[DOC] Romanov Riches: Russian Writers and Artists Under the Tsars by Solomon Volkov at Arts-Photography

Review

7 of 8 people found the following review helpful. Royal PatronageBy M. A NewmanThis book was recently reviewed in the New York Times recently where its thesis was attacked. The reviewer tended to dismiss this work as an apology for autocracy and appeared only to have read one chapter. that on Pushkins relationship with Nicholas I and tended to decry the role that he played in censoring Pushkin. The poor man clearly had no idea just how worse Pushkins fate might have been had he been left to suffer under the bureaucrats that enforced the cultural life of Russian Empire. Middle level bureaucrats would have had Pushkin on the road to Siberia in order to protect their own future promotion prospects. a concern that would not have governed the Tsar. Pushkin though he chaffed under the Tsars censorship. he was better off in his hands than a uneducated member of the government intent on making a name for himself.This book shows how the Romanov dynasty played a significant role in the cultural life of Russia. In a way this book is refreshing since during the Soviet period. the role of the imperial family was probably more likely to be downgraded. if not by Communists in the USSR then by academics who were more likely as not to dismiss the imperial family as troglodytic bores as they gleefully examined the comings and goings of every radical movement in Russia and urging Chernyshevsky on the unwary.The Romanovs were in fact huge patrons in their way particularly by the 18th century when Peter the Great tended to view every activity as a form of state service. Up through Catherine the Great. all cultural activities relied on some form of imperial sponsorship to achieve success. While Peter tended to focus on individuals such as Alexi Zubov and Dmitri Kantemir. his daughter Elizabeth would have at her disposal a genuine polyglot in the form of Lomonosov who was a genius of the first order. not only in scientific and cultural affairs. but also in establishing institutions some of which remain in service to this very day. Lomonosov is an almost Franklin-like figure. who arrived in St Petersburg from the north in cart carrying fish. From these humble beginnings he rose with the help of several patrons to the apex of Russian cultural life.Along with Lomonosov. the figures who were the most interesting were the ones who probably are least well known to western readers. These include the delightfully obscene poet Barkov who made full use of the range and colour that characterizes Russian obscenities. which are far more extensive in array and complexity than anything found in the west. So pornographic were Barkovs works that they were not published in full until the fall of the Soviet Union.Another figure that is little known in the west is Karamzin. No full translation of Karamzins history of the Russian state is available in English (Richard Pipes did a vastly abridged version published in 1959 by Harvard Press). Even Russian copies are hard to come by and I have only read him in French translation. This is sad really because what westerners are missing is a history that kind of explains the way Russians view their own history and forms of government. Karamzins history is a kind of love letter to the autocratic heavily centralized state. which is essential for order at least as far as most Russians are concerned. If anyone wants to know why the democratic experiments of the 1990s did not pan out. they might want to read this book should they ever be afforded an opportunity. Volkov does provide some insights. which are hard to come by given the limited availability of the text.Probably no Romanov played as big a role in Russian culture as did Nicholas I who is generally dismissed as martinet The reign of Nicholas included a number of significant cultural developments that were highlighted by authors and composers such as Pushkin. Gogol. Tolstoy. and Glinka. Nicholas. while delighting in Pushkins poetry (and his wife). did not care for the author and this was likely a fundamental problem in their relationship. Somewhat prudish considering the tsars love for ballerinas. he condemned Pushkin as much for his private life as he did his politics. That these were strongly influenced by the enlightenment and the French Revolution they did little to ingratiate Pushkin to the emperor. In this book as in others Pushkin does come off as more than slightly naiuml;ve. fully aware of his genius as everyone was including the Tsar. but willing to give offense whenever possible. believing this to be right. In the case of Gogol. approval of the play "The Inspector General" made Gogols reputation. It is doubtful that without the tsars patronage that Gogol would have survived the storm that bureaucrats would stir up. Volkov does appear to be somewhat unaware of Simon Karlinskys work. "The Sexual Labyrinth of Nikolai Gogol since this section stays away from Gogols sexuality as much as it flits closely to that of Pushkin.With Glinka. the composer of "A Life for the Tsar." Tsar Nicholas played an intiment role. even providing the title (and rejecting the original one "A Death for the Tsar as too much of a downer). Like Karamzins history. this work celebrates the dynasty in a flurry of nationalism. linking the three slogans of Nicholass reign. autocracy. orthodoxy and nationalism.Nicholas I may have had a tortured relationship with Pushkin. but he performed one indisputable service to world literature. So impressed was the Tsar with the young Tolstoys Sevastopol Sketches. a series of stories dealing with the Crimean War he gave orders for the future literary titan to be kept away from serious fighting. Tolstoy would have a more complicated relationship with the later Romanovs as he moved from solider to pacifist during the amazing journey that was his life.While Tolstoy started out in the good graces of the Romanovs. Dostoyevsky did not. Part of one of the innumerable radical groups. the future author of Brothers Karamazov found himself imprisoned in Siberia. This lead to a major reevaluation of his life and complete 180-degree turn toward a more traditional take on Russian values. as detailed in a book like "The Devils." Dostoyevsky became the writer for the last of the Romanovs as he continued to amaze readers with his novels.If Dostoyevsky was the author for the Romanovs in the last days of the 19th century. Tchaikovsky was the composer. Volkov. the author of books on Balanchine and a very controversial one on Shostakovich. is well suited to write on this era and the role that the Romanovs played in establishing St Petersburg as a major center of the dance.This is a very interesting interpretation of Russian cultural history. It is rare for patronage to be discussed at all. It is all too often the case that writers view the creation works of art as the product solely of the hermetically sealed imagination of the artists imagination. In Russia the stat has always played a role in both the positive and negative in shaping the cultural agenda from the days that Tsar Alexis banned vulgar singers and puppet shows from Moscow (to protect the public morals) to Putins endorsement of rap music. While Volkovs approach may be shocking to those who know little about the eternally hierarchical place that is Russia.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Five StarsBy Anil C.Loved it.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Five StarsBy david c remesnitskyI love every book by Solomon Volkov