Author Archives: Ethan Hill

How Russians Make their Own Luck

1 Reply

For being a story about outstanding good luck, “The Frog Tsarevna” is remarkably pessimistic. Indeed, the story never fails to expose the reader to what appears to be the laughably bad fortune of Ivan. Ivan frequently doubts his prospects, and with good reason. From the very moment Ivan’s arrow conveniently lands in a swamp in the sights of what appears to be a frog, who is conveniently able to talk, and conveniently insists that she be Ivan’s wife, the story presents some pretty bleak prospects for poor Ivan. Of course, Ivan’s luck turns in a fantastic way on multiple occasions throughout the story, such as when he learns that his frog-wife is in fact “Vasilisa the Wise and Clever.” But before this happens, Ivan frequently laments his fortune, voicing his worries to his frog-wife after his father gives him various challenges to assign her.

The fact that such pessimism is expressed by a character who later has dramatic turns in his luck seems to be very much in line with Russian folklore in the larger sense. Indeed, according to the secondary reading, Russian culture seems to be absolutely obsessed with pessimism and its positive relationship with luck. The “Russian Folk Beliefs and Superstitions” reading expresses that  “Talking about future success” is “considered bad luck.” It says that “it is considered better” to be “silent” or even “pessimistic.” Ivan, and by extension the story, follows this creed and fortune favors him.

I found a similar (and rather humorous) folkloric rule which applied to babies. The secondary reading stated that it is unwise for a stranger to look at a baby “before a certain age,” and if one makes the mistake of doing so, they aught to call the child “ugly.” Once again, Russian folklore expresses its idea that pessimism and good luck are positively correlated.

In the larger sense, this strange idea actually makes a lot of sense when taken in context with several other obsessions of Russian culture- namely, the Russian obsession with suffering. Indeed, under cruel Tsars and harsh nobles, the Russian people clearly have suffered, and their culture knows it. Perhaps pessimism is a coping mechanism- a way for Russian consumers of folk tales to avoid getting their hopes up. Pessimism allows people to anticipate negativity, so when anything other than the worst transpires, they are allowed to consider it positive. In a way, this allows Russians to create their own luck.

On the Character of Russians… Continued

1 Reply

What really caught by attention about the whole story of the False Dimitri is that it is very much in line with Gogol’s notes which we read on our first day of class. Indeed, as I watched Boris Godunov and Perused the “Pseudo Dimitri” text, Gogol’s claim that the character of Russians is “inherently more subtle” than any other European and that “every Russian” knows “how to pretend” so well as to “get the better” of anyone. The raw intrigue presented in the story of the False Dimitri screams cunning and subtly of course, but the way both the Opera and the Pseudo Dimitri text seem glorify it is very interesting to me.

Boris Godunov didn’t shy away from portraying the monstrous nature of Russian cunning. Tsar Boris in the 5th excerpt is seen violently struggling with his crimes of murder. He is thrown to the ground by his guilt, the royal reds of his robs being encroached upon by darkness in a way which was visually reminiscent of the Repin painting. His anguish is astounding, and the cunning he used to attain power is clearly being condemned. But in the final clip, we see the False Dimitry being lauded as a hero, though his lionization is clearly cast in a somewhat negative light by the bloody ending of the play. Still, the despite the ultimate outcome of his duplicity, and the critical way the opera portrays him, Dimitri ultimately wins power in a fantastic way. Boris Godunov seems to be telling that the Russian character is tied deeply in duplicity and that, though this is disastrous, it deserves to be glorified for its immense power.

Boris Godunov seemed to me to portray Grigori as, at best, an anti-hero. (I say this tentatively, having not seen the entire opera.) The elective reading of course portrays him as little more than the devil’s tool. Grigori’s duplicity is painted in the reading as an abomination. The lines at the start of the text however interested me because they seem to glorify Tsar Boris’s cunning in the same way Boris Gudunov glorifies Grigori’s trickery.  The reading describes Boris as a “brilliant” statesmen, even as it details his killing of the real Dimitri. Once again, the cunning Russian character is praised.

(Note- this whole blog rests on the fact that “glorification” and “dramatization” are one and the same.)

What is a God?

1 Reply

My greatest fascination with The Bronze Horsemen stems from its enormous pervading religiosity. There is something biblical about the way the city is engulfed by a flood, leaving nothing but a lone Idol in the watery desolation, futile in its passed glory.  The Bronze Horsemen seems to be an almost cautionary tale of human glory, reflecting many of the religious stories we now know today such the account of Bable and Sodom and Gomorrah.

Indeed, Russian culture has a fantastic way of walking the line between humbleness and self-glorification. The Bronze Horsemen highlights the immense majesty of Saint Petersburg as a bastion of Russian culture. Its imagery of the great bronze statue is sweeping, and the poem ends with it being the last thing standing. It embodies Russia in the sense that it remains glorious in in the face of terrible forces beyond its power to fully overcome. In the poem, such a force is the Neva river. It consumes Saint Petersburg in a fantastic way, glorifying it while bringing it to its knees. By painting the destruction of the Russian Spirit, Pushkin is idolizing it, and this reminded me of many of the other works we have encountered during this class.

First and foremost, I was reminded of the Birth of Peter I Secondary reading. It seemed to have a remarkable fascination with all the suffering and sin that had infected Russia at the time of Peter’s birth. When I first read the text, I simple wrote it off as the cultivation of a Messianic figure. But it seems a bit more complicated than that. The volume of time spent describing the ailments of Russia in this text tell me that the writer had a deep fascination with it. This is also true of the life of Theodosius reading, which more explicitly glorifies suffering in a religious sense.

Overall, perhaps it is safe to say that Russian culture has a fascination with its own suffering because it is somehow empowering. Perhaps it is safe to say that suffering in Russian culture leaves the possibility of people rising above and overcoming said suffering. But once again, this seems like an oversimplification. Indeed, the tale of Theodosius describes how the monk suffered in the flesh so that his spirit would be let free, and ultimately provided a positive portrayal of the fate of the long suffering. But Boris Godunov does no such thing.

1st Blog Post on “Religion: From Official Atheism to Freedom of Choice” (late)

1 Reply

From what I have been able to gather about Russia based on the readings of this course as well as my general understanding of the country, Russians seem to put enormous pride on their ability to overcome adversity. While completing our most recent reading, I noticed instances in which stories of Russia’s creation paralleled biblical stories in which heroes overcome obstacles in fantastic, divine ways. This was most notably present in the section in which Vladimir was blinded and later healed, in a way reminiscent to the trials of Saul (later Paul).

The video we were assigned on Atheism and religion in Russia had a similar way of narrating Russian history with a focus on overcoming obstacles in the context of Religion. It interested me that the video highlights the struggle of spirituality in Russia under soviet rule whilst painting it as a essential component to the Russian identity. The way Religion in Russia waxed and waned and ultimately endured seems to be a subject of pride.