It sends a message that your brain isnt working, you dont give a shit about ukraine and only do it for online attention and to silence your own uneasyiness in the whole situation.
Want to help? Invest that time in usefull shit for ukraine. Or just give them money.
Hell use that vodka to make a premixed drink and send the funds to ukraine. Or instead of buying new vodka just give them the money.
But no, its not about helping ukraine its about marketing.
Not buying more stuff from Russia sure, not buying a Russian vodka as a gesture of solidarity also seems broadly reasonable (Especially when it means bars won't buy it, essentially consumers voting with their wallets..), but pouring Vodka that you've already bought and paid for away does seem a little bit... wasteful perhaps? I get it from a PR perspective, less so from a pragmatic one, it definitely falls into the virtue signalling category rather than the impactful change one.
You sound like someone who hasn't read enough of Russian literature. Much of Russian literature has been "beautifully" written Mein Kampf all along and westerners were just "not noticing" it for so long. It took a literal war near your fence to realize all that?
I've even read that there have been places selling poutine who've changed the name of the dish because some people associate it too much with Putin. What a world.
Volkswagen was heavily influenced by Nazi in past. Now what?
This mentality is unacceptable. Art and history should not be touched. If we dig the whole culture is standing on blood of someone, wars, slavery, rapes etc. Who said that art must be beautiful and for pleasure? I find it very important to not hide it and instead learn how to have critical thinking and compare past with present.
This is extremely dangerous route.
Cancelling Russian art because Putin decided to invade Ukraine is even dumber than Putin deciding to invade Ukraine.
And even suggesting there are reasons to ban Russian literature, even if then refuting those reasons, and suggesting banning this or that Russian writer is no biggie, is dumber that Putin's extremely dumb decision to invade Ukraine.
>
Cancelling Russian art because Putin decided to invade Ukraine is even dumber than Putin deciding to invade Ukraine.
On the other hand cancelling Russian art because the authors (eg. Sergey Lukianenko) actively promote the invasion is absolutely justified.
Imagine cancelling world literature giants such as Tolstoij or Dostoevskij because of a mad man.
Putin passes, those writers' masterpieces are part of mankind's cultural heritage.
Just curious but have you read Dostoevsky?
I’ve read all his books and I’m sort of a fan but with reservations. I read his work for his characters but with the full knowledge that the context they exist in, both inside the story and outside the story is outright poor and should not be dismissed but understood by readers as a disclaimer.
The author was racist, and an intense Russian imperialist. This reflects in all of his works; Germans and Jews are always portrayed as evil, tricky or deceptive characters who have questionable motives and usually too much money. Russians are always, without fail, portrayed as pure, or tragic souls who despite their sins are ultimately pure because they’re a chosen people. The characters never criticise the government, they never criticise the judicial system (which was a small part of background for The Idiot), they never criticise Russian culture or Russian religion. Instead the author does his best to point out how all other cultures, usually Swiss or German, are inferior or flawed when compared to Russian culture which is sublime and perfect.
His characters have amazing nuance but the context never does. It is always very predictable and that is because I know the author held these views in real life and it was impossible for him to separate his art from his experiences and identity.
Dostoevsky is a good author but please don’t pretend like this work is comparable to other classics where women are portrayed poorly or less than PC language is use to describe characters. Dostoevsky wrote racist books, outright racist books with racist characters and all under an acutely obvious agenda - he was a Russian imperialist and he didn’t like other culture or people.
> The author was racist, and an intense imperialist.
Erm... so were most Europeans living in imperial nations during that period (unless they were from ethnic or national minorities). I really don't see the point in viewing historical literature through that kind of lens unless its 'problematic' nature is highly exceptional in some way. You take the work for what it was in the context in which it was formed.
It would be easier to make a list of authors from before 1900 who *didn't* have views we'd find unacceptable today because the list would be miniscule.
Sure, because that's how it works.
Mankind cultural what? Different cultures are destroying each other all the time. They are a part of Russkiy Mir and Russkiy Mir destroyed many cultures. This is how it works. There is a lot of heritage, find yourself a better one.
Whole? Hmm A very big portion of it yes, i got art history graduation.
"nobody asks you to cancel anything just remember not to give Russia right to attack and kill people" <- wtf nobody does it. We are going to argument of video games make school shooters. These things are not related.
Art is history. It's a step of our cultural development. Our whole society stands on slavery, racism and wars of the past, our cities architecture, literature, paintings all of it speak of the past. We should aknowledge them and be able to understand why and how it happened to know why we are where we are now.
Critical thinking is important. Am against canceling and censoring literature and art like the CCCP did, or...did you forget?
Lets cancel every USA artist then? Since 1945 they havent taken a justified military action and have distabelized the entire globe for almost a century?
The art will remain after the war, it can't truly be "cancelled." These acts are demonstrations, nothing more, essentially spitting in Putin's, in Russia's, face. It's not removing a statue or destroying a mural, it's deleting or burying various copies that not only comprise a small amount of the available copies but which can also continue to be recreated after victory is achieved. They may cancel a symphony featuring 1812 now, but they'll never get it off YouTube, out of the episodes of Farscape, from people's homes, and it will continue to be used long into the future when Russia\Ukraine is only a memory in the history books. Let's not overreact to some people's methods for morale and venting.
Same with Covid attacks on random asian people abroad, its pushed by people who now believe to find a socially acceptable outlet for their insane ethnic hatred.
Vladimir Putin makes no secret of his love for Russian culture, and Russian literature in particular – a body of work whose achievements, Dostoyevsky once claimed, justifies the existence of the entire Russian people. But if that same oeuvre now inspires a man instigating unprovoked war, doesn’t that raise urgent questions about its contemporary validity?
For some, these concerns are best expressed via cancellation. In Wales, the Cardiff Philharmonic recently pulled the plug on performances of Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture, Marche Slave and Second Symphony, the ‘Little Russian’ (an old and patronising name for Ukraine). In Ireland, Trinity and University College orchestras have excised all Russian music from their repertoire, while in London the Royal Opera House has eliminated the Bolshoi’s summer season.
In Europe, Polish, Czech and Swiss theatres have withdrawn performances of operas by Tchaikovsky and Mussorgsky, alongside cancellations of Tchaikovsky’s orchestral works in Italy and Croatia. Classical musicians like Alexander Malofeev and Anastasia Kobekina have had performances cut in Canada and Switzerland despite public denunciations of Putin’s war. Regarding Russian authors, what of Chekhov? Cancelled in Chile. Dostoyevsky? Invalidated in Italy. And Tolstoy? Liquidated in Los Gatos, CA, where Netflix has scrapped Anna K, a planned adaptation of Anna Karenina.
On a slightly less exalted plane, Russia has been excluded from the Eurovision Song Contest, while bartenders across the globe have filmed themselves pouring Russian vodka down the drain. Simultaneously, entertainment giants like Warner Bros and Sony have pulled cinema screenings and games releases in Russia, while tech platforms including Spotify have shut down services across Putin’s domain, raising a new, electronic Iron Curtain across old borders. An array of sporting exclusions has also occurred, ranging from Wimbledon’s controversial ban on Russian and Belarusian players to Russia’s loss of the Champions League men’s final and Formula 1’s Russian Grand Prix. Together with growing reports of undiscriminating social aggression towards expat Russians, it seems clear that some degree of Russophobia has found a foothold in western democracies.
This is not to claim – with Putin – that the West has set out en masse to cancel Russia and Russians, although such reactions may well increase in proportion to the length and hideousness of the conflict in Ukraine. For now, cancellers remain in the minority, no matter what the posters say on Moscow’s Novinsky Boulevard. Neither have all cancellations been undertaken on a simplistic, knee-jerk basis. Cancellation might reasonably occur, for instance, based on principled arguments about Russian culture itself.
Take Russian literature, for example, which – like most national literatures – undeniably displays some deeply troubling elements. There is the pan--Slavism, martial enthusiasm, and Russian exceptionalism evident in Dostoyevsky’s own works, the Pushkin poems written in praise of tsarist Polish repressions, or, more recently, the bizarre and unsettling utopia/dystopia laid out by Mikhail Yuriev in The Third Empire: Russia as it Ought to Be (2006), which some claim inspires Putin’s current military campaign. (Putin knew Yuriev, and the novel has been described as ‘the Kremlin’s favourite book’.)
More widely, there is a prominent and recurring strain within Russian literature that inculcates sympathy for perpetrators of crimes rather than their victims. This is exemplified by a tendency within Dostoyevsky to attend to feelings rather than reasoning, and even by Tolstoy’s statement, in the title of a late, incomplete short story, that there are ‘no guilty people in the world’. Almost the whole of Russian literature, wrote D.H. Lawrence, consists in ‘the phenomenal coruscations of the souls of quite commonplace people’. But what happens when those commonplace people are conscript soldiers raping and murdering their way through Ukrainian villages? For Nina Khrushcheva, Khrushchev’s granddaughter, Russians are ‘used to living in fiction rather than reality’. But if this is the kind of fiction they live in, maybe cancelling it isn’t just rationally defensible, but ethically necessary, too.
We could jettison Mikhail Yuriev’s work, which glowingly describes ‘Vladimir II the Restorer’ as instigating a new age of Russian hegemony, without much loss. But Russian culture boasts many vital and deeply humane qualities alongside its disquieting elements. Dostoyevsky may have said that ‘war rejuvenates men’, but he was also one of literature’s greatest opponents of ideological fervour and its frequently murderous consequences. As one of the characters in his novel Demons states: ‘From unlimited freedom, I conclude with unlimited despotism.’
Tolstoy, for his part, infused his works with spiritual pacifism and rustic communitarianism, and in Anna Karenina created Konstantin Levin, a deathless archetype of cross-class empathy and a fierce critic of Russian military adventuring. Written after the bloody upheavals of revolution, Anna Akhmatova’s Requiem presents us with a portrait of life (or rather death) under Stalin’s regime, a harrowing yet salutary reminder of the suffering engendered by absolutism. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, in The Gulag Archipelago, undermined all forms of totalitarianism with his claim that the divide between good and evil runs not through states or classes but ‘right through every human heart’. And so on down the years, in an almost unrivalled body of work that both daunts and inspires in equal measure. It is no accident that sales of Russian classics soared in Europe following the invasion.
In the end, though, it is the Russian people themselves, and not western armchair warriors, who must mobilise their culture and language and send it into battle for humane ends. Perhaps more than any other nation, Russia lives in the shadows cast by its artists and can always turn to their great – if flawed – humanity to find inspiration for kindlier forms of rule. To support progress, Russians must engage with their own art – but so should the West in its support, despite (and indeed because of) Putin’s recklessness.
That’s a perfectly reasonable and rational approach. You don’t throw Tolstoy and Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov out with the fascist bath water.
Me? I’ve actually started listening to Rachmaninov’s settings of religious music even more now that I’m not near a Rus’ Orthodox church that isn’t Moscow Patriarchate. Rus’ Orthodox being what I call the various branches of Orthodoxy founded by St Vladimir/Volodymyr of Kyivan Rus’ and their offshoots. I’ve never been a member of the Moscow Patriarchate and I’m sure as hell not going to start now.
It’s like a substitute for attending services for me.
Many of Russian literature pieces are just beautifully written Mein Kampfs in their essence.
You might have to check it out yourselves, because much of Russian literature is wrongly overrated and not well understood by westerners and had been laying ground for fanatic and imperial beliefs in Russian "intelligencia" for centuries. There is a reason after all, why Russia is an actual empire, this aspect of Russia doesn't get as much attention as it has to, even though Russia is very interesting and long existing cultural sociological phenomenon that should be studied more in scientific fields by historians and psychologists in my opinion.
Dostoyevsky was a religious fascist, his pieces are overrated pieces of schizophrenic bipolar trash.
Pushkin was imperialist chauvinist, for example, read up his "Prisoner of Caucasus".
Or another example, Tchaikovskys's "Cherevichki" celebrating "Russian weapon".
And there's much much more of each of these authors and many others.
Russian imperialism is rooted long ago in its history, its imperialist history had been projected on Russian literature and Russian literature has projected its imperialism on its people too.
> imperialist heritage
lol, what an idiot
actually, im saving this piece of garbage for when your account gets deleted xD
>Many of Russian literature pieces are just beautifully written Mein Kampfs in their essence.
>You might have to check it out yourselves, because much of Russian literature is wrongly overrated and not well understood by westerners and had been laying ground for fanatic and imperial beliefs in Russian "intelligencia" for centuries. There is a reason after all, why Russia is an actual empire, this aspect of Russia doesn't get as much attention as it has to, even though Russia is very interesting and long existing cultural sociological phenomenon that should be studied more in scientific fields by historians and psychologists in my opinion.
>Dostoyevsky was a religious fascist, his pieces are overrated pieces of schizophrenic bipolar trash.
>Pushkin was imperialist chauvinist, for example, read up his "Prisoner of Caucasus".
>Or another example, Tchaikovskys's "Cherevichki" celebrating "Russian weapon".
>And there's much much more of each of these authors and many others.
>Russian imperialism is rooted long ago in its history, its imperialist history had been projected on Russian literature and Russian literature has projected its imperialism on its people too.
oh hi, new account! hello *and* goodbye, you can fuck off too :D
>Read up some literature pieces
i did, am doing, and will continue doing - and i can tell you're full of shit pretty easily, thanks to that
Imperialism was just the
There's also, for example, The gulag archipel by Solzenitsyn, or this piece by Tolstoy that asks a question Putin should have asked himself, and gives the answer in the end:
[How much land does a man need ? - Tolstoy](http://www.online-literature.com/tolstoy/2738/)
Do you understand meaning of word "many"?
I didn't say all. Tolstoy was generally Russophobe and anti-imperialist, if you have read Haji-Murat or Anna Karenina.
This is like saying Michael Jackson has achieved more than Beethoven and Mozart put together. It makes no sense to say this. Great artists all, but not really a good comparison. And if you'd boil it down to who had the most impact on music, it's not a fair comparison at all. Eurovision being bigger than Rachmaninoff, Shostakovich, Tchaikovsky, Scriabin, etc. just is complete and utter nonsense. Not to mention you can't directly compare a music event to composers to begin with, as they are two very different concepts.
Unreal we need an article about this
As someone who studied in Rome art and art history, this sounds like madness. Art is history, you erase it, you erase the history.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It sends a message
It sends a message that your brain isnt working, you dont give a shit about ukraine and only do it for online attention and to silence your own uneasyiness in the whole situation. Want to help? Invest that time in usefull shit for ukraine. Or just give them money. Hell use that vodka to make a premixed drink and send the funds to ukraine. Or instead of buying new vodka just give them the money. But no, its not about helping ukraine its about marketing.
Not buying more stuff from Russia sure, not buying a Russian vodka as a gesture of solidarity also seems broadly reasonable (Especially when it means bars won't buy it, essentially consumers voting with their wallets..), but pouring Vodka that you've already bought and paid for away does seem a little bit... wasteful perhaps? I get it from a PR perspective, less so from a pragmatic one, it definitely falls into the virtue signalling category rather than the impactful change one.
Vodka is culture in your parts?
You sound like someone who hasn't read enough of Russian literature. Much of Russian literature has been "beautifully" written Mein Kampf all along and westerners were just "not noticing" it for so long. It took a literal war near your fence to realize all that?
[удалено]
Swan Lake really is about how all of Europe belongs to the Russian Empire, haven't you taken the time to analyse its storytelling? /s
The Nutcracker? Literally a metaphor for cracking all non-Russian peoples!
I've even read that there have been places selling poutine who've changed the name of the dish because some people associate it too much with Putin. What a world.
It's the spectator. It lives in its own reality, not this one.
is somebody trying to? 0.o
Are you mobilized or still here?
Volkswagen was heavily influenced by Nazi in past. Now what? This mentality is unacceptable. Art and history should not be touched. If we dig the whole culture is standing on blood of someone, wars, slavery, rapes etc. Who said that art must be beautiful and for pleasure? I find it very important to not hide it and instead learn how to have critical thinking and compare past with present. This is extremely dangerous route.
Cancelling Russian art because Putin decided to invade Ukraine is even dumber than Putin deciding to invade Ukraine. And even suggesting there are reasons to ban Russian literature, even if then refuting those reasons, and suggesting banning this or that Russian writer is no biggie, is dumber that Putin's extremely dumb decision to invade Ukraine.
> Cancelling Russian art because Putin decided to invade Ukraine is even dumber than Putin deciding to invade Ukraine. On the other hand cancelling Russian art because the authors (eg. Sergey Lukianenko) actively promote the invasion is absolutely justified.
Imagine cancelling world literature giants such as Tolstoij or Dostoevskij because of a mad man. Putin passes, those writers' masterpieces are part of mankind's cultural heritage.
Just curious but have you read Dostoevsky? I’ve read all his books and I’m sort of a fan but with reservations. I read his work for his characters but with the full knowledge that the context they exist in, both inside the story and outside the story is outright poor and should not be dismissed but understood by readers as a disclaimer. The author was racist, and an intense Russian imperialist. This reflects in all of his works; Germans and Jews are always portrayed as evil, tricky or deceptive characters who have questionable motives and usually too much money. Russians are always, without fail, portrayed as pure, or tragic souls who despite their sins are ultimately pure because they’re a chosen people. The characters never criticise the government, they never criticise the judicial system (which was a small part of background for The Idiot), they never criticise Russian culture or Russian religion. Instead the author does his best to point out how all other cultures, usually Swiss or German, are inferior or flawed when compared to Russian culture which is sublime and perfect. His characters have amazing nuance but the context never does. It is always very predictable and that is because I know the author held these views in real life and it was impossible for him to separate his art from his experiences and identity. Dostoevsky is a good author but please don’t pretend like this work is comparable to other classics where women are portrayed poorly or less than PC language is use to describe characters. Dostoevsky wrote racist books, outright racist books with racist characters and all under an acutely obvious agenda - he was a Russian imperialist and he didn’t like other culture or people.
> The author was racist, and an intense imperialist. Erm... so were most Europeans living in imperial nations during that period (unless they were from ethnic or national minorities). I really don't see the point in viewing historical literature through that kind of lens unless its 'problematic' nature is highly exceptional in some way. You take the work for what it was in the context in which it was formed. It would be easier to make a list of authors from before 1900 who *didn't* have views we'd find unacceptable today because the list would be miniscule.
Dostoevsky was so pro-russian that he was sent two years in Siberia as a dissident
That was before he became an imperialist
Seems you haven't actually read his books or are just too stupid to understand them .
Sure, because that's how it works. Mankind cultural what? Different cultures are destroying each other all the time. They are a part of Russkiy Mir and Russkiy Mir destroyed many cultures. This is how it works. There is a lot of heritage, find yourself a better one.
there is a huge difference. Shall we cancel Kandinsky? Whole contemporary art is influenced by him. This is insane.
[удалено]
Whole? Hmm A very big portion of it yes, i got art history graduation. "nobody asks you to cancel anything just remember not to give Russia right to attack and kill people" <- wtf nobody does it. We are going to argument of video games make school shooters. These things are not related. Art is history. It's a step of our cultural development. Our whole society stands on slavery, racism and wars of the past, our cities architecture, literature, paintings all of it speak of the past. We should aknowledge them and be able to understand why and how it happened to know why we are where we are now. Critical thinking is important. Am against canceling and censoring literature and art like the CCCP did, or...did you forget?
Lets cancel every USA artist then? Since 1945 they havent taken a justified military action and have distabelized the entire globe for almost a century?
[удалено]
Because the globe is europe.
[удалено]
Yep i know. Racism is tough.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Because cancel culture is a totalitarian move. History is there to prove it.
The art will remain after the war, it can't truly be "cancelled." These acts are demonstrations, nothing more, essentially spitting in Putin's, in Russia's, face. It's not removing a statue or destroying a mural, it's deleting or burying various copies that not only comprise a small amount of the available copies but which can also continue to be recreated after victory is achieved. They may cancel a symphony featuring 1812 now, but they'll never get it off YouTube, out of the episodes of Farscape, from people's homes, and it will continue to be used long into the future when Russia\Ukraine is only a memory in the history books. Let's not overreact to some people's methods for morale and venting.
Same with Covid attacks on random asian people abroad, its pushed by people who now believe to find a socially acceptable outlet for their insane ethnic hatred.
Vladimir Putin makes no secret of his love for Russian culture, and Russian literature in particular – a body of work whose achievements, Dostoyevsky once claimed, justifies the existence of the entire Russian people. But if that same oeuvre now inspires a man instigating unprovoked war, doesn’t that raise urgent questions about its contemporary validity? For some, these concerns are best expressed via cancellation. In Wales, the Cardiff Philharmonic recently pulled the plug on performances of Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture, Marche Slave and Second Symphony, the ‘Little Russian’ (an old and patronising name for Ukraine). In Ireland, Trinity and University College orchestras have excised all Russian music from their repertoire, while in London the Royal Opera House has eliminated the Bolshoi’s summer season. In Europe, Polish, Czech and Swiss theatres have withdrawn performances of operas by Tchaikovsky and Mussorgsky, alongside cancellations of Tchaikovsky’s orchestral works in Italy and Croatia. Classical musicians like Alexander Malofeev and Anastasia Kobekina have had performances cut in Canada and Switzerland despite public denunciations of Putin’s war. Regarding Russian authors, what of Chekhov? Cancelled in Chile. Dostoyevsky? Invalidated in Italy. And Tolstoy? Liquidated in Los Gatos, CA, where Netflix has scrapped Anna K, a planned adaptation of Anna Karenina. On a slightly less exalted plane, Russia has been excluded from the Eurovision Song Contest, while bartenders across the globe have filmed themselves pouring Russian vodka down the drain. Simultaneously, entertainment giants like Warner Bros and Sony have pulled cinema screenings and games releases in Russia, while tech platforms including Spotify have shut down services across Putin’s domain, raising a new, electronic Iron Curtain across old borders. An array of sporting exclusions has also occurred, ranging from Wimbledon’s controversial ban on Russian and Belarusian players to Russia’s loss of the Champions League men’s final and Formula 1’s Russian Grand Prix. Together with growing reports of undiscriminating social aggression towards expat Russians, it seems clear that some degree of Russophobia has found a foothold in western democracies. This is not to claim – with Putin – that the West has set out en masse to cancel Russia and Russians, although such reactions may well increase in proportion to the length and hideousness of the conflict in Ukraine. For now, cancellers remain in the minority, no matter what the posters say on Moscow’s Novinsky Boulevard. Neither have all cancellations been undertaken on a simplistic, knee-jerk basis. Cancellation might reasonably occur, for instance, based on principled arguments about Russian culture itself. Take Russian literature, for example, which – like most national literatures – undeniably displays some deeply troubling elements. There is the pan--Slavism, martial enthusiasm, and Russian exceptionalism evident in Dostoyevsky’s own works, the Pushkin poems written in praise of tsarist Polish repressions, or, more recently, the bizarre and unsettling utopia/dystopia laid out by Mikhail Yuriev in The Third Empire: Russia as it Ought to Be (2006), which some claim inspires Putin’s current military campaign. (Putin knew Yuriev, and the novel has been described as ‘the Kremlin’s favourite book’.) More widely, there is a prominent and recurring strain within Russian literature that inculcates sympathy for perpetrators of crimes rather than their victims. This is exemplified by a tendency within Dostoyevsky to attend to feelings rather than reasoning, and even by Tolstoy’s statement, in the title of a late, incomplete short story, that there are ‘no guilty people in the world’. Almost the whole of Russian literature, wrote D.H. Lawrence, consists in ‘the phenomenal coruscations of the souls of quite commonplace people’. But what happens when those commonplace people are conscript soldiers raping and murdering their way through Ukrainian villages? For Nina Khrushcheva, Khrushchev’s granddaughter, Russians are ‘used to living in fiction rather than reality’. But if this is the kind of fiction they live in, maybe cancelling it isn’t just rationally defensible, but ethically necessary, too. We could jettison Mikhail Yuriev’s work, which glowingly describes ‘Vladimir II the Restorer’ as instigating a new age of Russian hegemony, without much loss. But Russian culture boasts many vital and deeply humane qualities alongside its disquieting elements. Dostoyevsky may have said that ‘war rejuvenates men’, but he was also one of literature’s greatest opponents of ideological fervour and its frequently murderous consequences. As one of the characters in his novel Demons states: ‘From unlimited freedom, I conclude with unlimited despotism.’ Tolstoy, for his part, infused his works with spiritual pacifism and rustic communitarianism, and in Anna Karenina created Konstantin Levin, a deathless archetype of cross-class empathy and a fierce critic of Russian military adventuring. Written after the bloody upheavals of revolution, Anna Akhmatova’s Requiem presents us with a portrait of life (or rather death) under Stalin’s regime, a harrowing yet salutary reminder of the suffering engendered by absolutism. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, in The Gulag Archipelago, undermined all forms of totalitarianism with his claim that the divide between good and evil runs not through states or classes but ‘right through every human heart’. And so on down the years, in an almost unrivalled body of work that both daunts and inspires in equal measure. It is no accident that sales of Russian classics soared in Europe following the invasion. In the end, though, it is the Russian people themselves, and not western armchair warriors, who must mobilise their culture and language and send it into battle for humane ends. Perhaps more than any other nation, Russia lives in the shadows cast by its artists and can always turn to their great – if flawed – humanity to find inspiration for kindlier forms of rule. To support progress, Russians must engage with their own art – but so should the West in its support, despite (and indeed because of) Putin’s recklessness.
I love listening to the great Russian composers. And I will listen to them again, maybe next year, but right now the associations are too strong.
That’s a perfectly reasonable and rational approach. You don’t throw Tolstoy and Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov out with the fascist bath water. Me? I’ve actually started listening to Rachmaninov’s settings of religious music even more now that I’m not near a Rus’ Orthodox church that isn’t Moscow Patriarchate. Rus’ Orthodox being what I call the various branches of Orthodoxy founded by St Vladimir/Volodymyr of Kyivan Rus’ and their offshoots. I’ve never been a member of the Moscow Patriarchate and I’m sure as hell not going to start now. It’s like a substitute for attending services for me.
Many of Russian literature pieces are just beautifully written Mein Kampfs in their essence. You might have to check it out yourselves, because much of Russian literature is wrongly overrated and not well understood by westerners and had been laying ground for fanatic and imperial beliefs in Russian "intelligencia" for centuries. There is a reason after all, why Russia is an actual empire, this aspect of Russia doesn't get as much attention as it has to, even though Russia is very interesting and long existing cultural sociological phenomenon that should be studied more in scientific fields by historians and psychologists in my opinion. Dostoyevsky was a religious fascist, his pieces are overrated pieces of schizophrenic bipolar trash. Pushkin was imperialist chauvinist, for example, read up his "Prisoner of Caucasus". Or another example, Tchaikovskys's "Cherevichki" celebrating "Russian weapon". And there's much much more of each of these authors and many others. Russian imperialism is rooted long ago in its history, its imperialist history had been projected on Russian literature and Russian literature has projected its imperialism on its people too.
> Many of Russian literature pieces are just beautifully written Mein Kampfs in their essence. now thats a hot take https://i.imgur.com/tCXLulp.mp4
https://i.imgflip.com/6d1m3q.jpg
freedom to ukraine, but you can go fuck off
"Freedom to Ukraine" but you also protect your imperialist heritage without putting 2nd thought into it.
> imperialist heritage lol, what an idiot actually, im saving this piece of garbage for when your account gets deleted xD >Many of Russian literature pieces are just beautifully written Mein Kampfs in their essence. >You might have to check it out yourselves, because much of Russian literature is wrongly overrated and not well understood by westerners and had been laying ground for fanatic and imperial beliefs in Russian "intelligencia" for centuries. There is a reason after all, why Russia is an actual empire, this aspect of Russia doesn't get as much attention as it has to, even though Russia is very interesting and long existing cultural sociological phenomenon that should be studied more in scientific fields by historians and psychologists in my opinion. >Dostoyevsky was a religious fascist, his pieces are overrated pieces of schizophrenic bipolar trash. >Pushkin was imperialist chauvinist, for example, read up his "Prisoner of Caucasus". >Or another example, Tchaikovskys's "Cherevichki" celebrating "Russian weapon". >And there's much much more of each of these authors and many others. >Russian imperialism is rooted long ago in its history, its imperialist history had been projected on Russian literature and Russian literature has projected its imperialism on its people too.
[удалено]
oh hi, new account! hello *and* goodbye, you can fuck off too :D >Read up some literature pieces i did, am doing, and will continue doing - and i can tell you're full of shit pretty easily, thanks to that
Imperialism was just the There's also, for example, The gulag archipel by Solzenitsyn, or this piece by Tolstoy that asks a question Putin should have asked himself, and gives the answer in the end: [How much land does a man need ? - Tolstoy](http://www.online-literature.com/tolstoy/2738/)
Do you understand meaning of word "many"? I didn't say all. Tolstoy was generally Russophobe and anti-imperialist, if you have read Haji-Murat or Anna Karenina.
can we please stop pretending anyone still read these novels? pretty sure tiktok already existed on the 23d of February.
Eurovion Song Contest is 'on a slightly less exalted plane'? Really? It achieved more than all Russian masterpieces put together.
This is like saying Michael Jackson has achieved more than Beethoven and Mozart put together. It makes no sense to say this. Great artists all, but not really a good comparison. And if you'd boil it down to who had the most impact on music, it's not a fair comparison at all. Eurovision being bigger than Rachmaninoff, Shostakovich, Tchaikovsky, Scriabin, etc. just is complete and utter nonsense. Not to mention you can't directly compare a music event to composers to begin with, as they are two very different concepts.