The Role of the "Day of Russian Culture" in Constructing Russian Emigration Identity of the "First Wave".

Bulatov Ivan Aleksandrovich ORCID: 0000-0001-7148-491X PhD in History Associate Professor, Department of History and Politology, Yuri Gagarin State Technical University of Saratov 77 Politechnicheskaya str., Saratov, 410054, Russia, Saratov region kicum-333@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

The emigration of the "first wave" or white emigration includes people who left Russia as a result of the Civil War in 1918-1922. Researchers differ in estimates of the number of this outcome, but as a rule, the figures are in the range of 1-2 million people. An important characteristic of the Russian emigration of the first wave, distinguishing it from other diasporas, was the belief in a speedy return to their homeland. Because of this, the emigrants were in no hurry to join the host societies, but rather felt like guests who would soon leave for home. But even during this short period, it was necessary not to lose what was valuable to bring out of Russia: the army, culture and Russian children. The latter had to be saved, both physically – from hunger and disease, and spiritually – from denationalization. The holiday "Day of Russian Culture" (hereinafter DRC) was supposed to help with the preservation of culture and national identity. But before we turn directly to the holiday, we need to say a few words about the identity of white emigration, in its purest form presented in the 1920s – 1930s.

Today, the prevailing opinion in science is that the nation is an intellectual construct, an "imaginary community" that has replaced religious and class identities. If we accept this point of view, then we can talk about the simultaneous existence of several projects of the Russian nation competing with each other for the minds of people. Such a situation existed already in the Russian Empire, but it was most clearly manifested after the revolution, when Soviet and emigrant projects arose. The perception of Russianness changed dramatically in the USSR, where a new Soviet identity was emerging. Emigration tried to preserve the imperial understanding of Russianness, however, new living conditions left their mark, which makes it more promising to talk about constructing a new identity of "white Russians" than, in fact, about preserving Russianness (as the emigrants themselves said). Here it would be appropriate to recall the words of the classic of sociology Durkheim that "society consists not only of the mass of individuals forming it, ... first of all it consists of its own idea of itself. And there is no doubt that sometimes society hesitates as to how it should present itself. ... These conflicts break out not between an ideal and reality, but between two different ideals, yesterday and today, between what has the authority of tradition and what is just beginning to exist" ^{[19, p. 695]}. In the Soviet Union, the tradition was torn consciously and radically, in emigration they tried to preserve it, but the idea of themselves inevitably changed.

These changes were caused by the loss of the Motherland and the confrontation with the Bolsheviks. An important role for self-consciousness was acquired by the cult of the white army and the heroes of the Civil War, uncompromising anti-communism. To consolidate these ideas, new commemorative practices were required. So new places of memory, holidays and memorable dates began to be created. The new celebrations ensured cultural unity in all the countries of the dispersion and, at the same time, distinguished emigrants from Soviet Russians. Of the holidays and memorable days can be distinguished based on recent events: "Day of Hatred and Sorrow" (February Revolution), "Day of Irreconcilability" (October Revolution); and, filling old dates with new meaning: St. Vladimir's Day, Russian Youth Day (June 12, Peter I's birthday), Russian Soldiers' Day (May 6th, St. George's Day), The Day of Orthodox Russian Culture (July 28, St. Vladimir's Day) ^{[4, L. 2]}. The most common and important for the formation of a new identity was the DRC, celebrated on the birthday of Alexander Pushkin. At the same time, the very fact that a national holiday, that is, an event designed to unite the nation, ignoring political, ethnic and religious differences, was based on a cultural, not a political or military event, which is much more common in the world ^{[44, p. 212; 43, p. 213-215]}, vividly characterizes white emigration.

The history of the holiday.

In the first years of emigration, teachers and public figures began to raise the question of the possibility of the loss of Russian identity by young people. Emigrant schools and extracurricular organizations added more national elements to their programs, prominent philosophers and writers devoted their articles to this topic. On this wave, on May 26, 1924, the "Day of Russian Enlightenment" was held in Estonia, dedicated to the 125th anniversary of the birth of Alexander Pushkin ^{[37, p. 73]}. Already in emigration, alternative ideas about the origin of the holiday appeared. So V. Kolokolnikov ^[22] wrote about the continuity of this holiday from the initiative of the Petrograd "House of Writers" to celebrate the day of Pushkin's death as a holiday of Russian culture. However, the connection of these events is not confirmed, so, apparently, the Russian diaspora of Estonia independently came to the holiday. The idea was interested in the Pedagogical Bureau for Secondary and Lower Russian Schools abroad. This organization tried to coordinate the work and financially support Russian education in emigration, and was also one of the first to raise the issue of combating denationalization. In 1924, the Bureau studied the Estonian experience and decided to borrow it, renaming the holiday the Day of Russian Culture ^[29], and moving the date of the celebration from May 26 to June 8. That is, they switched from the old style to the new one. However, an attentive researcher will immediately notice that according to the new style it should be June 6th. In emigration, there were disagreements about the calculation of the difference between calendars, which is why the majority accepted June 8th, but some groups of emigrants celebrated the holiday on the 6th ^[21].

To promote the new event, a proclamation was prepared, issued in a circulation of 1000 copies. and sent to all the countries where the Russians lived. Russian Russian Teachers' Organizations, the Board of the Union of Russian Academic Organizations, the Board of the Union of Russian Teachers' Organizations Abroad, the Association of Russian Emigrant Student Organizations, the Russian Zemsko-City Committee for Assistance to Russian Citizens Abroad signed the appeal in addition to the Pedagogical Bureau. Most of the emigrant newspapers published a proclamation. Russian Russian Russian Russian Culture Day celebration will be organized in all Russian foreign centers on June 8, on the anniversary of the birth of Alexander Pushkin, at the initiative of a number of Russian organizations in Prague, in all Russian foreign centers, with the aim of uniting Russian people scattered everywhere, deprived of a living connection between themselves and each other,"Vozrozhdenie" wrote about it: "On June 8, on the anniversary of the birth of Alexander Pushkin, at the initiative of a number of Russian organizations in Prague, a celebration of the "day of Russian culture" will be organized in all Russian foreign centers, with the aim of uniting Russian people scattered everywhere, deprived of a living connection with each other and common cultural tasks" ^[6]. The geography of the holiday was rapidly increasing. In the first year, the celebrations covered 13 countries, in the following 1926 emigrants participated in 20 countries ^{[1, p. 152]}. In the late 20s - 30s, the DRC did not lose its importance for Russian emigration, however, the holiday did not survive the Second World War. In Finland, the last DRC was held in 1940 ^{[25, p. 304.]}, and in Harbin in 1942 ^{[1, p. 158]}.

The DRC program.The events organized in the DRC varied from region to region.

First of all, this was caused by the different capabilities of the colonies, resulting from their size and organization. So in a small town like Nancy, they could limit themselves to one concert in a student dormitory ^[16]. In Belgrade, they had been celebrating for four days, and in Paris, the celebrations stretched for a week. At the same time, certain common features can be identified. As a rule, the festivities began with a morning prayer service ^[21]. Further, if the Russian colony was large enough, then the celebrations were divided into adult and children's parts. Lectures on Russia and Russian culture were necessarily read at them, musical performances were organized, and sometimes dance numbers were added to them. Children's events differed from adults with a greater degree of public involvement in the celebration. This could manifest itself in the performances of various circles: music, dance, theater, etc. In the adult part, there was much less amateur activity, professional groups performed, often deserving world recognition. There were more speakers at the meetings than in the children's section. If funds were available, the organizing committee of the DRC published a one-day magazine or newspaper, which included reports on the preparation and conduct of events, as well as specially prepared articles on given topics, often timed to anniversaries from the history of Russia ^{[1, pp. 156-157]}. A mandatory part of the holiday was its wide coverage in the press. Announcements of festive events appeared for several days, or even weeks, and then reports on the holiday and especially outstanding speeches were published. In Paris, since the late 20s, special holiday concerts have also been broadcast on the radio ^[28].

The goals of the Day of Russian Culture. One of the most important tasks of the holiday was to unite the entire emigration, which was complicated by the fact that there was no such holiday in Russia.

V.A. Maklakov's speech delivered by him in 1926 at a meeting at the Sorbonne was devoted to this fact. He noted that the Russian Empire did not create a national-state holiday, instead there were either religious or dynastic ones, but there was no political one. Further, Maklakov analyzed in detail why a cultural event, not a political one, should become a national holiday for Russian people. The reason for this was the fact that, in political terms, "there is no day in our past that could merge everyone into one" and because of this, "Pushkin's birthday was chosen as a day that can cause neither doubt nor disagreement in anyone" ^{[24, p. 1, 3]}.

The organizers of the holiday expected that the unifying potential of the "sun of Russian poetry" would be transferred to the holiday. And they were right. For example, in an editorial article of the Berlin magazine "Rudder" they wrote that "there is no other moment in Russian foreign life that only rallied everyone, without separating anyone, only united everyone, without pushing anyone away" ^[10]. In many other articles we find similar thoughts. Someone spoke of Pushkin's name as "the white banner of a festive truce among ... political struggle" ^{[33, p. 2]}, others noted that "people of very different views can come together to protect the common indisputable values of Russian culture" ^[9], "the question of honoring the "first poet" ... caused suddenly, such a rise, in which all our not deep ones disappeared, but – alas! – irremediable strife" ^[30]. In Harbin, during the 1930s, the Harbin Committee for Assistance to Russian Refugees was engaged in organizing celebrations because it was an "apolitical and all-immigrant organization", and the holiday was supposed to unite everyone regardless of political preferences ^{[26, p. 37]}.

In addition to political unification, geographical unification was also implied: "Paris and a Russian village in Estonia, Polish Crosses and Brussels – it was difficult to count on such an association; and it is happening" ^[11]. This was facilitated by the fact that all Russian people celebrated a common holiday on one day, as well as the work of the press. The description of the celebrations spread throughout all the countries of the scattering. So already at the start of the holiday in 1925, the newspaper "Latest News" published in Paris published a detailed plan of celebrations both in France and in Prague and Belgrade, and listed the rest of the countries in which the events were planned ^[8]. And the committee for the DRC in Harbin appealed to the European emigration with a request to send texts for the festive collection. A number of publicists responded, "showing by this the practical possibility and feasibility of the idea of close unity of Russians on the basis of a common national work" ^{[26, p. 37]}.

Besides spiritual unity, physical unity was also important. Russian Russians, when describing a musical concert in the Trocadero, the following phrase slips through: "thousands of Russian people came there, not only looking for aesthetic pleasure, but also uniting, in general, national and patriotic feeling" ^[2], and two years later on the same occasion: "we are used to celebrating our Russian national holiday in a dense Russian to the crowd" ^[12]. These words make Durkheim recall: "in order for society to be aware of itself and maintain the necessary level of intensity of this self-consciousness, it must gather and concentrate" ^{[19, p. 694]}. So the DRC, primarily a symbolic and spiritual event, also carried a physical component.

With all that said, the unifying potential of the DRC should not be absolutized, as domestic researchers have already pointed out ^[21]. So the liberal "Latest News" immediately entered into a polemic with the conservative "New Time" (Belgrade), which opposed the holiday. Russian Russian News stated the need to recognize the connection of culture with the "destinies of Russian liberalism", because "the lords cannot participate in the celebration of Russian culture" ^[8]. True, the "keep the lords" in the face of the "New Time" and were not going to participate, becoming one of the few forces that opposed the holiday. The "reactionaries" got it on the holiday not only from liberals, but also from socialists. So in the Socialist-Revolutionary newspaper "Days" they noted that the holiday is good, but the history of Russian culture is primarily "the history of the struggle of the free spirit of the nation" with a soulless and spiritless statehood ^[20]. The answer to the left forces can be considered a publication in the moderately monarchical organ "Renaissance", where the author, under the pseudonym Chub, accused P.N. Milyukov of splitting the holiday in Paris into two parts on a political principle: in the Sorbonne for the nationally minded, in the Trocadero for Republicans ^[38].

The struggle for the political affiliation of the holiday is not a feature of the DRC, but is characteristic of most national holidays, ^{[43, p. 209; 44, p. 215; 42, p. 71]}. At the same time, Pushkin Day provided a platform for dialogue and cooperation between different forces. Both Milyukov's "Latest News" and P.B. Struve's "Renaissance" edited published announcements and reports on all festive events: both at the Trocadero and at the Sorbonne. It is important that they moved their confrontation inside the holiday, and not divided into "for" and "against" it (with rare exceptions).

There was also another type of schismatics who generally approved of the holiday, but wanted to choose another historical date for it ^[13]. The main competitor of Pushkin was Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavovich ^[21], whose supporters were mainly concentrated in Belgrade. As mentioned above, local conservatives were critical of Pushkin Day from the very beginning. In Belgrade , the feast of St. Vladimir was called the day of "Russian Glory", in imitation of the Serbian tradition of praising the ancestors from the moment of initiation to Christianity. In 1929, the Belgrade "Vladimirovtsy" raised the question of postponing the holiday, and in 1930 it was decided to celebrate both holidays ^[14]. In Harbin, a similar holiday was called the Day of Orthodox Russian Culture. In this city , the main supporters of St. Vladimir had fascists led by K.V. Rodzaevsky. And in 1944, they even managed to hold their holiday instead of the DRC ^{[3, L. 38, 39.]}. But still these were rare exceptions.

In its first appeal, the Pedagogical Bureau spoke about two problems of emigration with a solution that the DRC could help. The disunity of emigration was mentioned above. The second problem was recognized as the "loss of a living sense of homeland" ^[7]. Because of this, no holiday was complete without the participation of young people. In Mukden in 1926 The DRC was conducted only by the students and staff of the real school of the Orthodox brotherhood ^{[36, p. 223]}. In the same year, the holiday came to Harbin, and, at first, it was also limited to the walls of the 1st Harbin Mixed Real School ^{[37, p. 80]}. In the 30s, the practice of separating a children's holiday from an adult was established in this city. The children's part took place in the morning and began with a prayer service in St. Nicholas Church, then the children marched in orderly rows, lined up by schools or organizations, under flags to the place of the main celebrations. The number of participants varied, but as a rule several hundred teenagers were invited, for example, in 1936 600 children were planned to participate ^[1]. In Paris, educational institutions and youth organizations were traditionally involved in the events, so in 1930 there were six of them ^[27], in 1931 there were nine ^[31]. The DRC became a kind of showcase for emigrant children's movements: "among the public there are slender groups of young people in uniform, crimson tops of Sokolsky hats, blue and black blouses of "Knights", protective shirts of scouts" ^[17]. In Berlin, a steamboat for 250 people was rented for children, on which they were rolled around the lake. Mugel was fed lunch and then entertained with songs, dances and instructive lectures ^[15]. If possible, festive events were adjusted to different ages. So in Paris, the kindergarten of the Association of Zemstvo and City Leaders (Zemgor) he organized a holiday for children 3-8 years old ^[12]. The Russian Student Christian Movement (RSHD) in the same city organized events for children aged 10-14 in the morning, and gathered young people in the evening ^[18].

An important component of national identity is a sense of belonging to something great. The DRC coped with this task as well. It should be remembered that white emigrants are people who lost two wars, were expelled from their homeland, forced to work in low–prestige professions. Because of this, the refugees maintained their dignity through involvement in a great culture. The "golden age" of the nation is extremely important for national identity, when its core was formed and creative genius flourished ^{[41, p. 112, 117]}. Equally important is the recognition of the national contribution to the universal civilization ^{[40, p. 7-8; 41, p. 117]}. Russian Russian culture achievements were strongly emphasized by publicists writing about the DRC: "In front of the great image of Russian culture, conquering and forcing the recognition of even the enemies of Russia ..." ^[11], "our culture has managed to impress this West; bring him revelations, move his culture forward" ^{[24, p. 5]}, "we are not what- it is the backward ranks of humanity, but a great nation that has invested a huge contribution to the common treasury of the human spirit" ^[34], "a powerful and original statehood" was noted by the philosopher N.O. Lossky in an article with the telling title "On the global character of Russian culture" ^{[23, p. 7]}.

This apologetics of Russian achievements was important for what F. Fukuyama calls timos, or a fierce spirit responsible for self-esteem. According to Fukuyama, the assertion of one's dignity can go in two ways: through personal recognition and belonging to a group. It is on the second path that nationalism lies ^{[35, p. 20, 84-85]}. This feeling was well formulated by the chairman of the Society of Siberians in Harbin A.G. Russian Russians in a letter written in 1936: "The Day of remembrance by Russian people in a foreign land of their native Russian Culture and its glorious creators and ascetics is a natural right to be proud of such a past, it is happiness and consolation in difficult modern experiences and it is an obligation to preserve, develop and improve Russian Culture in the present and future and faith in the triumph of her" ^{[5, l. 18]}.

The DRC in the context of emigration.

A distinctive feature of the DRC, as a national holiday, was the separation from the Motherland. Researchers point to the important role of the state in organizing such celebrations ^{[43, p. 209]}. This fact is all the more important because Russian emigration was the bearer of the idea of a civil nation, or rather its imperial variety. This distinguished the Russian Diaspora from such ethnically and culturally closed diasporas as Jewish and Armenian. Moreover, Jews and Armenians could be included in the Russian identity if desired. But if building an inclusive civic identity is natural for a large state, this is surprising for emigrants, from whom one would rather expect a transition to protective ethno-nationalism. This brings us to the question of the peculiarities of the construction of national identity among emigrants. One of these features is that emigrants practically lack elements of banal nationalism. Michael Billig in his book "Banal Nationalism" ^[39] distinguishes two types of nationalism: banal and hot. The first describes everyday, usually unconscious practices of nation-building (flags on state buildings, stamps and coins with state symbols, etc.). This type of nationalism is characteristic of established nation-states. Hot nationalism, as a rule, can be observed at the stage of the formation of nations and with the aggravation of interethnic conflicts. Public holidays are an example of banal nationalism, but only if they are held in a national state. In emigration, almost any action somehow related to the markers of national identity is carried out consciously. Of course, a simple comprehension of everyday practices brought from the Motherland was not enough, which is why new measures were introduced to preserve identity, which were not needed in a nation-state. This was aptly noted by V.A. Maklakov: "where there is reality, there is no need for symbols: in a house where everyone is still alive, there is no need for portraits of family members" ^{[24, p. 3]}.

Although the emigrants lost their national state, it has not ceased to play its important role in their cohesion. As the German researcher Karola Lentz notes: "national days urge citizens to remember, recreate and rethink the national past and strive to strengthen their emotional attachment to the nation state" ^{[43, p. 208]}. The DRC acted in the same way, strengthening the solidarity of emigration, including relying on a common love for Russia and belief in the inevitability of returning there.

The DRC was a manifestation of the statesman's instinct of the Russian people. In fact, this holiday has become the brightest attempt of emigration to construct a collective identity. The Russian Russian intelligentsia, torn away from their homeland and consequently forced to move from supporting "banal nationalism" to more active practices, tried to make the birthday of a symbol of Russian culture a national holiday. Miroslav Khrokh wrote that "the unity of the nation is based on how strong the sense of agreement about what constitutes the values of the nation is" ^{[40, p. 8]}. The figure of Pushkin provided such agreement. Moreover, political squabbles did not allow choosing an indisputable event in political history, and the broad interpretation of the Russian nation, including Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., did not allow declaring a religious holiday national. At the same time, the emigrants themselves realized that they were celebrating not just a cultural event, but giving it the "character of a national demonstration" ^[30]. The DRC certainly had other goals: entertaining, educational, familiarization for foreigners, but the task of constructing identity remained in the first place.

As for the reasons for the extinction of the holiday, it will not be superfluous to turn to Durkheim again: "We know that the Great French Revolution established a whole cycle of celebrations in order to preserve the principles that inspired it in a state of eternal youth. If this institution quickly declined, it was because the revolutionary faith did not last long: the initial enthusiasm was soon replaced by disappointment and despondency" ^{[19, p. 703]}. The same is true for the white immigrant practices of maintaining identity. They existed as long as there was a belief in a speedy return to their homeland. T.K. Savchenko correctly noted that "the task of preserving culture was connected with the hope of returning to their homeland" ^{[32, p. 95]}. The more time passed, the more the emigrants became disillusioned with this belief, getting tired of waiting. After the victory of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War, it became clear that communism is strong and will not fall in the near future, because of this, white identity, although it did not disappear at all, but became much less noticeable. Thus, we can say that an interesting experiment was set up in emigration to construct a new community within the framework of the broad Russian nation. Russian Russians differed from Soviet Russians in their views on history, politics, and culture. Even the grammar was different, since the emigrants preferred the pre-reform version. The new self-awareness was reinforced by new symbols and practices reinforcing them, the most striking of which was the DRC. As E. Renan wrote, the sacrifices made for the sake of a nation in the past and the willingness to make them in the future are important for the formation of a nation ^[45]. However, the Second World War, having made it possible to make these sacrifices, took the lives of the most active emigrants and showed the impossibility of returning to Russia (at least alive and free). Another result of the war was the destruction of old communities in Europe and the Far East, dilution of the emigration of the first wave by the second wave, already Soviet emigrants, the loss of a large number of passionate carriers of the identity of white Russians and disappointment in the idea of returning to national Russia. All this has determined the impossibility of widespread dissemination of this identity, and consequently the loss of popularity of practices supporting it, such as the DRC.

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.