#Raznochintsy

[russianreader]

Lenin Is on Our Side

A military youth band plays outside the former Lenin Apartment Museum on Cossack Alley in Petersburg as a local hipster documents the happening, 22 April 2023. Photo by PZ, who kindly gave me permission to reproduce it here. The Raznochintsy Petersburg Memorial Museum tells the story of downmarket Petersburg. In pre-revolutionary Russia, the raznochintsy were people whose social status did not…

[anditendshowyoudexpect]

Esteemed detective Anna fan/benevolent translator.

Wondering if you could help answer a question due to lost in translation side effect ——— How many names does a Russian need?

Okay, joking joking.

Real question was if you could shed some light on the social standing of the characters.

Main reason for my confusion was due to honorifics translating into “your high nobleness” and I wondered if they meant aristocratic status or was it something one used in general to address person in power.

Side note, the Anna/Iakov/Nina triangle confused the hell out of me because the relationship status seems to vacillate one episode after another and I won’t bother you with figuring this one out....Two episodes from wrapping up S1 for me. 💪

~~~

hey, cool, my first ask!  and there i was, wondering why nobody asks me anything. i figured it was because i'm not that interesting and i happen to know next to nothing, which is both an attempt at self-deprecation and a defense mechanism, but also more than a bit true: it did, after all, take me quite a while to find the right section in the settings to turn this function on and i couldn't even do that without googling it first.

you said you were joking, but Russian names are no joke! :D a Russian needs a last (family) name, a first (given) name and a patronymic - all three together make the full name, what we call a Ф.И.О. (фамилия/имя/отчество), and that's the formal order, like for various paperwork. they are used in various combinations or alone (yes, each of the three can be used alone, even the patronymic) depending on the situation, conversation companion, etc. but i won't bore you with these, i'm sure you can read about Russian honorifics on Wikipedia or smth

now, to your real question: first of all, you shouldn't take this show as a reliable source on the Russian society in the late 19th century, because there are many things that the writers were either lazy or ignorant about or just plain used however was convenient to them.

there was a Table of Ranks in the Russian Empire, which determined the positions and ranks in the army, government and court etc. (i think the Russians had to do this bc they were so confused about all kinds of nobility they had) and each of those ranks had a style of address of their own. while "your high nobleness" sounds jarring to me, i'm not sure any translation wouldn't (i think i saw it translated as "your honor" as well), so i just went with plain good "sir" (i also just didn't want to waste time on something that wasn't actual plot and, more importantly, the protagonists' relationship, and for that i apologize to those genuinely interested in all things Russian). long story short, it's sometimes both and sometimes (in this lazy, lazy show) neither. say, Shtolman in s1 has the rank of a court councillor (надворный советник), which means he's nobility, although we don't know if it's hereditary or personal. that's class 7, which entitles him to be addressed as "Ваше высокоблагородие" - that's "your high nobleness" right there (btw i looked it up on the English wiki, and it's translated as "Your High Well Born", i mean it's correct literally but wow. there, you can see for yourself). what makes me more curious is that the writers smh made Anton a collegiate assessor (коллежский асессор), that's class 8, one class lower than Shtolman, which can't be right, as Anton is only, what, a couple of years out of gymnasium, has no higher education and next to no work experience. so, as i said, take it all with a grain of salt. 

as for the Mironovs, yes, they are definitely nobility - landowners? - although i think their house being situated next to a prince's house has more to do with the plot than with their social status.

oh, and of course, there's nobility and there's nobility. like, hereditary and personal (granted to a commoner for service etc.). and there's royalty. but i guess it’s not exactly unique to the Russian Empire.

i don't know if this helps or confuses you even more :D i am not an expert (i'm not even 100% Russian (like, not even close) or a Russian national, just a native speaker, so my knowledge of Russian history is limited to what i learned in the first years of Soviet school, some historical fiction and films and TV. ...then again, you probably could say that about most Russians. thank you almighty google)

p.s. oh, and i don't mind discussing the love triangle either. you can blame most of your confusion on the writers though. there is a tentative consensus (well, kinda) in the Russian DA community that Shtolman got back together with Nina to keep Anna safe (after she pointedly said "i'd be scared for Anna if i were you. YOUR Anna" and did everything she could to make Anna stay so that she'd have smth to hold over Shtolman) and broke it off when he knew for sure he was in love with Anna (and/or didn't think she was in danger anymore. yes. i know. L is for Logic). although that didn't look like much of a painful and heavy burden for him, at least for a while :D his and Anna's back and forth is on the writers' too: they needed to keep the relationship storyline (or whatever the hell you call it) tense for 56 episodes and they resorted to every (well, maybe i’m exaggerating a lil bit here) soapy trick in the book. personally, it doesn't irk me as much as it might if i had to watch the show weekly but i get that it can be annoying.

here’s a small spoilerish thing for s2 re: social status, maybe come back when you’re done with the available episodes

there's one thing re: social status i think i should note. i don't remember it ever being mentioned in s1, but it was in s2 at least twice - the first time it was about one of Anna's admirers in Paris, the second time Anton says it about himself. these guys: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raznochintsy

both times i translated it as "commoners", because i honestly ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ i mean... you know? while nobody cares about that student, Anton is another matter, because he cites his status as one the reasons he's no match for Anna. and, well, if he's still a collegiate assessor, he is nobility, too. so there, take it as you will.

[kittoforos]

This history ask meme is so good omg - so 1, 3, 8 and 10 if that's not too much?

i know right? these questions are solid

1. Favorite time period — probably the whole second half of the 19th century extended into the 1920s in Russia; secondarily, the Cold War

3. Favorite female historical figure (HF) — setting aside any number of brilliant poets (i couldn’t possibly decide), probably Nadezhda Krupskaya. i disagree with her ideas about the uselessness/harmfulness of fiction, but she masterminded the Soviet public library system + wildly successful effort to make Russia literate, and since i think those are some of, if not the most impressive of the USSR’s achievements, i respect her a lot.

8. An obscure HF who needs more love — i’m gonna go with Nikolai Ivanovich Kibal’chich (1853 Korop, Ukraine – 1881, St. Petersburg, Russia): priest’s son, revolutionary terrorist, rocket engineer. 

Executed at the age of 27 for his participation in the assassination of Tsar Alexander II, Kibal’chich used his “final word” in court to say that “[the prosecutor] appears to believe that the one sure method [“to prevent the repetition of further regrettable events such as that with which we are here concerned”] is to make no move toward conciliation and to rely entirely upon the gallows and the firing squad. I regret that I cannot agree with the prosecutor that the methods he suggests will lead to the result desired.” and then to ask that his drafts for a space-flight-capable flying machine (which he had just reworked into a “practicable” design during his prison stay) be officially transferred to the care of his lawyer.

i’m in love.

10. Favorite historical novel — it’s been quite some time since i’ve read anything in this genre, actually… probably The Book Thief, for its use of language and formatting.

[livethinking]

«The Tsar is no commander of God's own element»: power and individual in "The Bronze Horseman"

“The Bronze Horseman” is not only the story of a human tragedy, – that of Yevgeny, who lost his beloved Parasha because of the flood and went mad with grief –, the tale about how nature fights back humanity if oppressed by men’s acting, but it’s also the story of power, – symbolised with the Horseman Statue –, the one people overindulge in, that’s oppressing against individuals, or the defeated, who will be severely punished, if they decided to rebel, like Yevgeny, that dies in the end. «It’s such a critical work against power that the author never published it when he was alive, surely tsarist censorship wouldn’t have allowed» thus wrote Gianfranco Lauretano, Italian translator of the poem. Moreover, that was the personal story of the author, the great Aleksandr Sergeevich Pushkin, and about his idological clash against the tsar, that power which got him away, exiled. It’s the battle against censorship and a dangerous despotism.

Oppression and Abuse of Power

«[...] His figure awesome to behold! Upon that brow what thought untold! What armoured might, aloofly ample! And in that steed what fire, what force! Where are you galloping, proud horse, And where will those hooves plunge and trample? Fate’s mighty master! Was not this How you, with curb of iron halting Her flight, reined back from vaulting Into the bottomless abyss?»

Just his presence inspires awe, his own imposing shape, his immobile posture. These physically portray the power and already through these rhymes, the poet seems to want to confer it a vital dimension, the questions are asked like the equestrian statue had already come to life, comparing to whom has the power in real life, thus affirming the allegory of the sculpture, which is going to carry throughout the whole poem. Here’s the indicative verse: «[...] Fate’s mighty master! Was not this / How you, with curb of iron halting/Her flight, reined back from vaulting/Into the bottomless abyss?». Fate is not arbitrary but is spread by our use of the power, which is what draws the historical doom of a nation: the future is built by human decisions and only the abyss will be the conclusion we reach with subjugation, and this is just what happened in the poem with Neva flood, that is the rebellion of nature oppressed by building an “artificial” city, and Yevgeny’s death, the subjection of individuality.

« And quivering with fury, raising His fist, as if compelled by some Dark force to blind, impulsive action, He hissed through teeth clenched in distraction: ‘You … builder of grand schemes! I’ll come And get you!’ – and then ran off, numb [...] And then, no matter where he wended His way, he found that all night through – Poor, hapless wretch – he was attended By bronze hooves beating their tattoo.»

Consequently of individual insurrection, even with just the word, the thought, is a strenuous oppression. Important in these verse is the abuse of power perpetrated by the Emperor against his own servants, who have no chance to expose their dissent because a tragical end is waited by the ones who dare, have faith in their own strengths and abilities, – as Yevgeny did –, who fight back the misfortune, a painful conclusion. It’s the dramatic awakening «of who deceives himself about remaining who he is in a world where arbitration of institution rules». A person need to be a part, therefore, of a dutiful crowd which, by virtue of progress, is driven to ignore anomalies, like Petersburg citizens did with a wandering and mad Yevgeny.

It’s an oppression that hit the environment as well. «[...] Alone upon the low banks had Oft cast his time-worn nets when reaping The waters’ hidden harvest, – now Great towers and palaces endow The bustling banks with grace and splendour; [...] Nevá’s augustly flowing water And granite banks: these I hold dear; Your railings, finely ornamented;[...]»

In the poem that’s outlined with Petersburg building, born by tsar Peter’s will, transforming the land which is going to be the host, annihilating its essence, the nature. But nature rises, much more than men, with more strength and pertinacity; the only one which can contrast the emperor, «[..] ‘The Tsar is no commander/Of God’s own elements.’» , and flood is one of its weapons but only the people will pay the consequence, like Parasha who is going to die, and who lives in palace will not, «[...] The people fear /God’s judgement, for the signs are clear:/No food, no shelter;»

Yevgeny vs. the Bronze Horseman, individual vs. power

« He stopped and, full of apprehension, Looked all around. He stood below Some columns, stately in dimension. […] And nearby – awesome sight indeed – A granite bluff: as if suspended On high, there sat with arm extended The great bronze idol on its steed.»

This is the first meeting between the power, as the monument symbol of Petersburg, and Yevgeny. The moment when it will reveal the drama which starts the process through the protagonist went crazy and then died. A meeting that is a harbinger, Yevgeny’s death. Their relationship hides the eternal conflict between authority and individual, now oppressed, lacking of personality as to be part of the crown, manifest of celebrated westernisation, and therefore, of modernity. A conflict becoming harsher, symbol, inside the narrative arc, of the abuse of power practiced by the Tsar against anyone and anything. On this conflicting relationship, due to the complex symbolic structure of the poem, different are the many analysts approach. Olga Sedakova, poet and translator, in her article for “Nuova Europa”, explained some of them. The first, sociological, solved the conflict under Pushkin’s liberalism, seeing Peter as symbol of monarchy and despotism and Yevgeny of Decembrist movement and first raznochintsy. Such point of view makes the poem a requiem to insurrection and to tragical surrender of man as freedom lover. Another approach is Hegelian, more neutral, and sees in the conflicts the clash between people and State, between the private and the whole, «With humble heart we recognise the triumph of the common on the private, without renouncing to understand the individual’s suffering» (V. G. Belinskij). Lauretano identifies, in addition, a relationship of likeness, «there’s a specific point from Yevgeny’s disgrace begun: the one when he started to make projects for his and his girlfriend’s future. Notes that it’s the only part in which Pushkin let the protagonist speak and from there, his tragedy starts. When does the person take for granted? When he looks like the power. When he, like that, pretends to cage life and schematise time. And doing it, he affirms, like power, his self-sufficiency and self-referentiality. Yevgeny’s trust on his own strength and abilities is suddenly wiped out by flood and he dies. Power made him conceited and, intrinsically, only before the unforeseen. The relationship established between the bronze monument of Peter the Great and Yevgeny, now gone mad, is gothic and monstrous, is a non-relationship between two solitudes, self-referentiality that the mystery of natural events destroys. The power, according to Pushkin, takes us out making us believe we can drive our doom with our solitary and losing strength».

When the omem concretises, the fight happens.

« And quivering with fury, raising His fist, as if compelled by some Dark force to blind, impulsive action, He hissed through teeth clenched in distraction: ‘You … builder of grand schemes! I’ll come And get you!’ – and then ran off, numb»

Yevgeny and Peter-Bronze Horseman conflict is inevitable, escalates into mutual revenge, mutual attack. The individual which inflames and arises with words won’t reach anything, because resistance is something to practise, it needs to be continuous. And when powers responds with acts and violence, doesn’t allow dissent and punished severely, having no pity. That is the eternal clash between power and inspiration, law and freedom but, as Seredova wrote, also the personal battle between Pushkin and the Tsar.

Viviana Rizzo @livethinking @ilbiancodellefarfalle

Article in Italian here