal ethos
Anti-nationalist sentiment directed squarely against the nativists
Only in this context can one appreciate reference to Lukashenka as “the main anti-Belarusian nationalist of Belarus”(Feduta 2005)
State Ideology under Construction
No codified account of pre-Soviet history
Steering clear of Catholics
Treshchenok about Kalinowski
Anastasiya Slutskaya (2003): Creole movie epic
Slutsk as the USSR light
Lukashenka at Brest State University (09. 04)
Belarus has never ever been part of Western culture and way of life
To the Catholic-and-Protestant . . . civilization, Belarus and Belarusians, who are predominantly Orthodox and for centuries coexisted in the same political setting with Russia and Russians, are alien
I am not afraid of saying this in Western Belarus
Yury Shautsou’s Perspective
Nativist historical myth false
The region was repeatedly ravaged by wars initiated by external powers
Following each war, cultural self-identification of regional political class changed
No cultural form had enough time to crystallize before being replaced by a different form
Only under the Soviets had tuteishiya become Belarusians
Yury Shautsou (cont.)
During the 1940s, Jews and Poles who used to dominate middle and high strata in Belarus vacated their social niches
Lock gates of vertical mobility thrust open for many Belarusians
Consequently, Belarusians had as much of a heyday in post-war Soviet Belarus as did Lithuanians, Latvians, and Estonians during their 1919-1940 independence
Strengths and Weaknesses: Project 1
Tight-knit community united by devotion to the Belarusian language and to fight with Russia’s cultural colonialism
Valyantsin Akudovich: Our ideology is too rigid, we are insulated from larger society, and our wholesale negativism in regard to Soviet period alienates people
Strengths and Weaknesses: Project 2
All bureaucratic, scientific, technological, economic, and much of inter-personal communication is in Russian, using which presents itself as a cultural norm
Lack of convincing explanation of Belarusians’ differences from Russians
Yury Shautsou yet again: Baltic substratum and homegrown Catholicism
Strengths and Weaknesses: Project 3
Broad social base
Sponsorship by the ruling regime
Post-1996 economic success
Alexiyevich: “Belarus is still a country with patriarchal peasant culture . . .I was asked why our own Havel did not emerge in Belarus. I replied that we had Ales’ Adamovich, but we chose a different man. The point is not that we have no Havels, we do, but that they are not called for by society”
Strengths and Weaknesses: Project 3 (cont.)
Glorification of Belarus’ role in the war and of socio-economic success thereafter
Close ties with Russia, yet not to the point of giving up on statehood
Low appeal to highly skilled and educated Belarusians
Creole nationalism helps sustain Belarusians as a demotic ethnie
Concluding Remarks
Miroslav Hroch’s model: the scholarly phase A, the national agitation phase B, and the national movement phase C
Belarusians are still in phase B?
No single internal group around which to “coalesce”
Each national project is more specific in stressing who Belarusians lean to or away from than in asserting who they are
Concluding Remarks
Yury Drakakhrust: this situation is “blissfully medieval”
Ales Chobat: “No nation which has not resolved its inner problems has a chance for political independence and survival of its culture and distinctiveness”
Shautsou’s assertion that “Belarusian identity is there to comprehend, not to manifest” acquires down-to-earth meaning
Concluding Remarks
Mitigating circumstance: Belarus straddles a cultural divide
Clash of civilizations?
Minsk policeman: “President of Belarus should be from Grodno or Brest, not Vitebsk or Mogilev”
Concluding Remarks
Ihar Babkou: Because Belarus straddles a cultural divide, it can develop only as a consciously trans-cultural society
Ihar Babkou: In this trans-cultural tradition “Adam Mickiewicz is a native alien, and Alexander Lukashenka is an alien native”
Synthesis of national projects under civic nationalism umbrella?
Hope remains
THE END!!!
