Customer Reviews

Natasha's Dance: A Cultural History of Russia

5 star:		(36)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I usually like to give my reviews catchy little titles. I was going to call this one "Fabulous Figes". I finally decided it was more important to just come right out and say this is the best book I read this year. Of course, if we were in January or February, that statement wouldn't mean too much! (Kind of like movie reviews that come out early in the year..."Best Darn Romantic Comedy I've Seen...So Far!) Since we're in December, and considering I've read about 70 books this year, that makes the statement a little more impressive. Okay, so now I've got to "put my money where my mouth is" and tell you what makes "Natasha's Dance" so good. First, the book is beautifully written. It is lyrical, poignant, funny, thoughtful, etc. Like all good popular historians, Mr. Figes has a novelist's flair. Second, the book is wonderfully structured. The author decided to give each chapter a particular theme. So, despite the daunting task Mr. Figes has assigned himself (a cultural history of Russia!), the book doesn't ramble. It has a tight focus. On the other hand, there are enough themes covered that you don't feel anything relevant has been left out. Some of the themes that are covered: how Russian culture was influenced by both Asia and Western Europe; peasant life- the reality vs. how the urban intellectuals imagined it to be; Moscow vs. St. Petersburg (i.e.- their competition with each other, and changing fortunes as cultural centers); the search for the Russian soul- the religious beliefs of some of the famous Russian authors (Pushkin, Tolstoy, Gogol, Turgenev, Dostoevsky, Chekhov, etc.); the distortion and manipulation of culture by the Bolsheviks; and, finally, the effect that emigration from "Mother Russia" had on various cultural figures- such as Prokofiev, Rachmaninov, Stravinsky, Gorky and Nabokov. Mr. Figes also makes sure not to neglect those who chose to stay- people such as the poet Anna Akhmatova, the film director Sergei Eisenstein and the composer Dmitry Shostakovich. Some of these people hated the Revolution and pined for the past. Others welcomed the Revolution and later on became disillusioned. All of them either suffered (materially and/or spiritually) or lived in fear during the nightmare years under Stalin. Third, besides each chapter having an interesting theme, within each chapter Mr. Figes gives details concerning what was going on in the lives of various artists within a particular creative field. So, you get lots of interesting biographical material concerning novelists, poets, composers, etc. The threads of their lives intersect in interesting ways: Tolstoy, who had a lifelong fear of his own death, going to visit Chekhov- Tolstoy thought Chekhov was on his deathbed and wanted to see how Chekhov would "handle" his own mortality! Tolstoy was amazed that Chekhov could still laugh and joke and put on "a brave face". (Chekhov was amused. He knew Tolstoy and suspected the reason for his visit.). Another interesting "artistic intersection" was when Prokofiev decided to leave America because he didn't want to play "second fiddle" (or maybe I should say "second piano!) to Rachmaninov. Prokofiev apparently had quite a large ego, and when he saw how popular Rachmaninov was in the United States (Rachmaninov had emigrated first) he decided to return to Europe (part of this was style- Prokofiev felt that he was too "modern"- that Americans preferred Rachmaninov's more "traditional" and "romantic" music). Regarding Prokofiev, there is the touching footnote that he had the misfortune to die on the same day that Stalin did, March 5, 1953. As Mr. Figes writes, "(Prokofiev's) funeral (was) a sad affair that was scarcely noticed by the Soviet public...There were no flowers left to buy, so a single pine branch was placed on the composer's grave." I hope I have been able to convey some idea of the richness of this book. It is a remarkable achievement by Mr. Figes. If you have any interest whatsoever in Russian cultural history, you will definitely love this book. And, as sort of a wonderful dessert after a gourmet meal, the author has provided a section called "A Guide To Further Reading". This section is almost 30 pages long. Mr. Figes lists many books in this section but also indicates his particular favorites. I've already found at least half-a-dozen titles I want to buy. We bibliophiles should have a "universal tattoo"- "So many books, so little time!"

I disagree with the reviewer who finds this not quite "heavyweight" enough. It is not an academic book - and thank God for that - but a superb introduction to the history and the culture of Russia.

Figes starts with a wonderful account of the building of St Petersburg in the 1700s, and goes on to discuss the meaning of Europe to Russian culture in the eighteenth century. Europe caused a split in the Russian national identity - and much of Russian culture in the nineteenth century was concerned with how to reconcile the two almost contradictory halves of the Russian character: the native Russian (or Muscovite) and the European (or Petrine).

The next chapter takes up the story of 1812, when Russia's writers and artist first began to think about the ways of developing a distinctively "Russian style" in contrast to the West. This is when the Slavophiles were born. There are lots of fascinating details here - on the Russian customs of child-rearing, on interior design and Russian fashions.

The next three chapters explore various facets of Russian culture in the nineteenth century: the Moscow tradition; the romantic fascination with the Russian peasants (which Figes explores as a search for nationhood); and the influence of the Orthodox tradition on Russian literature and art.

Then there is a speculative chapetr on the cultural influence of the Asiatic steppe/ For me, this was the most original and the most interesting chapter in the book (Rachel Polonsky, in her hatchet-job review in the TLS doesn;t even mention it). In this chapter Figes digs down deep into peasant culture and folklore, showing how the shamanic beliefs of the steppeland nomads (the "Decsendants of Genghiz Khan") left their trace on the Russians/

Finally there are two long chapterson the twentieth century when Russian culture was divided into two: the first on Soviet culture and the last on the emigration to the West. I didn't quite agree with Figes's argument - that in the end Soviet culture was peripheral and failed to change the underlying Russian cultural traditions (represented by Akhmatova). But I was moved by the tremendous emotional impact of these final chapters, which (more than anything I've ever read before) assert triumphantly the endurance of the Russian people and their culture over politics.

I am not surprised that Figes has his critics. He writes too well, too flamboyantly;he tackles bigger themes than most academics dare. But for the general reader Natasha's Dance is a rich delight. On every page there is something new and fascinating. There are sumptuous illustrations. And for those who want to read more "heavyweight" volumes there is a comprehensive guide to further reading at the end.

In sum- this is a wonderful, enriching book, for anybody with a psssing interest in Russia, its history and culture.

In light of other rave reviews I feel absolutely churlish submitting less than five stars for this book. However, I must review this book, in part, on whether it achieved its stated objective, which was to provide a comprehensive overview of all of Russian culture.

The answer is no. Let's not confuse "long" with "comprehensive."

In fairness to Figes, this book has a lot of strengths, particularly his discussion of the relationship between nineteenth century Russian operas and the texts from which their libretti were drawn, his emphasis on the Old Believer schism, and his treatment of Vassily Grossman, still relatively unknown in the West. However, it has some glaring omissions for a work which wants to be comprehensive.

First, Figes basically ignores all literature, architecture, and applied art prior to the period around the founding of St. Petersburg. This means that he fails to address, among other things, the _Tale of Igor_, the literary impact of Slavonic hagiography, icons and their influence on secular painting (other than a lick and a promise to Andrei Rublev's work), and any of Ivan IV a/k/a the Terrible's perorations. This omits a necessary context for the Westernizers (such as Peter I a/k/a "The Great") and the Slavophiles.

Second, I think his treatment of _Oblomov_ would not communicate the importance of this work in the public imagination to anyone who was not familiar with this work, and Figes doesn't even mention _The Precipice_, which Goncharov regarded as his true masterpiece. He also doesn't discuss the rift between Goncharov and Turgenev as a result of the similar themes in _The Precipice_ and _Fathers and Children_. This really was an unfortunate omission. This was big news in the nineteenth century.

Third, I thought that Figes did not devote sufficient attention to the nineteenth-century anarchists, particularly those of the upper-classes, and slighted Yurij Dombrosky, though I grant you that these might be quibbles.

Fourth, given his emphasis on Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and emigre and returnee literature, I was expecting to see more discussion of Solzhenitsyn, who rates only a cursory mention. Solzhenitsyn's work neatly demonstrates and extends virtually all the points that Figes is making, which is why his failure to discuss him at greater length is so odd.

Fifth, there were occasional odd minor lapses in scholarship. For example, at one point Figes notes that the word "robot" is "not coincidentally" similar to the Russian verb _rabotat'_, or "to work". However, a few minutes with the Oxford English dictionary told me that the first reported use of the word "robot" was by a Czech playwright, Karel Capek, in the play "R.U.R." released circa 1921, and that "rabota" means forced labor in Czech. In fact, In the days when Czechoslovakia was a feudal society, "robota" referred to the two or three days of the week that peasants were obliged to leave their own fields to work without remuneration on the lands of noblemen. However, that fact does not fit with Fige's theory. It makes me fret about what Figes did in the course of assembling his book with other facts (and artists, such as ones noted above) that do not fit his theory.

Finally, his offering of Natasha's dance at the end of _War and Peace_ as the central image of the authentic pure Russian soul revealing itself beneath the veneer of European culture really bothers me. It bothers me because an equally central image of Natasha Rostova and her reaction to Art is Natasha at the opera earlier in the book, suffering _ostranenie_, or a sense of estrangement, from the opera's artifice. Moreover, the final image of Natasha in _War and Peace_ that Tolstoy creates for us is to show her stout, jealous, with a faint mustache, which has always stuck me as cruel both to poor Natasha and to the patient reader. It begs the question to say, as Figes does, that Tolstoy's view is simply that Natasha is "estranged" from Western art, therefore it is bad, and that she responds "naturally" to Russian art, therefore it is good. As Figes admits elsewhere in this book, Tolstoy was far more complex in his personal beliefs than this, and his writing improved when he could abandon his didacticism. Natasha's dance and her reaction to the opera are both examples of a Tolstoyan rigidity into which Figes periodically slips.

Conclusion: read it together with _The Icon and the Axe._

Although Figes takes the title from Natasha's dance in "War and Peace," he could have just as easily used Chichikov from "Dead Souls" as his vehicle, as he takes the reader along on a wild ride through Russia's rich cultural history. Figes explores his chapters thematically, exploring a compelling set of Russian ideas that revolve around the East-West duality that is so apparent in the works of great Russian artists, writers and musicians. Figes seems to be more at home when exploring the themes found in the great classical compositions, providing wonderful character sketches of composers such as Stravinsky, Prokofiev and Tchaikovsky.

He also takes on virtually all of the major Russian novels of the past two centuries, starting with "Eugene Onegin," noting the inspirations and the thoughts that pervaded these works. He notes that it was Pushkin who gave Russia a literary voice, which it would never forsake, as each writer that succeeded him built on the language he had to a large part invented. Ultimately, we get Nabokov's thoughts on the subject as Figes covers the emigres in the concluding chapter. Nabokov imagined himself as a latter-day Pushkin, devoting a considerable amount of time to a translation and analysis of Pushkin's great literary work, before embarking on his own major works.

Figes captures the mood and energy of the time, the tumultuous reign of the Tsars, their Tatar origins, their identification with Byzantine, the Decembrist revolt and the Bolshevik Revolution. He casts a light on some of the major figures of the time, such as Volkhonsky who defied the Tsar and was sentenced to Siberia. Rather than submit to the elements, Volkhonsky rose to become a people's hero, greatly inspiring the works of Pushkin and Tolstoy.

He also takes in the artistic movement in Russia and how it was reflected through the writings of Tolstoy and others. How the social realism and symbolist painting of the 19th century transformed into a dynamic abstract art of the 20th century, richly inspired by folk images as seen in the work of Kandinsky and Chagall.

Figes also treats the influence of the church on writers such as Gogol and Dostoevsky, and how they struggled to find salvation not only for themselves but for the nation through their writings. Figes states that Gogol imagined "Dead Souls" as a divine comedy, but the only part he ever finished was the first part, which has haunted Russian authors and scholars ever since in assessing the genius of Gogol. Chichikov and his carriage ride through the Russian countryside remains one of the most enduring images in Russian literature.

Figes's expansive discussion of cultural influences and trends in Russian history opens with the reign of Peter the Great and runs through the first half of the twentieth century. He makes only brief forays into the era before 1700 (e.g., the lingering effects of the Mongol invasion), and he scans the years after Stalin sketchily in a final chapter on exiles from the Soviet Union (Nabokov, but not Brodsky--although he follows Stravinsky through the early 1960s).

Still, that's over 250 years in 600 pages, and his focus allows him to analyze what are surely the most formative years of the Russian empire. Although he occasionally examines the visual arts, architecture, politics, and scholarship, Figes primarily discusses music, performance art, and--above all--literature. Even then, there's a lot to absorb, yet remarkably the book is a refreshing survey that will not only motivate many readers (including yours truly) to run out and buy some of the novels and orchestral works he mentions but also provides a framework for appreciating all those newly purchased books and CDs.

It's not easy to summarize the themes that, according to Figes, pervade most of Russia's culture (and politics). At the risk of oversimplification, one could say that "Natasha's Dance" views the last three centuries as a clash of dualities. Peter the Great opened Russia to European exchanges, and, by the end of his reign, society in St. Petersburg was emulating Parisian trends to the point of caricature: "the aristocracy had become so bilingual that they slipped quite easily and impercitibly from Russian into French and back again. Letters of a page or so could switch a dozen times, sometimes in the middle of a sentence."

During the nineteenth century, however, many writers and artists longed to pull Russia back to its roots, and they found their "lost" heritage reflected in the eyes of the peasantry. (The war with Napoleon only hastened this retrenchment.) Thus, for example, one sees the unintentionally comical specter of Tolstoy trying to be like his serfs: "he idealized the peasants and loved to be with them, but for many years he could not bring himself to break from the conventions of society and become one himself." More seriously, by the beginning of the twentieth century, fine art was influenced less by European expectations and more by folk art and peasant dances (compare, for example, Tchaikovsky's "Swan Lake" with Stravinksy's "Firebird"). Nevertheless, the aristocracy continued to remain aloof from the "more Russian" customs of the peasantry--for many, the folk traditions never rose above a trendy curiosity--and this dissonance contributed to the tensions that led to the Russian Revolution.

In many ways, Russia's history has been a search for the answer to a number of parallel questions. Is Russia part of Europe or part of Asia? Is the nation's center in St. Petersburg or in Moscow? Is its essence to be found in the cities or in the countryside? These are questions that inform Russian culture (and politics) to this day, and Figes helps the lay enthusiast understand their lasting effects.

This is a really fascinating book. Figes explores the development of the Russian national identity and the extraordinary role of literature and all the other arts in Russian history.

It is not meant to be a "comprehensive history" of all the Russian arts but an interpretation of the Russian tradition. Figes makes this clear in the Introduction - so it is quite unfair to criticize his book for omissions.

Natasha's Dance is a wonderfully rich and entertaining read. Figes writes quite beautifully. As in A People's Tragedy (his brilliant history of the Russian Revolution), Figes develops his analysis through mini-narratives which bring his "cultural history" to life. The book starts for example with a rivetting account of the building of St Petersburg in the early eighteenth century, which leads him to the theme of the first chapter - the elusive and ambiguous ideal of European civilization. The chapters are thematically arranged but the chapters follow in a sort of sequence - from the 18th to the 20th centuries - which gives the book a grander narrative.

All the major themes of Russian culture are discussed: the tension between the ("high") European culture of the aristocracy and the native ("low") culture of the peasantry; the contrast between Moscow and St Petersburg; the religious searching for the "Russian soul" (developed beautifully through the biographies of Gogol, Dostoevsky and Tolstoy); and the influence of Asia (fascinating stuff!). There are also chapters on Soviet culture and the emigres.

At 700 pages this is a long book . But don't let that put you off. It reads like a novel. And there are some wonderful pictures. Overall a bargain - and a "must buy".

I thought this was one of the best books I have ever read on Russia. In 500 beautifully written pages, it manages to say an awful lot - not just about the Russian arts and literature, nor simply about Russia as a place, its history, its customs, its religious traditions - but about that thing we call "culture". Figes shows how the arts were intertwined with politics, religion, folklore and beliefs, to create a "national consciousness". His main argument - that Russian culture was defined by a dialogue between the high culture of the aristocracy and the folk culture of the peasantry - is brilliantly developed - and original.

No doubt there are minor points where academic critics may pronounce that there is more to say - or something to be said in a more complex way. This is not an academic book (thank God for that!) though Figes does provide a comprehensive guide to academic works on what seems like almost everything...

But for the general reader this book is unparalleled. It is more exciting, and a better read, than The Icon and the Axe by James Billington, which is a more traditional cultural history of Russia.

In sum - the highest recommendation.

My obsession with wanting a people's history of Russia started with a collection of letters left to me from correspondence between my grandparents in the USA and their families in the Minsk area of Russia. Everything of my heritage is gone except what I hold in my heart from the stories and emotions coming thru in the letters. Using NATASHA'S DANCE as a guide, I have been able to piece together the story of a land torn apart by war but held together by the culture and spirit of the people. Figes takes writers', artists', and musicians' great works and weaves them into a tapestry of daily life giving the reader a window into a fascinating land. This is a history book that rings with facts, creatively written in a style you don't have to be a scholar of history to appreciate. If you have ancestors from Russia or Poland who came through Ellis Island, this book will open your eyes to your roots. If you are a student of history or someone interested in Russia as it was, then this is a book you MUST read.

This book is bewitching. One of those rare reads where you just cannot put it down. Even when you hit " bits" that perhaps aren't your usual interest you are compelled to just carry on reading.

From the foundations of St Petersburg through the " loss" of their language and the compulsion to speak French, the scenes of the palaces, ball rooms, serf artists, the influences of Asia, Persia and then back to Russia itself this is a fabulous book.

Orlando Figes maintains our interest even those of us with a purely " lay interest", with enchanting vignettes, stories, almost unbelievable accounts of excess with wealth, food,jewels elicit liasons, and entices you into a World where you dsicover how the music, the plays, the poetry, cinema, ballet, people from all strata of life, all start to link together.

Whether Cinema or architecture is your interest or passion this is just amazing.

Wonderful. An engrossing and fantastic adventure.

Several of the earlier reviewers have covered the book very well, including both its strengths and weaknesses. I have to nothing to add or subtract, but some recommendations to make. There is a very good "interpretive" cultural history of Russia written in the 1960's by James Billington (who is the Librarian of Congress). The book is still in print and is one of five or six concerning Russian history and culture written by Billington. For reader-reviewers who felt that Russian history prior to the late 17th century was slighted by Figes, Billington's book is the place to go for information on the earlier period, especially on Russian Orthodoxy --its art,architecture, and influence on political and cultural life. The abundance and high quality of 20th century translations of Russian literature (both prose and poetry)almost obviates the need of a "cultural interpreter" for the period of the last 120 years or so. Edmund Wilson's "To the Finland Station" does this sort of job for the relationship between the radicalized ideas of the Enlightenment and Russian political life, but should be read with the cautionary note that he himself lost his enthusiasm for Leninism as a real solution to Russia's age-old social and economic problems. Reading a typical 1930's era hagiography of Stalin by any Western writer who leaned to the left is especially informative if you read any of the post-mortem biographies (Volkogonov's, R. Tucker's, etc.)that tell the truly awful story of the man, who chose to bestride culture as well as politics as a "colossus". Chekov, Bulgakov and the far less talented Solzhenitsyn(I mean this only from the point of literary skill, his importance lying in other directions) will also show you life as perceived by those who have lived it in its recent Russian incarnation. My "supplementary" list slights a few areas (the visual arts, music, film), but each of these areas has been treated in depth and with finesse by 20th century authors whose work is available in English. Like any book of this type, Figes' work should be a starting point from which the reader can branch out along many possible paths (and then come back and read it again, say five or ten years later, after exploring some of the territory in depth; then he or she will be able to better judge whether or not it does a good comprehensive job.)