Beyond the Line: The Meaning of Female Patriotism in the Recent Era

Speech at the Philosophical Sobor "The Great Russian Rectification of Names"

Session 9 “Feminine Patriotism”

Opening remarks

At our Philosophical Sobor meetings we have discussed the philosophy of the Russian idea, historiosophy, problems of modern Russian ideology and philosophy. Today we are discussing female patriotism. As a matter of fact, this topic fits into the general concept of the Philosophical Sobor and the Great Russian Rectification of Names. The concept of "woman" and woman as a person are widely debated these days. These controversies concern both the social role of women and the female philosophy. It is necessary to begin the work of rectifying the way women are perceived and of debunking some stereotypes about women in the Tradition and outside of it.

The first topic that I would like to touch upon is a woman in and outside of Tradition; her social roles and how and why they can change. What we see now is a kind of opposition that is often to be found in the feminist discourse in particular. It is believed that there is a traditional image of a woman — not a very good one — which portrays a woman being led, trapped and playing a secondary role in society. And there is another image that stands in opposition to the first one — a modern, fashionable and a bright one depicting a woman having the same rights as a man. This is an unconventional or even anti-traditional vision of women's social status; women must be rescued from patriarchal slavery and put on an equal footing with men. Then she will finally find her place. She will be able to fulfill certain primary roles. In my opinion, this is where the problem is.

Let's start with the general context of society. Let's think about what happens to a woman when she is fully equal to a man and finds herself next to him in a social setting. If a woman is already equal to a man, what will remain of her former social manifestations and how will she realize herself? What is left of a woman in the new status of being fully in alignment? When a woman is fully equal to a man in rights, the differences are leveled, which is necessary, among other things, to understand the uniqueness of a woman herself. And here I would like to address the problem of representing women in the Russian tradition. Let's take a look at the common images in Russian epics. What were the archetypes of the traditional epic tale? They can be divided into four categories, and they are completely independent of each other.

The first archetype is the classical warrior maiden polyanitsa (it stems from the word "polyakovat'", which means ‘to play in the field’). A polyanitsa is a woman who runs wild through the fields, mostly enjoying military amusements. It is curious that when a female warrior is out in the field having a good time, it is usually when she meets a male warrior (bogatyr'). Usually, the male warrior will approach her from behind and strike her on the top of her head. In the epics there are several funny cases (it seems that bogatyr' Dobrynya approached his future wife like this), when the male warrior approached polyanitsa, hit her on the top of her head and rode away and she didn't even notice. Thinking he didn't have enough strength, he splits the oak tree checking his strength and rides up to her again and hit her on the head. She's not paying attention again. He finds a bigger oak, cracks it – there is power in his strike!

And he rides up to her again. And only then she turns to him: "I thought mosquitoes were biting me, and this a Russian bogatyr' is snapping." They fight. The female warrior wins and puts the male warrior in her pocket. Then ahe thinks, "Here I have a bogatyr' in my pocket, I'll take a look at him. If I fancy him, I'll take him as my husband. If I don't, I'll take his head off his shoulders." Eventually, she fancies the warrior, and they get married.

This is one of the storylines where there is a living example of a Russian woman with the status of a warrior heroine. It is likely that when she meets a male warrior, there is a fight that mirrors the stages of the wedding ceremony; in any case, she becomes a part of the ritual action. For the polyanitsy found husbands by fighting with a man. At least, in the main plots, I have never come across a polyanitsa who has remained unmarried. It is not that a woman loses her power after she marries; her status simply changes, although she may, in fact, have continued to be a warrior maiden. Nevertheless, the traditional Russian epic did not deprive the warrior woman of another social representation, i.e., the classical image of mother and wife. By the way, the description of polyanitsy was very funny. At the sound of their whistling, the dark forests disintegrated, the stones rolled down, the grass withered, and the flowers withered. That is, in their heroic portrayal they were described in the same way as men. The only difference was what happened after the fights.

There is another female archetype — a sorceress and a fortune teller. Most of the time it has a very negative character, because here we are talking about earthly witches. In this case we are not talking about the fabulous Baba Yaga. She has a completely different sacred status, she is between worlds. A witch is an ordinary woman who is a practitioner of black magic.

Mother and Woman are the two remaining archetypes. They do not remain on the sidelines in the legends either, according to my observations. It is noteworthy that mothers do not appear in legends very often, and when they do, they usually send wonderful gifts. In a way, they also have magical abilities. They perform the sacred function of guardians. Mothers support children in acts of bravery or other endeavors where children fail. When things don't work out for the son, he turns to his mother for advice, which is another important, sometimes even plot-defining function.

There are a lot of famous women in the legends who belong to the Wife archetype. For example, the wife of Prince Vladimir, Apraxia, who saves the hero. When Prince Vladimir gets angry with Ilya-Muromets and wants to have him imprisoned, Apraxia feeds him in the belief that this hero of Mother Russia may still prove useful. The wife has a number of classic qualities: she is kind, faithful, long-suffering, etc. But at the same time, for example, at the time of the invasion of Russia, she acts as a balancing principle, saves the prince from panic, instructs him, helps with advice — in other words, a lot depends on her. She can even save the leading heroes.

Of course, these four archetypes do not exhaust all of the images of women that can be found in the epics. These are not all manifestations of women in the Russian folklore tradition, but in my opinion these examples are enough to show that the traditional idea of a woman is not so dull and boring in comparison with that of a man. When comparing tradition and modernity, it is necessary to deepen the level of analysis and not just take two images of a woman and contrast them indiscriminately.

Another aspect is the social roles and perception of women in society. For example, modern society faces war. The knowledge of what war, peace and Motherland are must be transmitted in a certain manner. A woman can be a Wife, she can be a Mother; if she refuses those roles, that's another question, but she has the opportunity to express herself in society in that way. The classical function of a woman is the transmission of sacred knowledge, which forms a certain intellectual basis of a person. And much now depends on how the problem of sacrifice, the necessity or possibility of sacrifice, is perceived, especially in wartime.

Can a man transmit this knowledge? Probably, he can. But there is a certain difference between the status and role of a woman who spends more time with her child and can transmit this knowledge constantly and gradually. A man is usually out and spends his time at his work place. And in this case, the responsibility falls on the shoulders of a woman.

When I studied how modern social philosophy views the concepts of sacrifice, Motherland, and patriotism, I came to the conclusion that patriotism and the concept of Motherland are negatively evaluated in the discourse of Western philosophy. This evaluation is negative in that it is irrational to sacrifice anything, including for the Motherland. Serious articles, whole collections of articles, monographs are now being published on this problem, saying that patriotism and the Motherland are part of the affect. That is, it is an affected passion that leads to rash decisions. And when we evaluate such things within the framework of moral philosophy and ethics, for example, then of course we have to analyze them from a rational point of view. If we can say that the Motherland is wrong somewhere, which is already a paradox, this leads us to the separation of the Motherland and the state, which is now actively promoted in liberal circles. This leads us to the fact that there is no such thing as a Motherland as an unchanging point of reference in the life of a human being. These two concepts – Motherland and mother – when the earth itself nourishes a person, are fading away, are being considered unfashionable and outdated. When Ilya-Muromets left Russia, he literally lost his strength physically, because he crossed the border and was not in his own land. And where his land is, there is all his might. If he leaves his Motherland, then he needs, for example, to carry a small bag with its earth. Now such views are being reconsidered and are in the process of reinterpretation. The idea that such things are invented difficulties is found in social and philosophical literature.

The second point, which is also being debunked, is the problem of sacrifice. And patriotism, of course, and first of all, female patriotism, is closely connected with the problem of sacrifice. Sacrifice is clearly viewed negatively in modern society. We live in the context of a culture of euthanasia, where sacrifice is unfashionable, unnecessary, and superfluous. It disturbs the comfortable life of a particular individual, while a person should try to live the way she feels good, and think about loving herself first, and settling down in life so that nothing disturbs her. We strive to maximize the comfort of life, which is incompatible with the patriotic agenda, when our own comfort fades into the background and uncomfortable sacrifice comes to the fore.

There are a number of problems here. In the first place, overcoming the psychological in a human being is an incredibly difficult task; and it would be very foolish to demand it from everyone. Nevertheless, it is in the context of female patriotism that sacrifice is necessary. If we try to analyze the differences between female and male patriotism, we can identify an aspect relevant to the current situation. When a woman lets her husband, son or friend go to war, she has to not just let him go, but even sacrifice him in advance. It's one thing to go to the front. There is a certain difference in the statuses of a person leaving and a person letting go. Of course, none of this excludes sacrifice; a person leaving by himself is ready to sacrifice himself.

But probably modern women are afraid of the need to let go of another person, stay and wait. Take Dobrynya Nikitich's wife, a Russian Penelope, who waited for her husband for 12 years from the battlefield. Of course, there were twists and turns, but I note that such a plot is not new. When we all as a society have to let go in the name of something transpersonal, something more important than comfort, more than just "we" and our lives, we unite against a fragmented world, where a person is reduced to a small cell, cares only for herself, and may even be alone. This is what happens to a woman when she is emancipated, does not marry, does not give birth to children, but asserts herself in society on an equal basis with a man and thus forms an independent cell of society. This is probably the best scenario for the modern agenda. It is much easier to manage such people, because when a person is a part of a family, they are connected to it not only by certain relations, but by threads, thanks to which the understanding of traditional knowledge, sacrifice, Motherland and patriotism becomes clearer. And the more disconnected we are in this sense, the easier it is to delude us with the idea that this is unnecessary.

Therefore, when we talk about the reactualization of modern patriotic discourse, language is a special problem, including the patriotic agenda and the role of symbols, which we really lack. Soviet military propaganda was much more effective when it came to this. I do not mean propaganda in a bad sense, but as a mechanism for consolidating society and presenting feminine images. That is not the case now, and that is a huge problem. Today it is necessary to introduce such propaganda again, not just to use old images that may not be so interesting now, but to come up with something that really works and conveys the meanings necessary in the modern situation.

Translated by Sophia Polyankina