By Zinaida Osipova<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ideas\nof nationalism, nation-states and national identity made their way to history\nrelatively recently, yet they have caused numerous military conflicts, introduced\nnew ways of categorizing people, and led to creation of political entities\nbased on these categories. Grouping people together based on their shared culture,\nheritage, and language has been not only a pressing matter for political\nleaders, but also a subject for scholarly discussions. Russia presents a\ncurious case: comprised of over a hundred nationalities, it is a country where\none could be a citizen of Russia (rossiiskii<\/em>)\nbut not always ethnically Russian (russkii<\/em>).\nIt is in this setting of the multinational yet monolithic unit, often\ninfluenced by or responding to Western ideas, that the self-assured Russian\nintelligentsia has deliberated over the destiny of the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In\nhis writings, the philosopher Isaiah Berlin argues that although nineteenth-century\nRussian intelligentsia was devoted to discovering and abiding by the truth, few\nof their ideas \u201cwere born on Russian soil.\u201d He stresses the Western influence\non Russia\u2019s intelligentsia yet points out the \u201cextraordinary tendency toward\nself-preoccupation\u201d characterizing Russian writers.[1]<\/a> Indeed, being part of the highly\neducated class in nineteenth-century Russia presupposed familiarity with French,\nEnglish, and German texts and principles. Many prominent intellectuals traveled\nto Europe, bringing back ideas of how Russian society should function. Importantly,\nwhether they looked up to Western ideals (Alexander Herzen) or despised Western\npreoccupation with the mundane (Fyodor Dostoyevsky), it is through the lens of\nthe foreign that they sought to understand their homeland.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While\nunderstanding and directing Russia\u2019s place in the world has been a major\npreoccupation of the Russian intelligentsia, it has also puzzled Western scholars\nof Russia. Simon Franklin and Emma Widdis point out that \u201cnational identity is\na process rather than a result\u201d and that \u201cRussia is continually represented as\na question, a field of possibilities, a set of contradictions.\u201d They both reject\nand engage with characteristics of \u201cRussianness,\u201d attempting to delineate the indefinable.\nThey suggest that the key to understanding Russian national identity is looking\nat how Russians understand themselves.[2]<\/a> While Western scholars\nexamine the ways in which Russians define themselves and Russian intellectuals,\nin turn, juxtapose themselves with the West to better understand their culture,\nthe question of Russia\u2019s destiny remains unanswered, and, according to Franklin\nand Widdis, cannot be decisively resolved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The\nRussian intelligentsia may not have come up with a resolution regarding what\nthe country is and should be, but they have had an easier time defining\nthemselves as a social group rather than a national one. Berlin stresses \u201cthe\ntotal and unquestioning\u201d dedication of the intelligentsia to pursuit of the\ntruth, implying that it was an intrinsic part of belonging to the group. He\nalso mentions \u201cthe notorious chasm that divided the educated from the\nuneducated,\u201d indicating that unlike Russia\u2019s relationship with the West, the\nintelligentsia\u2019s relationship vis-a-vis other social groups was more clearly\ndefined.[3]<\/a> Thus, despite Russian\nintellectuals\u2019 debates over Russia\u2019s place in the world, their belief that they\nhave the authority to speak on behalf of the whole country based on their sense\nof intellectual superiority has been their invariable characteristic. [1]<\/a>\nIsaiah Berlin, Introduction to Russian Intellectual History: an Anthology<\/em>,\nby Mark Raeff (New York, Chicago, San Francisco and Atlanta: Harcourt,\nBrace & World, 1966), 5-9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [2]<\/a>\nSimon Franklin and Emma Widdis, National Identity in Russian Culture<\/em>, (Cambridge:\nCambridge University Press, 2004), 2-4.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [3]<\/a>\nBerlin, 9-10.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" By Zinaida Osipova Ideas of nationalism, nation-states and national identity made their way to history relatively recently, yet they have caused numerous military conflicts, introduced new ways of categorizing people, and led to creation of political entities based on these … Continue reading
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n