Comments on "The Man Without a Face - The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin" by Masha Gessen
Although Masha Gessen has written a very interesting and informative book, isn't it true that vast multi-cultural Russia has always been a police state in one form or another? And, perhaps more accurately, a secret police state with additional occupied territories?
The whole world has, at best, something like poorly concealed gang warfare, although mostly in various states of truce or ceasefire.
The Russian leaders Vladimir Putin and Dimitri Medvedev are hardly "natural born tyrants". Probably to most people they seem to be about as innocuous world leaders, but still responsible, as can be found anywhere.
Wouldn't any of those people demonstrating so much against the present Russian government, assuming that they were capable, eventually become "tyrants" if they were somehow given the power?
Monday, June 25, 2012
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Experimental Blog #120
Comments on "Romanov Riches" - Russian Writers and Artists under the Tsars by Solomon Volkov translated from the Russian by Antonina W. Bouis
Monarchy and monarchial society are not very familiar to Americans.
"...the ideological triad "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality," developed under his{Nicholas I's} aegis, ... it has survived in its basic form to this day. It was used, with modifications to suit changing political realities, ... even by Joseph Stalin, Leonid Brezhnev, and Vladimir Putin."
Although Alexander Pushkin seems to be the Russian writer most referred to in this book, the lives of the other writers Nikolai Gogol, Fedor Dostoevsky, and Leo Tolstoy are usually more interesting to American outsiders. Solomon Volkov's very knowledgable account of the composer Peter Ilych Tchaikovsky and his interpretation of Alexander Pushkin in his opera "Eugene Onegin" are also very informative.
Solomon Volkov characterizes Leo Tolstoy as a "Christian anarchist", who, of course, had much influence and many followers.
The book ends with the downfall of the tragically incompetent Nicholas II and his wife Alexandra in the February Revolution of 1917.
Monarchy and monarchial society are not very familiar to Americans.
"...the ideological triad "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality," developed under his{Nicholas I's} aegis, ... it has survived in its basic form to this day. It was used, with modifications to suit changing political realities, ... even by Joseph Stalin, Leonid Brezhnev, and Vladimir Putin."
Although Alexander Pushkin seems to be the Russian writer most referred to in this book, the lives of the other writers Nikolai Gogol, Fedor Dostoevsky, and Leo Tolstoy are usually more interesting to American outsiders. Solomon Volkov's very knowledgable account of the composer Peter Ilych Tchaikovsky and his interpretation of Alexander Pushkin in his opera "Eugene Onegin" are also very informative.
Solomon Volkov characterizes Leo Tolstoy as a "Christian anarchist", who, of course, had much influence and many followers.
The book ends with the downfall of the tragically incompetent Nicholas II and his wife Alexandra in the February Revolution of 1917.
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Experimental Blog #119
Quotations from "The Magical Chorus - A History of Russian Culture from Tolstoy to Solzhenitsyn" by Solomon Volkov and translated from the Russian by Antonina W. Bouis
Here are only a few of the hundred or more of references to Joseph Stalin in this book:
"Even though Stalin's formal education ended when he was expelled from the Tiflis Seminary < >, he read a lot{some recall his reading 400 pages a day, both fiction and nonfiction} and he had a lively interest in cultural issues."
"In his youth, he had written poetry, and he was a lifelong avid reader of varied nonfiction < > and fiction, including foreign and naturally Russian classics..."
"He was a great lover of film and classical music. < > He was frequently seen at the theater."
"The road to this intellectual parity was not an easy one for Stalin, but he was a good student, mastering the lessons and advice of people with a wider worldview< >, such as Lenin, and other old party leaders with emigre' experience."
"Certainly Stalin was ruthless toward his own people and other nations. < >"but his attitude toward the cultural elite was outwardly friendlier than that of Lenin < > {he} felt more respect for people of culture. < >Stalin ... almost never shouted at cultural figures, and when he was angry, he actually lowered his voice. Simonov, who heard many stories of how cruel and coarse Stalin could be ... stressed that the ruler 'was never once boorish' to writers."
"Stalin might have read "Doctor Zhivago", as he did dozens of other novels by Soviet writers .. As stated Simonov, who attended many discussions of literary works nominated for the Stalin Prize at which Stalin was present, 'everything that was in the least bit controversial and caused disagreement, he had read ..."
"Gorbachev was better educated than Khrushchev or Brezhnev, but less well read that Stalin or Andropov."
Here are only a few of the hundred or more of references to Joseph Stalin in this book:
"Even though Stalin's formal education ended when he was expelled from the Tiflis Seminary < >, he read a lot{some recall his reading 400 pages a day, both fiction and nonfiction} and he had a lively interest in cultural issues."
"In his youth, he had written poetry, and he was a lifelong avid reader of varied nonfiction < > and fiction, including foreign and naturally Russian classics..."
"He was a great lover of film and classical music. < > He was frequently seen at the theater."
"The road to this intellectual parity was not an easy one for Stalin, but he was a good student, mastering the lessons and advice of people with a wider worldview< >, such as Lenin, and other old party leaders with emigre' experience."
"Certainly Stalin was ruthless toward his own people and other nations. < >"but his attitude toward the cultural elite was outwardly friendlier than that of Lenin < > {he} felt more respect for people of culture. < >Stalin ... almost never shouted at cultural figures, and when he was angry, he actually lowered his voice. Simonov, who heard many stories of how cruel and coarse Stalin could be ... stressed that the ruler 'was never once boorish' to writers."
"Stalin might have read "Doctor Zhivago", as he did dozens of other novels by Soviet writers .. As stated Simonov, who attended many discussions of literary works nominated for the Stalin Prize at which Stalin was present, 'everything that was in the least bit controversial and caused disagreement, he had read ..."
"Gorbachev was better educated than Khrushchev or Brezhnev, but less well read that Stalin or Andropov."
Saturday, June 2, 2012
Experimental Blog #118
Quotations and Comments on "DNA USA - A Genetic Protrait of America" by Bryan Sykes
It seems that except for a fairly limited number of diseases, "the Human Genome Project has achieved very little as far as alleviating or even untangling the suffering caused by disease."
"...for most diseases with an inherited component, ... the links to specific genes are a great deal more tenuous." "The reality is that the genes involved are many in number and individually weak in their effect."
As far as the English are concerned, "the predominant myth today {is} that the English are descended from Germanic Saxons" ... However, "Genetics shows that this is not the case, and that the genetic bedrock of the whole of Britain ... is fundamentally Celtic overlaid with a thin topsoil of Saxons and Vikings, nowhere more than 20 percent."
And speaking of "origin myths" in general, is it not true that it is through our DNA that we are all human, and we are all related to each other, and to all of the rest of life on Earth as well?
And also generally speaking, is it not true that China and India, for example, are "succeeding" by beating the "winners", that is Western Europe and America, at "our own game" by becoming experts in the necessary sciences?
"DNA USA" is also a very entertaining travel book.
It seems that except for a fairly limited number of diseases, "the Human Genome Project has achieved very little as far as alleviating or even untangling the suffering caused by disease."
"...for most diseases with an inherited component, ... the links to specific genes are a great deal more tenuous." "The reality is that the genes involved are many in number and individually weak in their effect."
As far as the English are concerned, "the predominant myth today {is} that the English are descended from Germanic Saxons" ... However, "Genetics shows that this is not the case, and that the genetic bedrock of the whole of Britain ... is fundamentally Celtic overlaid with a thin topsoil of Saxons and Vikings, nowhere more than 20 percent."
And speaking of "origin myths" in general, is it not true that it is through our DNA that we are all human, and we are all related to each other, and to all of the rest of life on Earth as well?
And also generally speaking, is it not true that China and India, for example, are "succeeding" by beating the "winners", that is Western Europe and America, at "our own game" by becoming experts in the necessary sciences?
"DNA USA" is also a very entertaining travel book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)