Comics and nation: power, pop culture, and political transformation in Poland

Abstract

minds of the current Russian leadership. In contrast, the book insists that the Belarusian people and the Russian people have followed different historical paths and have different experiences and self-identifications. It further argues that there are great differences in their cultures and languages, geographic environments, and opportunities for political influence. While the book makes several valuable points, its central argument is somewhat weak and not very convincing. That Belarus and Russia are two different countries is an indisputable fact. However, mentally organizing these countries as two different civilizations that clash (83) makes us oblivious to a number of complexities. First of all, epistemologically, the Huntingtonian “clash of civilizations” is rooted in political realism, which claims the inevitability of inter-civilizational clashes. It does not look into intra-civilizational diversity, and it presents each civilization as static, monolithic, and immutable. Such views ultimately ignore cultural, historical, and linguistic interpenetration among different civilizations. Moreover, Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” has been politically utilized and popularized by the Russian leadership in order to legitimize its claims. It is not clear from the monograph how helpful and necessary this framing really is. Secondly, the “clash of civilizations” is embedded in the epistemology of deterministic othering. For example, the author refers to Russia’s immutable “nature” (178), its inherent aggressiveness (169), and claims that “European culture is genetically closer to Belarusians” (194). Such labels and generalizations are somewhat inadequate, as they do not allow us critically to reflect and discuss the current reality. There are examples of European countries imposing high moral standards in efforts to come to terms with their own pasts. However, the argument that Russia, “formed thanks to the Golden Horde” (62), is inherently aggressive appears orientalizing and ultimately simplistic. Notwithstanding these critical reflections, the book provides a good basis for a profound discussion about the orientation of Belarus and its possible future. It is clear that in order to resist Russia’s influence, Belarus needs to reclaim its Europeanness. Challenging widespread myths and simplifications about Belarus, the book offers us needed perspectives on the country, which is now facing one of the darkest periods of its history and a very unclear future.