Interpretation Patterns with relation to the Soviet Past in Contemporary Russia

The proposed study is devoted to patterns of collective memory of the Soviet past and to the interpretation of these patterns in contemporary Russia. The lack of a reflective approach to Soviet history is one of the most distinctive characteristics of the Russian populations collective conscious today. The aim of the proposed research project is the detailed explication and theoretical analysis of collective interpretation patterns that condition the peoples attitude to the Soviet experience. I regard the manner in which meaningful reference is made to the Soviet past, if it is made at all, as an essential component of present political culture in Russia. In addition it is an important defining factor in the process of post-Soviet social transformation. My objectives are thus 1) to closely record specific social interpretation patterns with regard to the Soviet past and 2) to better understand their specific role in the process of post-Soviet social transformation. Of particular interest is the theoretical question of the extent to which the dynamics and direction of post-Soviet social transformation can be linked to critical reflection about the Soviet experience within society. I am thus particularly committed to researching the potential for the collective and its development triggered by a reflective approach towards historical experience. This question has been hardly touched upon by existing research into post-Soviet Russian society; the proposed project will be a pioneering study. With the help of biographical narrative interviews I will carry out an empirical survey of the specifics of subjective historical retrospective and interpretation patterns with regard to Soviet experience. Thereby I will focus on the manner in which the subjects make meaningful reference to the Soviet experience, if they do so at all, on specific patterns in their perception and interpretation of past events, on the context in which reference is made and on how, if at all, they justify the relevance of the historical experience of the Soviet era. I envisage taking between 30 and 40 interviews and to research at least two age groups, namely the young generation between 20-25 years of age and the older generation of those who are now over 60. To heighten the informative value of the data I will at first concentrate on the two capitals, Moscow and St Petersburg, and on the social stratum of the so-called intelligentsia (in the humanities and technical subjects). My partner organisations in Russia will assist me in recruiting respondents. The results of this study are relevant to both scientists and active members of civil society. Moreover, the study opens a new perspective on post-Soviet Russia for representatives of the public, policy makers and the economy. The project will provide these groups with valuable insights into the challenges and specific characteristics of post-Soviet transformation, as well as into present-day traits of political culture and the social conscious in Russia.

What particularly interested me about this research project was the view of people living in Russia today of the Soviet past: How well is it known, what ideas do people have today about the life of their ancestors? What emotions and feelings accompany the view into the Soviet era fear? Curiosity? Nostalgia? To find answers to these questions, I conducted 40 interviews with young people (18 to 28 years old) and people older than 55 years in Moscow and St. Petersburg, by far the most important cities in Russia. If the older generation had direct experience in the Soviet era, the younger generation was born only afterwards and therefore knows the Soviet Union only indirectly: from narratives in the family, from the media, from history lessons at school and university etc. In today`s Russia, statements about Soviet history are sometimes "ignition material" for fierce debates or, in certain cases, even for politically motivated persecution. The interviews I made with a recording device were often not easy. Many people seemed to be very tense about the subject and reacted to my questions irritated or anxious. It was therefore very pleasant for me that many interviewees at the end were grateful for the opportunity to bring the family history not only to my, but also to their own attention. Many said that they had never had such a conversation before and never asked themselves such questions at all. As expected, one of the most important differences lies in the extent of knowledge: the young people often only expressed vague ideas about the life of their ancestors in the Soviet Union; the most important "historical" point of reference for them are the first years after its collapse in 1991. They regard the Soviet epoch as a distant past and believe that they live in a completely different country. The young people do not show any nostalgic moods about life in the Soviet Union, although their image of it is very much idealized. This concerns especially the eternally optimistic vision of a better ("brighter") future that has been conveyed in the Soviet Union for decades. The young people are almost jealous of it. In contrast to then, today they do not longer have the feeling of moving towards a better future. Surprisingly, many of them also stated that people in the Soviet Union were much freer than they are today. However, by "freedom" they mean above all social security. The older people also regret the loss of this kind of security, but in contrast to the younger ones they consider current life in Russia to be much freer. Despite the fact that there was knowledge about repressions and state terror in the Soviet Union and its victims in their own families, the interviewees hardly touched on this topic; the fates of their relatives were usually portrayed very dryly and without emotion. Here, in particular, it became apparent how ambivalent the review of the Soviet past was.