Author Archives: Theo Gardner-Puschak '20

A Palm Full of Copecks Helps the Medicine Go Down

In the United States, we find ourselves at an extremely contentious time in terms of national politics. The New Right conservative movement has reached its zenith and ultimate form with the candidacy of Donald J. Trump, while another Clinton is poised to ascend to the nation’s “throne”. The Republican and Democratic parties are extremely divided over many issues, perhaps none more so than the structure and size of government in the USA. The Democratic Party stands for government as a tool to aid the nation’s citizens in many areas, and thus favors increased power, breadth, and size of government. The Republican stance is one of limited government, where government serves as the common bond between a collection of states with self determined laws, and a mechanism for common national defense. In the Republican view, less government oversight allows citizens to aid themselves with increased efficiency and effectiveness.

It is no small coincidence that the term “bureaucracy” was introduced practically simultaneously with the beginning of our discussion of St. Petersburg. Although Russia was a monarchy until the early 20th century, civil servants dominated St. Petersburg, much as they do today in Northern Virginia, The District of Columbia, and Metro-area Maryland. With this acknowledgment, a study of some rudimentary mechanisms of Petrovian-bureaucracy seems highly in order.

Bureaucracy, in a Petersburg-ian context, is a major theme throughout every one of the assigned works. According to Brodsky, Petersburg was home to “a web like bureaucracy”. Bureaucracy is also a central tenant of Lieutenant Kizhe. Most specifically, though, a convoluted bureaucratic system that would give modern Republicans fits is displayed in The Nose. Bribery is mentioned often. When the police officer returns his nose, Kovalyov “got the message and pressed a 10 ruble note into his hand”. Likewise, when arriving at the Police Superintendent’s home, it is thought that even if Kovalyov had “brought with him a few pounds of tea or a bolt of cloth” (as a bribe) the Superintendent would not have granted him “a particularly effusive welcome”. By emphasizing that these gifts usually would get a kind welcome, and that this was out of the norm, Gogol shows how pervasive the bribe was at this time. It would appear again in Soviet times. Earlier in the story, during the print shop episode, Kovalyov says “I would be extremely grateful to you, and very glad this incident has brought me the pleasure of your acquaintance. In normal context, this may be perceived as simple niceties, but in the context of bureaucratic St. Petersburg and The Nose, we can be sure that “grateful” has some monetary connotation. Although the story is incredibly irreverent and humorous, some comment on Gogol’s residence of St. Petersburg and its corruption circa 1835 is plainly visible.

Success Without Absolute Merit

Although the opera Boris Gudonov is now regarded as one of, if not the greatest, in the Russian canon, it was initially panned. Although the drama is a remarkable, complex tale of opportunism and the failings of human political systems, and has long been acknowledged as such, the opera’s score has come under harsh criticism since Gudonov‘s premier. Originally written and composed by Modest Mussorgsky, noted member of the “Mighty Handful” group of nationalistic Russian composers, the score was torn apart by critics for its “weak harmonies”. Incredibly, it was later re-worked by another member of the “Mighty Handful”, Nicholai Rimsky-Korsakov, in a fairly successful attempt to right the thinly-orchestrated areas of Gudonov‘s original Mussorgsky score. Some of the errors in Mussorgsky original work are plainly evident, even to the relatively untrained ear. One minute into Act 4, Scene 2 (second excerpt), the harmony is stark and ugly, not aiding or benefiting the soloist’s melody line.

Shostakovich also reworked Gudonov, completing a veritable who’s who of Russian classical composers (with Tchaikovsky the notable exception). Although Mussorgsky has many musical accomplishments, including Night on Bald Mountain, Boris Gudonov is clearly not within that number. The success of the opera is solely based on Pushkin’s drama, which was the framework for the plot. Although a fantastic opera, it may be very well best absorbed with a score that is not original.

They Who Rise Again

As has been reiterated numerous times during class, Russian culture is obsessed with what it means to be “Russian”. It is an ironic and cyclical phenomenon. As the Russian citizen ponders their identity, they are including themselves in the long Russian tradition of doing so, and asking such broad cultural questions. It is unsurprising, however, to see several common elements emerge when analyzing the collective Russian psyche. Chief among those is an incredible resilience of spirit, and the belief that triumph is  won through sacrifice. Many instances of Russian history have established and cemented these themes. It is often in the darkest of night that the Russian spirit truly reveals itself, and prevails.

Perhaps most famous among Russia’s  triumphs was the halt of Nazi Germany by Russian forces just 5 miles from Moscow. Until this point in World War II, the Red Army had lost hundreds of thousands of men to German rifles, and thousands died from starvation. Previously, and almost equally well known, Napoleon encountered much the same narrative in his invasion of Russia. The Russian Army essentially sacrificed itself in a climatic battle outside of Moscow, taking with them a large percentage of Napoleon’s force. The French were only able to hold Moscow for a few months, until the Russian Army crawled back from the grave and expelled the intruders west of the Dnieper. Tchaikovsky chronicled this musically in The 1812 Overture.

Themes of sacrifice before triumph lie deeply in the Russian literary canon, a direct result of an extensive history of such. In Tale of the Destruction of Riazan, the Russians suffer catastrophic defeat, losing one prince and city after another. The extent of the loss is exhibited explicitly, when it is written “Prince Ingvar Ingvareveich found his fatherland devastated, and learned that all his brothers had been killed by the impure, lawbreaking Batu.” Later, however, Ingvareveich rises above his loss when he “Took the throne of his father […]. And he restored the land of Riazin and he erected churches and monasteries.” Ingvareveich, after assuming the throne, is also described as a “great joy for the Christians”. The text emphasized the unyielding character of the Russian spirit, and the eventual triumph of Russia and her Christendom over all invading forces. The famed Russian film director, Eisenstein, uses these themes in overwhelming fashion in his seminal  Alexander Nevsky,  which depicts the titular hero’s victory over invading Teutonic Knights. In its purest sense, the aforementioned theme is nowhere more present than in Sergei Prokofiev’s score for Alexander Nevsky. The score moves from utter despair to incredible triumph, perfectly encapsulating a central element of Russian identity over the last one thousand years.