Contributions to insanity

I am always happy to oblige anyone who would like to toast their brain on stuff most people don't care about =) Here's another dose!

"What were common elements in the development of modern nationalism in the territories of the Russian Empire and early Soviet Union?”

Introduction

The rise of nationalism in the Baltic States, Ukraine, and Russia, happened in some very different ways – but in all three cases, there were common themes that helped this development. Of most interest for the purpose of this paper are the themes of literature, language, and music. Nationalism is a product of a national identity, and a national identity is forged through common experience, whether historical or fictional. As will be seen, the difference in what kind of shared experience is used to develop a national consciousness is directly related to what the position of the state was within the Soviet Union. These three – the Baltic States, Ukraine, and Russia – had three ways of going about their national progress: discovery, protest, and self-identification. These differences were directly related to their political status and how much needed to be done in order to have free expression of national identity. However, despite these differences, all three had a common approach to developing a national consciousness: the usage of literature,[1] language,[2] and music.[3]

Nationalism as discovery

 In the case of the Baltic States, the national identity came from a desire to throw off the yoke of Russian and Baltic German oppression and move toward recognition as free states. Just below the surface of subordinated states lay “Baltic nationalism [with] its capacity to inspire and move; its intense love for old, precious and unique traditions; and its basically peaceful and unaggressive character.”[4] Instead of leaving objectionable rule in place, there was potential for a new kind of nationalism – one that would hold on to myths, folklore, and traditional songs, and then simply promote a national identity. This was done through gaining a sense of cultural identity did not need to be manufactured, only fostered: and literature and music that recalled history (whether authentic or legendary[5]) proved ideal to bring this about. “Until the early nineteenth century, peasant folk-songs and legends were, to all intents and purposes, the essence of Latvian and Estonian culture”.[6] From this, it follows that “When [the folk song and dance festivals] began, under Russian imperial rule in the nineteenth century, they symbolized not only the unity and aspirations but the very existence of the Baltic nations … Before 1917, each national festival was seen as a further step in the consolidation and mobilization of the spirit of Baltic nations”.[7] The national festivals were seen to be such for good cause, as they were indeed a part of the development of Baltic nationalism.

Additionally, native languages needed to be preserved and put to use: Baltic Germans, who were attempting to keep Latvians under control, “denied utterly that [the Latvians] were capable of a literary language, … [realizing that] as soon as they admitted that the Latvians and Estonians were nations, rather than rebellious peasants stirred up by agitators, their whole historical and intellectual position would collapse”.[8] Suppressing the native language was, then, a priority in keeping control of the nations and suppressing national identity. The importance of language can also be seen in the way its lack hurt nationalism: “The failure to develop a written language until the sixteenth century … was … [an] obvious weakness of the old Lithuanian pagan culture”[9] and one that resulted in “a massive Lithuanian inferiority complex and a sense of cultural vulnerability vis-à-vis the Poles”.[10] This was not to be resolved until Lithuania emerged in the nineteenth century “in a new form: a linguistic nation”[11] and one that would be able to assert independence and gain its own identity as its Latvian and Estonian counterparts were also doing.[12]

Nationalism as protest

The form of nationalism taken in Ukraine was different than that taken in the Baltic States, although as will be seen, the medium had the same components. Ukrainian politics had long been under the rule of others, and an appeal to an ideal Ukrainian state that had not been dominated by a foreign power was not something that could be reasonably made and have success. Instead, “Since a state which could be glorified as the bearer of the ‘national ideal’ did not exist, enormous stress was placed on securing absolute adherence to the ‘pure’ national language and culture”.[13]  This was not so hard; it wasn’t that the Ukrainians enjoyed Soviet Rule and being exploited. More difficult was developing a sense of national identity that would be strong enough to stand up to the Russians.

Ukrainian nationalism became a rival of Communism since it was inevitably a class struggle: “Both [Communism’s] ideology and its practical possibilities induced it to seek especially the support of the urban industrial workers, led and inspired by a group of dissident intellectuals”. However, these people were the ones who were singing national songs and telling national stories in the years between 1917-20 and were “able to maintain a series of Ukrainian governments on the soil of Ukraine” [14] – disastrous to the suppression of a national consciousness!  However, this was only made possible through the usage of a common Ukrainian language and promotion of Ukrainian literature and song that would evoke nationalist feelings.[15] These feelings were not of the old days of glory, as was possible in the Baltic States; those days did not exist in the historical past of Ukraine. Instead, the heroes of the nationalist stories were the peasants and people of Ukraine, people and lifestyles with whom Ukrainians could relate. “Nationalist Ukrainians felt it essential to instill a love of the indigenous popular arts and customs, emphasizing their distinctive nature”, also songs “as a powerful intellectual and emotional stimulus to nationalist feeling, since most of the songs were distinctively Ukrainian”.[16]

More important than a past turned out to be identification, and if it wasn’t that the same characters of old had shaped their country, then at least everyone had grown up in the same country, knew the same language, and was able to understand the same traditions. In developing a national consciousness, an awareness of others being similar was imperative – and Ukrainian literature showed Ukrainians that they were not alone in their situation and gave them a nationality with which to identify. “Since it was vital to the emerging nation that its language and its history be embodied in works which could inspire loyalty, it was only natural that the leaders of the nationalist movement should have been writers.”[17] Thus, “the majority of [nationalist] leadership consisted of intellectuals par excellence; that is, it was drawn from the academic or literary profession” [18] Through writers and literature, Ukrainian nationalism was developed as distinctively non-Russian and something entirely unique – a protest against the prevailing Russian culture, but one that could sustain itself on account of the way it went about it.

Nationalism as self-identification

Russian national awareness began developing long before the collapse of Imperial Russia, particularly in 1838-48, when Russians became “aware of themselves and their society in a way which could not be controlled by the Third Section and the censorship, despite their efforts to do so. Direct political and social commentary was forbidden, but philosophy, literature and criticism enabled the debate about Russia and its place in the world …”[19] Russian nationalism takes difficult twists, because by its nature it is a self-destroying spirit. Whereas Baltic and Ukrainian nationalism consisted strongly of identifying outside Russia, it was not so simple for Russians to do that. The way this problem was solved was through identification with what they were not. Russians were not able to say that they were against Russia, but they could protest their loyalty to ‘Mother Russia’ and identify with that apart from the Russia of the early 1900’s. One Russian writer even states that “the countryside writers were in effect ‘wanderers returning to our native land’”[20] – sensing that even in a country not under foreign domination, there can still be a need to have a national consciousness apart from the political state. Russian nationalism was not a new concept – just as nationalism was not a new concept for any of these countries, – but it was being expressed in a new way.

Since Russian nationalists around the turn of the century could not identify themselves as standing against the Soviet Union for freedom (since they were a part of the ‘older brother’ country in the Union and breaking away from themselves would only be self-destructive), Russian nationalism instead rose from the inside and idealized the Russian land itself.[21] This movement was not a search for an exterior nationalism, but instead a drawing upon of Russian culture for a sense of nationalism aside from the state of affairs that was being displayed in Russia. The task was to develop a sense of Russian identity apart from the Soviet Union, which drew upon Russian culture that was not dependent on the Soviet Union – a sense of history and place, calling upon loyalty through addressing the historical self of the Russian people and appealing to their roots in Russian soil to call forth a sense of national pride. In this way, the nationalists were able to instill a sense of solidarity in Russian people and invoke a nationalist movement – although again, on account of the rather unique position of Russia in the Soviet Union, there was no real need for a revolution against the head state but instead a changed awareness in culture and an increased sense of national awareness. This may appear to be rather different from the nationalist movements in the Baltic States and Ukraine, but the medium is again the same – Russian writers using evocative images of childhoods past and the culture of Russia contributed heavily to the establishment of this sense of identity through writing about “eternal, national values”[22] that were unmistakably Russian.

Conclusion

While there were different needs for the Baltic States, Ukraine, and Russia in the development of a nationalist movement, there clearly were common elements in the way these changes took place. Some of the largest contributing factors were the common usages of literature, language, and music in the culture. As promoting the national language the use is apparent, as promoting a certain perspective on history national literature’s place seems obvious, and in evoking a sense of solidarity and shared experience music is certainly a strong factor in stirring emotions and recalling the past. These all working together show that although the needs of different cultures, different backgrounds, and different political situations are very different (and at times seem self-obstructive) in developing nationalism, there are commonalities as well.  

Bibliography:

J.A. Armstrong, Ukrainian Nationalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1963).

F.C. Barghoorn, Soviet Russian Nationalism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1956).

S.K. Carter, Russian Nationalism (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990). 

L. Hajda and M. Beissinger, The Nationalities Factor in Soviet Politics and Society (Boulder:

Westview Press, 1990).

A. Lieven, The Baltic Revolution (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993).

R. Pearson, National Minorities in Eastern Europe (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1983).

---

[1] P.A. Goble, Readers, Writers, and Republics: The Structural Basis of Non-Russian Literary Politics, as found in L. Hajda and M. Beissinger, The Nationalities Factor in Soviet Politics and Society, p. 133.

[2] R. Pearson, National Minorities in Eastern Europe 1848-1945, p. 25.

[3] A. Lieven, The Baltic Revolution, p. 111.

[4] A. Lieven, p. 128.

[5] ibid., p. 124.

[6] ibid., p. 111.

[7] ibid.. 

[8] ibid., p. 136.

[9] ibid., p. 47.

[10] ibid., p. 48.

[11] ibid., p. 49.

[12] ibid., p. 125.

[13] J.A. Armstrong, Ukrainian Nationalism, p. 22.

[14] ibid., p. 10.

[15] ibid., p. 226.

[16] ibid., p. 225.

[17] ibid., p. 7.

[18] ibid., p. 239.

[19] S.K. Carter, Russian Nationalism, p. 16.

[20] V. Soloukhin, A Walk in Rural Russia, qtd. S.K. Carter p. 90.

[21] F.C. Barghoorn, Soviet Russian Nationalism, p. 150.

[22] S.K. Carter, p. 98.