Defensive Social Practices in the History of Russia: the Early Formation of “Cancel Culture” or a Rare Event of the Past?

IF 0.1 Q3 HISTORY
N. Mogilevskiy, A. V. Skizhenok, T. V. Chernikova
{"title":"Defensive Social Practices in the History of Russia: the Early Formation of “Cancel Culture” or a Rare Event of the Past?","authors":"N. Mogilevskiy, A. V. Skizhenok, T. V. Chernikova","doi":"10.22363/2312-8674-2023-22-3-470-483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While the concept of “cancel culture” is already a given in contemporary culture; through this article, the authors propose to illustrate a comparable concept/term “defensive practice” in a broader historical retrospective. The authors emphasize that in general there were relative few examples of such “defensive practices” in Russian history, but analyzes the two earliest of them. The first is at the end of the XVII century, when a conflict broke out between the religious and political groups of “Latinisers” and “Graecophils.” Patriarch Joachim played an active role in resolving the conflict by unequivocally taking the side of the “Graecophils.” As a result, the writings of “latinising heretics” were banned, and they were either executed or condemned by the local council of the Russian Church. In the XVIII century manifestations of comparable defensive practice became even rarer, but already at the very end of the century, under Emperor Paul I, the highest authorities again re-used this technique. Fearing the spread of revolutionary “contagion,” Paul I set the goal of banning the spread of “French fashions” in Russia, individual French words, as well as writings by French authors (or those who sympathized with the events of the French Revolution). However, all these measures had no effect and were eventually ended under Alexander I. As a result, the authors come to the conclusion that at the initial stage of the Modern era and even in the XVIII century, practices comparable to modern cancel culture were not widespread in Russian life, and were an exception rather than socio-political practice.","PeriodicalId":41139,"journal":{"name":"Rudn Journal of Russian History","volume":"49 45","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rudn Journal of Russian History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-8674-2023-22-3-470-483","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While the concept of “cancel culture” is already a given in contemporary culture; through this article, the authors propose to illustrate a comparable concept/term “defensive practice” in a broader historical retrospective. The authors emphasize that in general there were relative few examples of such “defensive practices” in Russian history, but analyzes the two earliest of them. The first is at the end of the XVII century, when a conflict broke out between the religious and political groups of “Latinisers” and “Graecophils.” Patriarch Joachim played an active role in resolving the conflict by unequivocally taking the side of the “Graecophils.” As a result, the writings of “latinising heretics” were banned, and they were either executed or condemned by the local council of the Russian Church. In the XVIII century manifestations of comparable defensive practice became even rarer, but already at the very end of the century, under Emperor Paul I, the highest authorities again re-used this technique. Fearing the spread of revolutionary “contagion,” Paul I set the goal of banning the spread of “French fashions” in Russia, individual French words, as well as writings by French authors (or those who sympathized with the events of the French Revolution). However, all these measures had no effect and were eventually ended under Alexander I. As a result, the authors come to the conclusion that at the initial stage of the Modern era and even in the XVIII century, practices comparable to modern cancel culture were not widespread in Russian life, and were an exception rather than socio-political practice.
俄罗斯历史上的防御性社会实践:"取消文化 "的早期形成还是过去的罕见事件?
虽然 "取消文化 "的概念在当代文化中已经是一个既定的概念,但通过这篇文章,作者建议在更广阔的历史回顾中说明一个类似的概念/术语 "防御性实践"。作者强调,总体而言,俄罗斯历史上此类 "防御性实践 "的例子相对较少,但对其中最早的两个例子进行了分析。第一个例子发生在十七世纪末,当时 "拉丁派 "和 "希腊派 "的宗教和政治团体之间爆发了冲突。约阿希姆牧首在解决冲突中发挥了积极作用,明确站在了 "格拉古派 "一边。结果,"拉丁化异端 "的著作被禁,他们要么被处死,要么被俄罗斯教会地方议会判处死刑。在十八世纪,类似的防御性做法变得更加罕见,但在本世纪末,在保罗一世皇帝的统治下,最高当局再次使用了这一手段。由于担心革命 "传染病 "的传播,保罗一世制定了禁止在俄罗斯传播 "法国时尚"、个别法语词汇以及法国作家(或同情法国大革命事件的人)的著作的目标。因此,作者得出的结论是,在近代初期,甚至在 XVIII 世纪,与现代取消文化相媲美的做法在俄罗斯生活中并不普遍,只是一种例外而非社会政治实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信