Post-Soviet Singularity and Codes of Cultural Translation
Some stories, preliminary theses and variations around one enormous problem.
Alexei Penzin
1. I would like to begin with an anecdote, which an American friend told me. She lived in Moscow three years carrying out research on the Soviet constructivism. The story happened, when she was about to leave Russia and finally wanted to get a portion of some Russian exotic. They decided to visit a circus show with trained cats. Show was fine. In the end the clown with a big red nose had told to the public: ´Children, come down to me in the arena!ˇ When children went down, the clown said the following: ´Children, I wish to tell you one very important thing about our motherland, about Russia. You should not be ashamed, in front of America and Europe for our country. Russia now is a mighty country. We have a lot of oil, gas and minerals!ˇ Of course, there is a huge element of absurdity and black humor in this clown˙s propaganda story. But it is not just another crazy anecdote. All has its significance here, even starting from the search for ´exoticˇ (in Russia, and, moreover, in circus). The clown-orator urges rising generation to cease to be ashamed by presupposed exoticism of the country they live in. The clown and his adherents think that times have changed, and now we live in a ´normal countryˇ, worthy of all respect. I hope, from the following draft reflections we can get some means for understanding this story better.
2. In my talk I wish to attract methodological attention to the question concerning theoretical and cultural translation of contemporary Post-Soviet context. Translation here is understood not as just operation of translating from one language on another, but, rather, what Homi Bhabha and other theorists of postcolonial studies call ´cultural translationˇ, understanding this notion, generally, as critical practice, producing formation of meanings, which are common for different cultures. Relations of power, domination, hegemony, generating various stereotypes, clichés and ideologemes, should be deactivated by this critical agency.
3. Cultural translation of the local situation into an international context is now an enormous problem for post-Soviet Russia, causing its dangerous and regressive isolation. The typical position, which is now very popular among conservative intellectuals and spokesmen in Russia, is one of an inexplicable and untranslatable ´uniquenessˇ of the situation, its inherited difference, supported by references to a ´special Russian spirituality,ˇ Russian canonical literature like Dostoevsky, etc. Last time even liberal and ´pro-westernˇ intellectual milieu in Russia was discussing ´differences,ˇ which are discovered in space between conventional language of ´westernˇ theory and post-Soviet empirical reality: ´… we deal with Western concepts, though we realize that our life is ordered in a different wayˇ. These ideological statements, which indeed adopt and appropriate all external stereotypical views of Russia, or saturated by traumatic feeling of split between global concepts and local reality must be challenged by evoking a concrete and immediate intellectual and political pre-history. We treat this problem dialectically, reformulating it and reserving some theoretical ´singularityˇ for the post-Soviet situation, but in terms of resistance to dominant conformist right-wing politics and ideology. On the other hand, this singularity produces a lot of difficulties when they try to inscribe Post-Soviet space immediately in discursive field of contemporary theory.
4. It is paradoxical, but in many respects the situation in the USSR has been more easily translated into theoretical and cultural languages. In Soviet era, even the dogmatic and ideologically saturated Marxism that dominated culture and society was clear and recognizable for the global intellectual and political community, just as the various criticisms of the so-called ´Soviet experimentˇ were clear for well-informed late Soviet dissident intellectuals. The language of Marxism was a universal code, a mediator. Criticism of the Soviet project was also conducted in the language of Marxism. First, it was considered as a withdrawal from the principles of Leninist theory and politics. Then, the critical discourse formed around the theory of Termidor and the domination of bureaucracy. This was first formulated in the ´heterodoxˇ language of Trotskyism and then became known internationally. Even the liberal criticism of the USSR in terms of ´totalitarianismˇ is grounded in Marxism (or ´Western Marxism,ˇ to be precise), at least by the most penetrating theorists such as Hannah Arendt. The delegitimization and destruction of these codes after the disintegration of the USSR were one of many factors that have made the post-Soviet situation in the intellectual and cultural spheres almost opaque for a "Western" (or any) external observer. Some phrases from a recent interview with left-wing French philosopher Alain Badiou express sharply and completely the latest stage of this disposition: ´I do not understand contemporary Russia at all. (…) We knew the USSR and understood it, we had time to investigate it, and I˙d even say we needed the USSR. Everything that happened there helped Western leftist thinkers even if they were not in agreement with its ideology. Just the fact of the Soviet Union˙s existence was extremely important for us. And now that it has collapsed, Russia has turned into an extremely mysterious country.ˇ
5. The question on cultural translation of Post-Soviet experience is interweaving with a problem of its theoretical interpretation. So then, what theoretical languages can we find or invent for analysis and expression of the cultural, social, and political experiences that have arisen after the USSR? I propose a preliminary analysis that compares three paradigms: postcolonial, post-Fordist, and post-Soviet to avoid familiar theoretical traps of global ´postsˇ like notorious debates on postmodernism, which were prevailing in theory in previous decades. All of them, to a different degree and in different ways, have some Marxist background and genealogy. Post-Fordism usually refers to ´western countriesˇ, postcolonial – to the East, Africa, Latin America, Post-Soviet – to the countries formed at the place of the former USSR and partially ´Eastern Blockˇ. Thus, at the first glance it is a kind of global mapping in which the contemporary world is divided into three big zones. In 1960-1970s this division, geographically, partly corresponded to division into the First, Second and Third worlds. After three key events – decolonization, deindustrialization and disintegration of the USSR and Eastern Block – in theory it has been made a grand transition to three discourses on which we talk. Their relations are quite difficult. All three appeal to a sort of universality. As we will see, postcolonial researches aspire to show a postcolonial moment, which is present almost everywhere (even in the USA and Canada, and now – in connection with migration – in Europe). Post-Forism˙s theorists like Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt try to demonstrate that post-Fordist moment is present at any society, addressing, in particular, the growing importance of communications and immaterial work everywhere. But also the Post-Soviet condition, undoubtedly, has a global effect, which it is necessary to conceptualize. Preliminary, it is possible to speak here of a visible crisis of the Leftist parties, movements, Marxism etc. That was a precondition for contemporary neo-liberal ideological hegemony, after weakening of resistance to its doctrine and practice, which was limited before by existence of the USSR and the countries of Eastern Block. So, we cannot naively discuss simple geographical mapping with separate discourses corresponding to each zone. But even at this level Post-Soviet differs from that of postcolonial and the Post-Fordist: if the colonial and the Fordist are marked equivocally negatively (the rigid disciplinary organization of industrial Fordist organization of labor, colonial as oppression and exploitation of nations), the Soviet seems more ambivalent. Just take early Soviet revolutionary politics and culture with its emancipatory promises, which have made a huge impact on the intellectuals and politicians worldwide. These questions, of course, demand further extensive analysis. We will focus mostly on the Post-Soviet / postcolonial dimension.
6. Let me just remind you briefly that postcolonial studies as systematic area of research and as common terminology have appeared in 1980s, and now it has developed into an ambitious set of critical devices and accumulated knowledge, especially in the Anglo-American academic world. One of direct predecessors of postcolonial studies was Edward Said with his path-breaking book Orientalism (1978) in which he undertook an impressive critique of representations of so-called "East" in Western culture, considering them as effects of certain power strategy imbedded in history of colonization. In its development postcolonial studies borrowed various theoretical codes: Marxism, deconstruction, Foucauldian genealogy of the power-knowledge relations, and theory of world-system and ´periphery capitalismˇ etc. Postcolonial studies created a generation of radical and insightful authors like Gayatri Spivak, Homi Bhabha, Aijaz Ahmad and others. If we take a risk to summarize some consensuses existing among these scholars, postcolonial cultures and societies may be characterized by ´tensions between the desire to autonomy and a history of dependence, between the desire for autochthony and the fact of hybrid, part-colonial origin, between resistance and complicity, and between imitation (or mimicry) and originalityˇ.
7. In the space of the former Soviet republics, postcolonial approach discovers certain anomalies, referring to our idea of singularity. For example, a kind of ´subalternˇ position of Russian-speaking minorities in some post-Soviet states does not correspond to a familiar logic of decolonization, when retreat of former colonizers usually does not produce such consequences. In the last decade postcolonial studies had an interesting academic reception in some ex-Soviet republics (the Baltic countries, Ukraine, Belorussia). In these countries this reception was complicated by questions of national identity as politically and ideologically opposed to the state of affairs under Soviet regime. Postcolonial condition was interpreted, perhaps, too fast and immediately as historical moment after Soviet ´occupationˇ, which presupposed to be oppressive in relation to these identities. In this context postcolonial discourse was treated, rather, in identitarian terms. This ideological stance was absent in ´originalˇ postcolonial studies, which were mostly inspired by spirit of poststructuralist differance.
8. Collective work Baltic Postcolonialism (2006) is a symptomatic example of ´Post-Soviet postcolonial discourseˇ of this complicated kind. The main point of its references is the recent text by David Chinoni Moore called Is the Post- in Postcolonial the Post- in Post-Soviet? Toward a Global Postcolonial Critique. The basic idea of provocative Moore˙s piece consists of argument for possible universalization of postcolonial criticism. Following Moore, until now only the Post-Soviet countries have been an exception from this criticism. In particular, Moore puts forward an ambiguous thesis that the post-Soviet territories were excluded from postcolonial studies because many postcolonial theorists were Marxists and had sympathy for the USSR and socialism of the Second World as an alternative to colonial and imperialistic capitalism of the First World. Therefore, it was difficult for them to argue in postcolonial terms on Post-Soviet experience; after all, it assumed purely negative evaluation of the Soviet experiment itself. Meanwhile, according to Moore, the societies that have arisen in the place of the former Soviet republics express extreme similarity with the postcolonial ones. So for Moore, who presents himself as neutral in relation to these political Marxist attitudes, since 1920s the Soviet Union has been only a mask for colonial model of power and suppression of the national peripheries, inherited from imperial and tsarist Russia. Moore's interesting and disputable text became a good support for his Baltic colleagues. Appealing to Moor˙s refined scholarship as to an already recognized theoretical statement, they theorize the recent past of Baltic republics, using terms, which are doubtful enough scientifically (like ´colonization of minds", ´cultural genocide" , etc.) But none of Moor˙s phrases provides a pretext for such risky terminological innovations.
9. At the same time, inhabitants of contemporary Russia, presupposed former ´colonial centerˇ, demonstrate the traits of cultural and behavioral strategies described in postcolonial studies. A typical postcolonial syndrome for those who were under colonial control is the so-called ´compensatory behaviorˇ. It reveals as a search for some authentic roots, myths, heroic legends, which could show that in the past the colonized nation was a mighty colonizers itself, controlling bigger territories, than what they occupy at present. Such compensatory images and figures are widely represented not only in official state propaganda and TV-series recalling ´gloriousˇ pre-revolutionary past, but also in commercial mass genres, such as new Russian nationalistic science-fiction, which represent pictures of the lost past, as phantasm projected in some distant future of mighty Russian spaceships exploring and conquering new worlds. Another well known compensatory strategy is the so-called "mimicry", when the former colonized people diligently simulate the dominating cultural form (for example, English-speaking Hindus reproducing habits of English gentlemen). It is possible to recognize these two strategies in contemporary Russian nationalistic conservatives and liberal "Westerners" accordingly. Recent rather odd excitation of considerable part of Russian population, which was provoked by some symbolic ´victoriesˇ in sports and pop music competitions like Eurovision, undoubtedly belong to the same series of compensatory rewarding phenomena. It looks like a kind of theoretical paradox of postcolonial condition without colonial past, but we should remember that (post)colonial is a discursive, cultural and ideological formation as well.
10. Thus, postcolonial condition itself seems to be displaced or ´singularizedˇ in Post-Soviet space. These preliminary considerations might open a path to more attentive and critical usage of postcolonial criticism. It might have also an emancipatory effect of releasing from symptoms described above, and preventing from nationalistic excesses. Unquestionably, right after disintegration of the USSR and during 1990s till now, a (post)colonial aspect in broader cultural and political sense was actively present in Russia. It was, certainly, not a result of direct ´colonizationˇ, but rather a traumatic effect of forced implementation of "western" models of life, political forms and global mass culture with the background of catastrophic disintegration of previous social order. Formation of collective feelings of "backwardness" and structural "subalterity" in this context has been connected with that invasion, which in last decade is acting out in a multitude of symptoms specified above. Of course that kind of interpretation of Russian Post-Soviet experience may seem analogous with argument of Baltic postcolonialism we criticized above but (1) we clearly recognize that it is a kind of displaced postcoloniality without colonization and (2) we do not presuppose any identity question here.
11. At the same time, postcolonial criticism is practically absent in academy and in broad intellectual discussion in Russia. One of rare principal statements raising question of postcolonial discourse in relation to ex-Soviet Russia is Ekaterina Degot's paper on an old issue of Moscow Art Magazine (1998) published under the telling title How to Obtain the Right to Post-Colonial Discourse. In particular, Degot writes on various paradoxes of cultural colonialism and orientalistic discourse applied to Post-Soviet and post-socialist countries:
´These ideas can easily be applied to the identity of Eastern Europe and Russia. We can find many cases in which the West usurps the right to represent the East, subjecting it to discursive exploitation. For an example, it will prohibit a person from the East to express oneself in theoretical terms and only allow one to speak about his/her region. It orders the Russian (or any other) artist to be authentic and exotic, thus placing him beyond the borders of the West; however, when authenticity and independence are proclaimed at the artist's own will, they are usually criticized as nationalism. In this context, any Western expression is understood as violence. Both the request not to be an "other", to conform to the models of the West, and the request to be an "other", to fight against the West's cultural imperialism, are understood as examples of the West's cultural imperialism. The dialogue between the East and the West becomes a fascinating game: the East catches the West at the repressive character of its notions, and the West, taking vengeance, totally ignores the Eastˇ.
As strategy for resolving these cultural contradictions, Degot proposes the following principles, which in part seem applicable also for today:
´Thus, I would like to offer the following slogan: let's totally refuse the notion of the "other" and learn to live in the world without the "other"; let's come back to the geographical and historical definition of the Eastern Europe as a margin, basing its identity in reality and not upon myths or desires; … let's eliminate the Western monopoly on anti-hegemonial discourse, its monopoly on criticism of the West; let's understand our own repressive essence. And finally, let's realize that the place that is neither the West's province nor its subconscious or paradise and holds no guarantees. But let's also realize that this place still existsˇ.
12. However, it is necessary to take in account historicity of such statements and slogans of late 1990s, in view of contemporary political and economic realities. In 2000s and especially in last several years, compensatory mode of behavior became more visible in connection with the growth of Russian economic power based mainly on oil and gas economy. The rhetoric of Russian president at international scene can be considered here as a bright paradigm. In the so-called ´Munich speechˇ in 2007 Putin proclaims a "refusal" to be subjugated to cultural and political ´standards of the Westˇ. It is very interesting that some of interpretations of such speeches in the European and American press have been made exactly in "postcolonial" terms. So, in article titled Putin's colonial exploitation Christopher Caldwell reacted to Putin's assessment of British calls for the extradition of FSB agent Andrei Lugovoi. Putin said that this case ´is obviously a vestige of colonial thinking", meaning Britain˙s colonial past. The author of the publication, obviously was not sharing radical spirit of the postcolonial studies flourishing in American universities, accuses this discipline of all troubles. After all, thinks Caldwell, postcolonial studies, as a matter of fact, create a scientific legitimization for such a sort of populist rhetoric as Putin˙s. Though such kind of accusations is absurd in this respect, it signals indeed of certain political instrumentalization of compensatory postcolonial sentiments. All that new symptoms make critical studies, addressing new Russian realities in postcolonial terms, even more urgent.
13. If to address very briefly another ´postˇ discourse, the post-Fordist theories are rather restricted in their application in ex-Soviet Russia. A post-Fordist economy may be found in Moscow, considered as ´global cityˇ in the terms proposed by Saskia Sassen. A ´global cityˇ is not localized inside sovereignty of a national state, but in global chain of transnational financial centers. This exceptionality, which is obvious in case of relations of Moscow to the other parts of the country, is fitting very well in the post-Fordist theorizing of changing functions of national state. I cannot go in more details here within framework of this presentation.
14. So the Post- in Post-Soviet is not the Post in Postcolonial and in Post-Fordist. They are in more complicated relationship than just concerning identity or difference. In short, Post-Soviet condition is in a kind of displaced postcolonial, and partly overlaps with Post-Fordist. A specific and consistent theory of the post-Soviet still does not exist; it is rather an "object" or a name referring to a certain epoch, which is repeated and propagated; and this term is connected with a particular locality. It is multiple in itself, produced by various types of treating the Soviet condition: negation, assimilation, or nostalgic renewal of some codes and symbols. At the same time we should keep addressing to Post-Soviet as universal problem, whose roots are in early Soviet modernity of 1920s with its revolutionary experiments in art, politics and common life itself. Of course, one can say that now we do not need such a theory at all, facing the enormous homogenization brought by neo-liberal capitalism everywhere. But in trying to find or invent modes of resistance, we cannot avoid the problem of post-Soviet singularity, with all of its Soviet ruins, as a ´path not taken.ˇ Thus, the contemporary uncertainty of the notion of the post-Soviet not necessarily undermine treatment of this problem as a universal and generally valid one. I would like to conclude with Susan Buck-Morss˙ dictum, which argued recently that in a sense, the entire world is now "post-Soviet": "the post-Soviet condition does not apply to a curio of specimens who presently inhabit the former Soviet Union or define their situation as unique. This is not about ´failed modernity,ˇ or collective cultural difference based on linguistic specificity. Rather: we are all post-Soviet. We are to understand this situation as our own."
Klimova, Marusia: Abroad #16: Alain Badiou, Topos, http://topos.ru/article/4113
