print

The Commemoration in Russia of the Centenary of the 1917 Revolution(s):
Analysis of Strategies of the Key Mnemonic Actors

Malinova O.Yu.,

Professor, National Research University Higher School of Economics; Principal Researcher, Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences, omalinova@mail.ru

elibrary_id: 197217 | ORCID: 0000-0002-2754-8055 | RESEARCHER_ID: J-7893-2015

DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2018.01.02

Rubric: Theme of the Issue: Intangible Factors of Russian Politics

For citation:

Malinova O.Yu. The Commemoration in Russia of the Centenary of the 1917 Revolution(s): Analysis of Strategies of the Key Mnemonic Actors. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No. 1. P. 9-25. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2018.01.02

Abstract

The article analyzes practices of public commemoration of the centenary of the February and October revolutions in Russia. It reconstructs the symbolic strategies and historical narratives of the key mnemonic actors – the ruling elite, the Communists, the Russian Orthodox Church, the “Conservatives”, the “Liberals” etc. The analysis is based on the recent texts of politicians and public intellectuals from these groups. The research combines an analysis of discourses and commemorative practices. A commemoration of a historical event is considered as the political process, the outcome of which depends on interaction of mnemonic actors who 1) have certain political aims and take particular position against the other actors, 2) selectively use the common repertoire of symbolic resources and take part in its transformation. By the results of analysis, the commemoration of the centenary of the revolution(s) takes part in the context of a fragmented memory regime. This conclusion is based not only on significant discrepancy between the competing narratives, but also on the presence of several mnemonic warriors who use this symbolic chance for promotion of their own political agenda and seek to delegitimize their opponents. According to surveys, the same discrepancy about the revolution is revealed in the public opinion. However, the official project to celebrate “conciliation and concord” of the Reds and the Whites is facilitated by the fact that almost all major mnemonic actors (with exception of the Yabloko Party) share the “patriotic” and anti-Western discourse of the incumbent elite. Besides, the authority has as an influential ally: the Russian Orthodox Church. Nevertheless, in the context of the fragmented memory regime oppositional actors can impede a public demonstration of “conciliation and concord” even without large resources. This suggestion is well supported by the case of local opposition to a construction of the memorial to Conciliation in Crimea, which was designed as a central event of the official commemoration. 

Keywords

centenary of the 1917 Revolution in Russia; commemoration; the infrastructure of collective memory; mnemonic actors; political use of the past; memory politics; politics of memory; symbolic politics; historical narrative.

 Full Text

Benford R.D., Snow D.A. Framing Process and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment. – Annual Review of Sociology. 2000. Vol. 26. P. 611-639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611

Benford R.D., Snow D.A. Framing Process and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment. – Annual Review of Sociology. 2000. Vol. 26. P. 611-639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611

Brysk A. “Hearts and Minds”: Bringing Symbolic Politics Back In. – Polity. 1995. Vol. 27. No. 4. P. 559-585. https://doi.org/10.2307/3234960

Corney F.C. Rethinking a Great Event: The October Revolution as Memory Project. – Social Science History. 1998. Vol. 22. No 4. P. 389-414. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0145553200017892

Etkind A. Krivoe gore: Pamyat’ o nepogrebennykh [Crooked Grief: The Memory of the Unburied]. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 2016. 328 p. (In Russ.)

Heer N.W. Politics and History in the Soviet Union. Cambridge, Mass.; London: The MIT Press. 1971. 319 p.

Irwin-Zarecka I. Frames of Remembrance. The Dynamics of Collective Memory. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers. 1994. 214 p.

Kalinin I. Nostalgic Modernization: the Soviet Past as ‘Historical Horizon’. – Slavonica. 2011. Vol. 17. No. 2. P. 156-166. https://doi.org/10.1179/136174211X13122749974366

Koposov N.E. Pamyat’ strogogo rezhima. Istoriya i politika v Rossii [The High Security Memory. History and Politics in Russia]. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 2011. 320 p. (In Russ.)

Malinova O.Yu. Aktual’noe proshloe: Simvolicheskaya politika vlastvuyushchei elity i dilemmy rossiiskoi identichnosti [The Usable Past: The Symbolic Policy of the Ruling Elite and Dilemmas of the Rossian Identity]. Moscow: Politicheskaya entsiklopediya. 2015. 207 p. (In Russ.)

Malinova O.Yu. The Official Historical Narrative as a Part of Identity Policy of the Russian State: From the 1990s to the 2000s. – Polis. Political Studies. 2016. No. 6. P. 139-158 (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2016.06.10

Malinova O.Yu. The uncomfortable centenary. The Results of Reconsideration of the “Founding Myth” ofthe USSR in the Official Historical Narrative of Russian Federation. – Political Science (RU). 2017. No. 3. P. 13-39.

Miller A.I. The Role of Expert Communities in the Russian Memory Politics. – Politeia. 2013. No. 4 (71). 2013. P. 114-126. (In Russ.)

Miller A.I. The Memory Politics: The Year of Destroyed Hopes. – Politeia. 2014. No. 4 (75). 2014. P. 49-57. (In Russ.)

Mitrokhin N., Nuritova A., Kishkovsky S. The Russian Orthodox Church in Contemporary Russia: Structural Problems and Contradictory Relations. – Social Research. 2009. Vol. 76. No. 1. P. 289-320.

Papkova I. The Orthodox Church and Russian Politics. New York: Oxford University Press. 2011. 265 p.

Petrone K. Life Has Become More Joyous, Comrades: Celebrations in the Time of Stalin. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 2000. 280 p.

Rolf M. Soviet Mass Festivals, 1917-1991. (Russ. ed.: Rolf M. Sovetskie massovye prazdniki. Moscow: ROSSPEN. 2009. 439 p.).

Schöpflin G. The Functions of Myth and a Naxonomy of Myths. – Myths and Nationhood. Ed. by G. Hosking, G. Schöpflin. New York: Routledge. 1997.P. 19-35.

Sherlock Th. Historical Narratives in the Soviet Union and Post-Soviet Russia: Destroying the Settled Past, Creating an Uncertain Future. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 2007. 272 p.

Sherlock Th. Historical Narratives in the Soviet Union and Post-Soviet Russia: Destroying the Settled Past, Creating an Uncertain Future. (Russ. ed.: Sherlock T. Istoricheskie narrativy i politika v Sovetskom Soyuze i postsovetskoi Rossii. Moscow: ROSSPEN. 2014. 325 p.)

Smith K.E. Mythmaking in the New Russia: Politics and Memory in the Yeltsin Era. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 2002. 256 p.

The Art of Commemoration: Fifty years after the Warsaw Uprising. Ed. by T Ensink, C. Sauer. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 2003. 245 p. https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.7

Tikhonov V.V. The Revolution of 1917 in Communist Practices and Historical Politics of the Soviet Era. – Rossiiskaya istoriya. 2017. No. 2. P. 92-112. (In Russ.)

Topolski J. The Role of Logic and Aesthetic in Constructing Narrative Wholes in Historiography. – History and Theory. 1999. Vol. 38. No. 2. Р. 198-210. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2505662 (accessed 01/12/2017).

Torbakov I. The Russian Orthodox Church and Contestations over History in Contemporary Russia. – Demokratizatsiya. 2014. Vol. 22. No. 1. P. 145-170.

Twenty Years after Communism: The Politics of Memory and Commemoration. Ed. by M. Bernhard, J. Kubik. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2014. 384 p.   

See also: