Pussy Riot and the Russian Tradition

The Moscow Times just published my article on Pussy Riot:

What Links Pussy Riot With Dostoevsky

26 August 2012
By Peter Rutland

The dramatic trial and sentencing of the Pussy Riot band members captured the imagination of Western observers but has not resonated so much at home. Why has the band been so successful in gaining international attention, and what is the long-term historical significance of the Pussy Riot phenomenon?

Behind their punk Western image, it is important to recognize that Pussy Riot emanates from a long-standing tradition of dissent by the Russian intelligentsia. To borrow a Leninist term, Pussy Riot is Western in form but Russian in content. The Western-derived medium of a punk performance is delivering a very Russian message.

One obvious lesson to draw is the disruptive potential of the Internet. If a picture is worth 1,000 words, then in the age of YouTube, a video is worth 10,000. The striking images of colorfully dressed women dancing in front of the ornate gilt altar of Christ the Savior Cathedral — the country’s crowned Orthodox jewel — against a curious but ear-catching soundtrack, proved irresistible to global audiences. It spawned copy-cat action in a Cologne cathedral, demonstrations of support in dozens of cities from Marseilles to Sydney, and expressions of sympathy from the likes of Madonna and Paul McCartney.

The all-thumbs Russian government added fuel to the fire by arranging a clumsy show trial that culminated with the women sentenced to two years of corrective labor for “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred.”

Pussy Riot succeeded in drawing global attention to the cause of human rights in Russia in a way that dozens of reports of the beatings and killings of journalists, or the cruel death of lawyer Sergei Magnitsky in pretrial detention, had failed to accomplish. Just 41 seconds of tape, lengthened to three minutes by the addition of material recorded elsewhere, succeeded in undoing the Kremlin’s multimillion-dollar program to boost Russia’s soft power and its global image.

Much more interesting than the band’s antics in the cathedral, however, were the closing statements that the three defendants delivered to the court, which New Yorker editor-in-chief David Remnick described as “a kind of instant classic in the anthology of dissidence.” Each woman took a different theme. Yekaterina Samutsevich dissected the unhealthy fusion of church and state. Maria Alyokhina talked about the deficiencies of the country’s education system and the suppression of the individual. Nadezhda Tolokonnikova offered a critique of the “autocratic political system” in general and the conduct of their prosecution in particular.

The statements portray a society that is passive and disoriented in the face of an all-powerful ruling bureaucracy. Their critique is spiritual rather than material, and they are not particularly interested in leveling accusations of corruption, which have been the central theme of the mainstream opposition.

Many Russian observers have been dismissive of Pussy Riot, characterizing their provocative actions, including previous performances of a sexual nature, as infantile and offensive — and unpopular with the public at large. But it is not at all clear whether Pussy Riot expects or even desires a groundswell of public support. They do not aspire to be leaders of a revolutionary movement, either Orange or Leninist.

Rather, their appeal for truth and freedom puts them squarely in the tradition of the 19th-century Russian intelligentsia. Tolokonnikova directly referred to the group’s punk antics as equivalent to the truth-telling “holy fools” of centuries past and embraced the idea that their prison sentence proves the virtue of their cause.

Pussy Riot adopted the tactics of protest from the Situationists of 1960s France, the punk rockers of 1970s Britain and the feminist Riot Grrrls in the United States in the 1990s. The idea of donning masks comes from the movie “V for Vendetta,” which was popularized by the Occupy movement.

But the strategy of Pussy Riot has a deeper foundation. Their moral critique of authority and appeal to a higher truth is rooted in pre-revolutionary Russia, a tradition that fitfully resurfaced during the Soviet years. They cite 19th-century literary critic Vissarion Belinsky and Fyodor Dostoevsky, but not Voltaire, John Stuart Mill or other representatives of the Western liberal tradition.

The assertion of an individual’s right to exist — what Alyohkhina refers to as “inner freedom” — is not a problem for young people living in the West and has not been for a century or more. Whatever the shibboleths that are evoked by today’s Western radicals — such as capitalism, neoliberalism, Empire and racism — they are phenomena quite different from the challenge posed by the authoritarian Russian state.

There are, of course, many points of overlap between Pussy Riot and their Western supporters. They both want Russia to respect human rights and allow free elections. But even if Western pressure succeeds in freeing the band members, it is unlikely that Pussy Riot will be able to leverage their Western support into concrete political gains. Like their 19th-century counterparts, they will be on their own, which does not mean that they will not eventually be victorious.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Pussy Riot and the Russian Tradition

  1. Nicely written and COMMENDABLE of Moscow Times to publish
    same. The Russian history mirrors our own American era of enlightenment–sadly
    Americans too have forgotten it. In honor of a great closing argument by Pussy
    Riot, I penned this short e-mail:

    “Despite the fact that we are physically here, we
    are freer than everyone sitting across from us … We can say anything we
    want…”

    [Member of the band Pussy Riot, in closing arguments,
    standing up to universal government Oppression]

    How is it that a Russian woman in a Russian courtroom
    knows the power of this wisdom?:

    “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make
    you free.”

    And also knows this from the first LAW of the United
    States of America:

    “We hold these truths to be SELF evident…”

    Sadly Americans have lost what this Russian has gained:
    Truth needs no authority to tell you it is truth.

    No authority will set you free or offer you any real and
    lasting salvation. That authority includes all the figures tossed before
    you…the politicians, the judges, the agents, the police ‘authorities”, the
    courts, the lawyers, and even the supreme court for government. Only the truth
    can set you free. Americans have become blind to this and worship at the feet
    of government.

    The measure of freedom is the degree of oppression. I
    invite people to consider that any government of the world, including the
    government of the United States, does not endorse freedom of speech in all circumstances
    when such speech is critical of its own actions or challenges its revenue
    supply. All that changes with different governments is the degree of
    oppression—not the fact and truth that there IS oppression. Governments are
    famous for drafting the degree to pressing the envelope of tolerance….because
    only in that measure can they grow.

  2. [But the strategy of Pussy Riot has a deeper foundation. Their moral critique of authority and appeal to a higher truth is rooted in pre-revolutionary Russia, a tradition that fitfully resurfaced during the Soviet years. They cite 19th-century literary critic Vissarion Belinsky and Fyodor Dostoevsky]

    First problem with this idea is that V.Belinsky, who died in 1848, appreciated only the early works by Dostoevsky, his mature works are completely alien to him. They are in common on general sentimental realism which has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about now.

    On the contrary, mature Dostoevsky was fiercely religious and anti-revolutionary and anti-nihilist. He would certainly recognize atheist anti-clerical punks and pro-punk Liberals as Devils, his worst enemies.

    As a conservative, Dostoevsky was a bitter enemy of anything close to radical Feminism promoted by Pussy Riot. One really can’t find worse enemy for Pusssies than Dostoevsky!

    I am sorry, but that’s basics, quite obvious for those who have a slightest knowledge of Russian literature and philosophy.

    • I was not trying to suggest that Pussy Riot and Dostoevsky have similar political views, just that they can be seen as part of the same political tradition, responding to the same challenges.
      Incidentally, at the Moscow times, like most newspapers, headlines are written by the editor and not by the author.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s