Tyranny of Nationality: Puškin, Dostoevskij, and Berdjaev

www.elsevier.ni/locate/ruslit

Russian Literature XL VI (2000) 299-312 North-Holland

v

TYRANNY

OF NATIONALITY: PUSKIN, AND BERDJAEV

ANNA

DOSTOEVSKIJ,

MAKOLKIN

The twentieth century will go down in history of mankind not only as the age of most daring scientific and technological explorations but also as the century of the most sinister ideas of human intolerance, supported by pseudoscience and technology, and human delusions about purity and uniqueness, elaborated by thinkers and artists. It is the age of the most dangerous mythology about the uniqueness of particularity and nearly genetically transmitted cultural legacy. The breakup of the Soviet Union was merely a logical step in the chain of the most profound national conflicts since the Second World War. It was the Russian turn to participate in the global mythopoesis or to submerge into a delusional state of collective grievances opening its wounded collective self. The origins of such a cultural state should be sought in the current ethos and in the nineteenth century, which largely shaped the present national pride, formed the foundation of the present Russian culture and became its integral part. Be!ng a Russian in 1995 means to be the inheritor of Pu~kin and Nekrasov, ~ajkovskij and Repin, Dostoevskij and Turgenev, Tolstoj and Cechov... It means to be proud of the cultural heritage that made Russian culture a part of Europe and an integral part of European civilization. Nonetheless, it also means to have inherited the flawed thinking of the past, false notions about Russian uniqueness and superiority, specificity and mysteriousness, and unique historical mission. This paper will explore the contrasting views on Nationality and Russianness by three such significant cultural figures as Pu~kin, Dostoevskij and Berdjaev and their impact on contemporary Russian culture. If the choice of Pu~kin and Dostoevskij is self-explanatory, B erdjaev is

0304-3479/00/$ - see front matter ©2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S0304-3479(99)00060-5

300

Anna Makolkin

presented as an intellectualantidote, a Christian and a Marxist, whose views were shaped by European culture, suggesting a very provocative critique of Russian myopia in the matters of race, religion, ethnicity and Othemess in general. Berdjaev, unread in Communist Russia, still awaits close study in the post-perestrojka market-oriented new Russia. So far, his ideas are still a bit premature for Russia, tom by nationalistic passions and in a state of collective confusion. Let us unravel the paradoxes between God and Love, Self-Love and hate of the Other which seek their justification in the thoughts of such Russian national heroes as Pugkin and Dostoevskij.

1.

A m I Truly a Russian ? (Pugkin' s Search for Identity)

Aleksandr Pu~kin, Russia's most revered poet and a national icon, has been attributed the highest possible role in the history of Russian culture, i. e. to be the founder of the modem Russian language and the point of reference in Russian modem literature and poetry. Pu~kin became the measure of all things literary and cultural, before and after him. He erected the foundation of the Russian cultural monument and constructed the Russian national Self in modem times. His famous poem, 'Exegi Monumentum', an arrogant but prophetic confession of a confident recognized genius, may be in retrospect perceived as a poetic summary of his future role in Russian cultural history. Pu]kin, a product of Romanticism, was not only himself seduced by the romantic heroic spirit but contributed to the ongoing seduction by heroes and heroic icons, as well as his own worshipping in Russia for centuries to come. Despite the metaphoric message of the poem where the monument actually implies the poetic legacy, Pu~kin foresaw how he would be worshipped by the Russians in the future, how the patriotically-minded Russians would flock to his grave in nationalistic fervor and ecstasy of Self-Love. The yearly offerings of flowers to Pu~kin's monuments, scattered all over Russia, pilgrimage of people, who do not even remember his poems, and pseudo-scholarly attention to his work to boost the collective Russian ego, are nothing but a mere testimony to Pu~kin's own prophetic insight. Pu~kin, flattered by worshipping of his poetic genius, was not quite sure of his belonging to Russia while he was alive, but he anticipated some revenge after his own death. The well-known and quite obvious black ancestry of the great Russian national poet caused him a lot of grief and haunted him throughout his entire life. The topic, a taboo in Russian pre-revolutionary times and in Communist Russia as well, could be quite embarrassing to the contemporary Russian extreme nationalists and purists. If post-perestrojka Russians cannot tolerate othemess in its very mild form, i. e. slight physical difference from themselves, how can they be reconciled with the fact that their national icon and cultural pride is the epitome of Otherness? Had Pu~kin been alive today in the United

Pugkin, Dostoevskij, and Berdjaev

301

States he would have been perceived as a colored person (Americans even in 1995 adhere to the principle of racial difference and even racial ratios of 1/32th are still a key factor). How did Pu~kin feel about his racial origins in his lifetime and how did he express it in his work? The brunt of physical Otherness and prejudice followed him. The nickname "monkey" which caused him a lot of grief was somehow overlooked by numerous writers of his life, aiming at the European readership. Prior to 1917, the Russian biographers would mention his black ancestry only in connection with the licentiousness of the poet, attributing the flaws of his behavior to his African roots. The post-1917 biographies redeemed the poet of his sins and sinful ancestry and used all the available narratologicaldevices to de-emphasize his African origins (Sipovskij 1907, Ivanov 1899, Brodskij 1937, Grossman 1960, Petrov 1973, Mejlach 1974). Pu~kin's ethnico-racialanxiety may be seen even in his famous novel, Evgenij Onegin (Eugene Onegin) where the dark Tat'jana, a victim of rejected love, may be perceived as Pu~kin's secret poetic therapy: I/ITaK, OHa 3Ba.rlacb TaTb~IHOI~. " Hri KpaCOTOfl CecTpBI CBOel~I,

HH CBe:g
(Pu~kin 1953: 234) So she was called Tatyana. Truly she lacked her sister's beauty, lacked the rosy bloom that glowed so newly to catch the eye and to attract. Shy as a savage, silent, tearful, wild as a forest deer, and fearful, Tatyana had a changeling look in her own home. (Pugkin 1977: 75) Tat'jana is contrasted to her sister Ol'ga and her blondness, while Pu~kin clearly introduces a metaphor of Othemess with a very deep meaning. Ol'ga is the epitome of the Russian Northern beauty, her blondness and blue-eyedness encode the typical acceptable appearance. "Family" may be perceived as a country, Russia, where Tat'jana feels a stranger, a foreigner, whose appearance is a sign of Otherness that challenges the stereotype. "Wild" ("dikaja") subtly

302

Anna Makolkin

encodes Otherness of a non-European and deeply engrained stereotype. In the next Chapter of EugeneOneginthe narrator addresses Tat'jana: TaTb~Ha, MHJIaJt TaTb~Ha! C TO6Or] Tenepb a cJIe3bi JlbtO; TbI B pyKa MO~noro wrIpaHa ya< ow~ana cy]II,6y CBOIO. (1953: 245) Tatyana, dear, with you I'm weeping for you have, at this early date, into a modish tyrant's keeping resigned disposal of your fate. (1977, III, XV: 41) One may sense an intertextual link, a trace of Karamzin' s sentimental narrative and a philosophical double-entendre, i.e. a trace of identification with the "stranger", the emotions of an outcast. These are reinforced by the digression from the first chapter: HpFuIeT .rlH,~ac MOe~ CBO60~bI? IIopa, nopa! - B3blBatOK Hel~l; Bpo)I
1710BOYlbHOMypacnyTstO MOp~, [...] I10]I He60M AqbpaKn Moeft, B3iabIXaWb O cyMpaqHOft POCCHH, F~Ie ~ cTpa~aa, r~Ie J~JIm6Ha, F~e cep~ae a noxoponHa. (1953: 220-221) When comes my moment to untether? It's time, and freedom hears my hail. I walk the shore, I watch the weather, I signal to each passing sail. Beneath storm's vestment, on the seaway, Battling along that watery freeway, [..3 My Africa, where waves break high, to mourn for Russia' s gloomy savour, land where I learned to love and weep, land where my heart is buried deep. (1977, I, L: 51)

Pugkin, Dostoevskij, and Berdjaev

303

The key symbols prompt to draw a semiotic map like the following: Tat'jana Outcast Family

Pu~kin Outcast Russia

Gloomy Family Russia Tears

Loving Family Africa Joy

The subject of roots, belonging, blood and discomfort of Otherness did not prevent Pu~kin from writing jingoistic lines like these: TaM pyccKHit~yx... TaM PycsIo naxi-ieT! ('PycnaH a Jho)IMH.rla'; 1953: 68) There is the Russian spirit There is the Russian smell! (Ruslan and L yudmila ) Or: MOCKBa,n ~yMan o Te6e! MocI
(1953: 319) Oh, Moscow, I thought about you! Moscow... how much this sound echoes the pulsing Russian heart! The signs of a split cultural and ethnic identity are obvious in Pu~kin's work. The poet was torn between his Russian cultural upbringing and the awareness of his biological roots, between Russia, the land "where he learned to love and weep" and Africa, the land where he dreamt to dry his tears.

2.

Pugkin 's Glance o f an Outsider

Pugkin's patriotism is simultaneously a tribute to the romantic era and a manifestation of a split identity, the physical Other, locking the spiritual Self, in its turn split between the Russian and French Selves. Tat'jana, the author's

304

Anna Makolkin

secret confessing Self, the Other in the Russian native family, may be seen as a symbolic representation of Pu~kin' s own split and tormented identity. The dark shy stranger, she also possesses a mysterious Russian soul: TaTbana (pyccraa ~Iymoto, CaMa He 3HaSI, noqeMy) C ee x o n o ~ o m rpacom Jlm6nna pyccrym 3nMy, [...] (1953: 275) Tatyana (Russian in her soul, not knowing even why) was fond of Russian winters and their icy beauty. The voice of an African, dreaming about his return to the historical motherland, is paradoxically also Russian, one who is attached to Russia. Africa is an imposed root's nostalgia, a longing of a rejected Russian heart. Puikin symbolically argues with the contemporary Russian extreme nationalists and challenges the stereotypical portrait of a Russian, with pure peasant Russian roots. Physical Otherness and spiritual sameness, blood and belonging are juxtaposed and interwoven. The hero clamours acceptance and enlightens the ignorant bigots. Tribute to patriotism is a temporary state of Puikin' s mind. In 1821, during the Kishinev exile, Pu~kin used the opportunity to condemn not only the patriotism of the Russians but the nationalistic efforts of the Greeks, who fought for their independence, as well. In his letter to Davydov the poet mocks the military independence movement of the Greeks headed by Ypsilanti: Fperit cTan14 CTeKaTBCHTOJ-IHaMHIIO~I ero Tpoe 3HaMeH, H3 KOTOpbIx O~IHOTpext~BeTHO, Ha )IpyFoM pa3BeBaeTcH KpecT, 06BHTBIIT/ naBpaMn, c TerCTOM C~IMSHaMeHeM noSe,~nm~r, Ha TpeTbeM H306pa>reH Boapo>r~am~14r2ca ~en14rc. - [...] B Hccax Bce C140KOl~IHO.CeMepo TyproB 6bl.rlH np14Be~IeHbl r I/IrlcHYlaHTH I4 T O T q a C r a 3 H e H b I

-- c T p a H H a Y l HOBOCTB CO CTOpOHBI

eBpo14e~croro re14epaaa. B Faaauax Typr14 B qHc~Ie 100 qe~oBer 6bin~t nepepeaa14bi: JIBena2ttaT1, rperoB Tar>re y6aTbL (Zizn' Pugkins 1987, I: 426) Greeks flocked in crowds under three banners where one was unicolored, the second had a cross decorated with laurel leaves and a text "banner of victory" and the third had the image of a resurrected Phoenix. [...] All is quiet in Yassy. Seven Turks had been brought to Ypsilanti and immediately executed- a strange behavior for a European general. In Halatzy 100 Turks were butchered; Twelve Greeks were also killed.

PuJkin, Dostoevskij, and Berdjaev

305

He ridicules the support of the movement by the freedom loving patriots, shopkeepers, clergy and "up to the last monk". The caricature of fighters for the Greek cause is completed by the remark: B O~ecce a yx
(Zizn'Pugkins 1987, I: 427)

I missed the entertaining Odessa spectacle: in the small shops, streets, taverns - everywhere crowds of Greeks were selling their property for peanuts and were buying sables, firearms, revolvers, all spoke about Leonides, Themistocles and joining the Ypsilanti troops. Pu]kin ridicules this affectation by the Greek citizens of Russia who allowed ignorance and passions to take over their reason. With the eye of a cool outsider Pu~kin ends his letter on the following note: Ba>KHblIi BoIIpOC: HTO CTaHeT ~eJIaTb Poccm~; 3atiMeM nH MBI

MoJ~aBHIO H Banaxr~m no~I BI4~OMMHpO/IIO6HBBIXIIocpe~HHKOB; nepexa~eM nn MbI 3a ~yHa~ COIO3HHKaMHrpexoB I~ BparaMn Hx BparoB? Bo BCnKOMcny~ae, 6y~y yBe~OMnaTb-(Zizn' Pugkina 1987, I: 428) What will Russia do? That is the question. Shall we occupy Moldavia and Valakhia under the pretext of peaceloving mediators or cross the Danube as Greek allies and enemies of their enemies? At any rate I will continue reporting... Pu~kin reports the events not as a Russian patriot but as a distanced, levelheaded observer, his is the gaze of a critical outsider. He takes a position which is unusual for a citizen of the tsarist Empire. He ridicules the fairytale-like political plot and the roles designated to each of the participants in the battle for nationalism. It appears to him as childish play, a battle for futile goals. As equally childish did Pu~kin perceive the worshipping of the Greeks by all of Europe since he did not treat cultures and nations as petrified entities which genetically transmit culture through centuries in an unchanged form. Pu~kin saw world, culture and people as moving universes, constantly evolving and changing, enriching each other through contact and exchange. In his letter to Vjazemskij, of June 24-25, 1824 the poet challenges the myth of continuum, the uninterrupted line from antiquity to modem times which is so much in contradiction with the myth of a nation and with the cult of particularity:

Anna Makolkin

306

Fpeug_a MHe ora~/4na. O cy~b6e rpeKoB HO3BOJIeHOpaccya<~aTb, KaK O c y ~ 6 e MOe~ 6paTen HerpoB, MOa
pa6CTBa

HecTepn/4Moro.

Ho

qTO6bI

Bce

npocBemenHbm eBpone~icKrIe Hapo~t,I 6pe;arInrI Fpettne~ - aTO aenpocT/4Tenbnoe pe6aaeCTBO. HeaynTb~ HaTOnrOBan/4 HaM O qbeM/4CTOK~e n Heparae, a MbI Boo6paaHar~, aTO narOCTHbXfl napo~, COCTOflU_trI~rX3 paa60~HHKOB n naBOqH/4KOB, eCTb 3aKonnop o ~ t e n m , I~ /4X nOTOMOKrI nacae~Hnr nx UIII
(Pis'ma, 1982: 181) I am disgusted with Greece. It is possible to discuss the fate of Greece as much as the destiny of my blood brothers Negroes, one may wish liberation to both nations. However, for all civilized Europeans to rave about Greece - this is unforgivable childishness. The Jesuits used to preach to us about Themistocles and Pericles, and we have imagined that this mean nation consisting of pirates and shopkeepers is the legitimate descendantof the glorious heroes of the past and inheritor of their school glory. You would say that I have changed my mind lately but you should come to Odessa and see the compatriots of Miltiades, and would have agreed with me. Pu~kin ridicules the notion of culture as a frozen entity, a gene-culture carrier; not every Greek restaurateur is necessarily the direct progeny of Plato and Aristotle. This idea is not only very much ahead of the romantic era, but also o f the neoromanticism of this turbulent century.

3.

To be a Russian - to be Superior (Dostoevskij' s View)

Unlike Pu~kin, tormented by his roots and heritage anxiety, Dostoevskij had no doubts about his own identity and feelings towards Russia - his motherland was victimized by the evil foreigners. Moreover, ideas, thoughts, tastes, and deeds had national, religious and racial origins. Dostoevskij's universe was dominated by a difference and hierarchy that exists in order to elevate the Russians. To him, there are German ideas, French tastes, German miserliness, Jewish greed, Russian generosity, wild Tartar blood etc. His art did not elevate him above the trite stereotype, Dostoevskij merely succumbed to the tyranny o f nationality and prejudice. Through the utterances of his fictional characters, Dostoevskij orchestrated an image of a superior Russian national character and a unique collective consciousness. In Igrok (The Gambler), for example, he unequivocally stated that Russians are "too richly gifted", have a special sense of beauty, while the "French are the most boring creatures in the world", and

Pugkin, Dostoevskij, and Berdjaev

307

Jews are the people who "have no country and no God" (Dostoevsky 1966: 47, 59; 1962: 40). In Besy (The Possessed) Dostoevskij develops this notion further, ~atov becomes the spokesman of an extreme nationalism. SatovDostoevskij pleases the ego of the Russian group when he states that "one who is not Russian Orthodox cannot be a Russian". This position not only elevates Russians but excludes the rest of the inhabitants of the Russian Empire who are not Russian Orthodox. It creates the yardstick for measuring true Russianness. Accordingly, Dostoevskij actually rejects the Christian concept of Love, rooted in Universality. His voice, Satov, utters the sinister truth: HttrorjIa eme He 6bInO, qTO y Bcex I4nH y MHOrHX HapoRoB 6btn O,~ItH o6mn~ 6or, HO y Bcex n y II
255) A nation is a Divine Body. A nation is a nation only so long as it has its particular god and excludes as irreconcilable all other gods, so long as it believes that with the help of its god it will conquer and destroy all other gods. (1962: 238) Dostoevskij actually articulates the essence of nationalistic ideology which is rooted in exclusion, hypertrophied ego, and hate of the Other. His formula of a nationhood is not dissimilar to Gobineau' s theory of race hierarchy (Gobineau 1871) or Rosenberg's Nordic religion (Rosenberg 1933). In fact, Dostoevskij's Russian Orthodox God is very much akin to Rosenberg's Nordic Christ who is superior to the Jewish Christ and all other religious icons. With his appeal to submit to Desire and Will, Dostoevskij was not only the precursor of Nietzsche and his philosophy of destruction, decadence and fall of civilization, he was the Russian precursor of European fascism. His worship of the Rus-

Anna Makolkin

308

sian particularity, uniqueness, and difference place him into the sinister company of the ideologies of exclusion and hate. Much like Rosenberg or Gobineau, a century earlier, Dostoevskij conveniently uses the flaws of the Christian dogma, which failed to improve human nature and behavior, and unashamedly suggests to dispense with the hypocritical Christian idea of loving the Other and, instead, to start loving the Self without any sense of guilt. Dostoevskij helped Russians to rid themselves from the eternal inferiority complex vis-h-vis Europeans and offered to them the seductive theory of Russian uniqueness and superiority. Those post-perestrojka Russians who now particularly pride themselves in their Russian past, may find extreme comfort in Dostoevskij and his novel, The Possessed, where the same dialogue about the reforms and the Russiaversus-Europe-dilemma occupies the central place. He talks there about the public insult to Russia and the Western attempts to colonize the country via pseudoprogressive reforms. His ideas remarkably echo the current disappointments of many Russians: "Fifteen years of reform! and yet, never before, even in her most ridiculous periods has Russia sunk so low" (1962: 507). This statement could have been easily made by disgruntled Russians in 1995 seeing the country in a state of decay. Dostoevskij's glorification of particularity and national arrogance anticipates the racial superiority of the Germans and is essentially no different than any other cult of the ethnos. He shared the social Darwinism of the future fascists and belief in the self-confidentpowerful nation: T o n b r o CHJIbHaSl Taroi~ BepOl~I naI~H.q H HMeeT n p a B o Ha a b I c m y I o }KH3Hb. (~HeBHHICHPICaTeJI.H,HHB. 1877; Dostoevskij 1878: 25)

Only a nation possessing such strong belief deserves the fight for higher existence.(Diary, January 1877) By "higher existence" Dostoevskij understands a messianic role in the history of mankind which, he believed, Russians were to achieve in modern times: ~a,

3OJIOTO~tPor a

KOHCTaHTHHOHO$Ib, -

Bce :BTO6y;~eTHame [...]

HO paHo Jm, nO3~HO JIH, a I(OHCTaHTHHOnOJIb ~OJl31geH 6blTb H a m , H XOT~I 6hi JIHIIIb B 6 y ~ y m e M TOJIbKO CT0YleTHH! (1878: 84, 97)

Yes, the Golden Horn and Constantinople, all will be ours [...] Constantinopleshould be ours [...]. (Diary, March 1878) Dostoevskij acknowledges Russian poverty, lack of material comfort in comparison with the rest of Europe but turns this into a cultural virtue: disdain for money and prosperity which presumably would elevate Russia and Russian poverty would be compensated by the richness of the Russian national spirit,

Pugkin, Dostoevskij, and Berdjaev

309

the national ideology of martyrdom and become a new mission of ennobling Europe and all of mankind. This mania grandiosa is very much akin to the ideology of the German national-socialists, who equally dismissed capital as a Judaic cultural virtue and promised equal distribution of material wealth between all "pure Germans" upon the expulsion of the "non-Germans" from the Aryan state.

4.

Tyranny of Nationality (Berdjaev's Discovery)

Unlike Dostoevskij, with his profound Westophobia, or Pugkin, with his insecurity and flirtations with Russian ethnocentricity, Berdjaev is able to distance himself from Russian patriotic feelings and cultural limitations. He treats nationalism as slavery, and tyranny, which is voluntarily imposed on individuals by themselves, and is one of the most seductive forces in society: ~JDI HaIDtH Bce ~03BOneHO, BO 14Mg ee MO)KHO COBepIIIaTb n p e CTyIIYleHI45I C qeJIoBeqecKoH TOHKH 3peHHH. Mopa2Ib HaI~HH He

xOHeT 3HaTBqeY/oBeqHOCTtt. (Berdjaev 1936: 137) Everythingis permitted, all crimes against humanity may be committed in the name of a nation. The moral credo of anation rejects humanity. In his view, nationalism is an idol, and as all idols, requires human sacrifices. It is necessary to sacrifice the Other, to destroy it for the good of the Collective Self, to satisfy the collective ego and blindly follow the national egoism. The very national egoism which would later receive close attention of the nationalsocialist movement in Europe is analyzed in Berdjaev's work, 0 rabstve i svobode ~eloveka (Slavery and Freedom), published in Paris in 1936. There Berdjaev perceptively stated that "nationalism demands hostility, contempt for other nations and actually implies potential war between the peoples" (1936: 138). According to him, "nationalists do not think in global human terms, in terms of collective human justice and human interrelationship". The national feelings transcend class differences and falsely unify aristocrats and the demos of a given group. The ultimate goals of any nationalism go beyond the national cultural concerns and lead to the erection of an oppressive state and "all modem nationalisms are absolutely identical like two drops of water or like all forms of dictatorship or police control" (141). Ultimately, it is control over a group, over its spiritual growth and behavior and its identity that nationalism seeks to establish. Hatred of the Other - the essence of the nationalist myth - turns ultimately on itself and brutality towards the Other transforms into the oppression of the Self.

310

Anna Makolkin

Berdjaev senses the tyranny of the narrow-minded national self but is unable to prove how precisely it actualizes itself in a national state founded on the basis of ethnic homogeneity and purity. The history of the German national socialist state, the Israeli all-Jewish artificial state and Stalin-orchestrated nationalism in the former USSR, as well as current ethnic cleansing in former Yugoslavia are the best confirmations of Berdjaev's thesis. Tyranny of nationalism lies in robbing the members of a given group of empathy towards the Other, and of awareness of human sameness. Members of the group, blinded by nationalistic passions, submit themselves to the false idol and the worst tyrant who deprives them of their human qualities and feelings, replacing them with the artificial reactions to the fetishes of the Self, to narcissism of the tribe. Like any other narcissism, it is bound to fail since only love of the Other brings harmony and happiness to the 'T'. Had Berdjaev been alive in today's Russia, he might have been simultaneously vindicated and horrified at the paradoxical claims of democratic reforms and co-existence next to intolerance, ethnophobia and antisemitism in today's post-Communist Russia. This new Russia, striving to become a free democratic state, is locked into the prison of nationalism and thus is a victim of its own self-imposed tyranny. One cannot become free, advocating freedom only for oneself, and relying on the notion of one's superiority. The narcissistic egotistic 'T' is a slave of its own egoism and ethnocentricity. Like Narcissus constantly watching his own image in the water mirror, an isolated nationalist state may choke in its own sentiments of pride, superiority, purity and cultural isolation. Culture may thrive only in a dialogical context of exchange, interest in the Other and sharing creativity while the atmosphere of self-worshipping is not conducive to such undertakings.

5.

A Christian Versus a Russian (Berdjaev' s Perception)

As an alternative to such a harmful ethos of cultural and spiritual degeneration Berdjaev offers the Christian philosophy of accepting the Other and loving the hostile and unpleasant stranger: XpHCTHaHCTBO eCTI~ pe~IHrH~ IlepCOHaYIHCTHqeCKaSI H yHHBepcaJII~Ha~I, HO He HaI~HOHaJIbHag, He pO~OBag p e n H r i ~ . BCgI~H~ pa3, Korea HaRHOHa~H3M HpoBo3rHamaeT: 'TepMaHH~ JI~-H HeMI~eB,

~paHuHg ~ ~paHRy3OB, POCCH~~ PFCCKHX',OH H306HI4qaeT CBOIOg3bIqeCKylOH 6ec~enoBeqHylOnpHpoJ~y. (1936: 143) Christianity is apersonalistic and universal religion but not national or tribal. Each time when any nationalism proclaims, "Germany for the Germans", "France for the French", and "Russia for the Russians", it exposes its pagan and inhuman nature.

Pugkin, Dostoevskij, and Berdjaev

311

Paradoxically, contemporary Russia, flirting with its newly resurrected Russian Orthodox Church, finds it quite appropriate to combine the devotion to new rituals and total disregard for the basic Christian premise, i.e. Love of the Other. From the pulpit of the reopened, redecorated, post-perestrojka Russian Orthodox Churches the Russian priests of today unashamedly utter words of hate for their dark-skinned, dark-haired and long or differently shaped-nosed Christian and non-Christian brothers, Russian citizens of the inferior brand. Berdjaev's view on nationalism draws a line between genuine and false Christianity, and finds nationalism to be incompatible with the spiritual essence of Christianity. This view is quite unpopular in today' s Russia which prides itself in its Russian roots, alleged uniqueness and simple belonging to its Russian past. What was irrelevant for Berdjaev is highly important to the modern believers in Christ, the Russian brand of Christianity is a highly exclusive ethnocentric religion which advocates national egoism and isolationism. The post-perestrojka Russians see themselves as insulted and humiliated in the eyes of the Western world, their pride is deeply hurt. Contrary to Pu~kin's view, they perceive themselves as direct inheritors of Pugkin and Dostoevskij, ~ajkovskij and Tolstoj and identify with Dostoevskij's ultra-nationalisticideology more than with the general European humanist heritage. Their pride, reaching the point of arrogance and intolerance, permits them to hate all non-Russians and all non-Russian Orthodox citizens of Russia. They see enemies in all foreigners and all non-ethnic Russians, no matter how closely tied to their culture, history, politics and economics they are. The present messianic delusions of Russians in a country, experiencing a crisis of identity, are particularly dangerous: the delusional state does not permit the group to view itself critically, to condemn its own national obsessions with the Russianness and see the contradiction between the philosophy of Self Love and Christian love within the resurrected post-Communist version of Christianity. The post-perestrojka God of Dostoevskij who has a right to enslave his worshippers in the web of hate and intolerance is the sinister preacher for the nation, experiencing an identity crisis. It is another invented idol who may throw the nation back into a state of barbarism. Berdjaev's perception of Christianity is yet to be discovered in today's Russia, as much as the Western tradition of separation of the Church and State within the democratic political structure. The initial stage though must be a condemnation of intolerance in disguise, either under a religious or secular umbrella. Prior to democracy, Russia might have to accept the essentially Christian and humane principle of loving thy neighbor.

312

Anna Makolkin

LITERATURE Berdjaev, Nikolaj 1936 O rabstve i svobode ~eloveka. Paris. Dostoevski, F. Dnevnikpisatelja. Sankt-Peterburg. 1878 1962 The Possessed. New York 1966 The Gambler. New York. Besy. Moskva. 1993 Gobineau, Arthur The lnequality of Human Races. New York. 1871 Makolkin, Anna 'Displacementof Signs in Biography: Semiosis of Popular Genre'. 1992 Signs of Humanity (Eds. M. Balat, Janice Deledalle-Rodos). Berlin, 547-553. 1992 Name, Hero, Icon: Semiotics of Nationalism through Heroic Biography. Berlin. 1994 'City-Icon in a Poetic Biography: Pushkin's Odessa'. Writing the City. London, 81-95. 1995 'The Common Essence of Nations as a Sign'. Giambattista Vico and Anglo-American Science (Ed. M. Danesi). Berlin, 121 - 127. Nietzsche, Friedrich 1956 The Birth of Tragedy and the Genealogy of Morals. New York. Pugkin, Aleksandr 1953 Evgenij Onegin. Minsk. 1953 Ruslan i Ljudmila Minsk. 1977 Eugene Onegin (Transl. Charles Johnston). London. 1982 Pis'ma. Moskva. Rosenberg, Alfred v [1933] Race and Race History. New York (Orig.publ. 1933). Zizn ' Pugkina V 1987 Zizn' Pugkina, v dvuch tomach. Moskva.