Several days ago a small notice appeared in the entryway of our apartment building: the Communist Party of Russia announced a recruitment drive in honor of the 140th anniversary of Lenin’s birth. With all due respect to this political party, it is difficult to take this seriously. And the tying of Lenin’s name to this is nothing more than an advertising gimmick, a PR tactic. Lenin’s image has become a part of pop culture, an attractive brand. Considered to be among most influential politicians and thinkers of the 20th century, he is one of the most well-known figures in Russia and even world history. However, that is not what is most important now – Lenin is simply а fashion, and this fashion is going out of style.
According to a recent survey by WCIOM carried out on the eve of the anniversary (April 22), Lenin remains lodged in the consciousness of Russian citizens. However, over the past 9-10 years some changes have occurred. Today 39% of respondents said they are indifferent to Lenin, up from 21% in 2001, while those who respect the former Soviet leader fell from 40% to 34%. Only 15% of youth respect Lenin. At the same time, the number of those who believe that Lenin’s ideas were distrorted by his predecessors has fallen from 35% to 24%. Also declining in number are those who believe that Lenin was sincere in his intentions (falling from 24% to 19%). Very few have strong feels with regard to leader of the proletariat – be it dislike (6%), admiration (3%) or fear (1%).
All of this indicates a growing indifference toward the founding father of the Soviet Union. It’s no coincidence that in the much discussed Name of Russia project he only came in sixth. Although he did end up ahead of Dostoyevsky, Suvorov and other big names, he lost to, for example, Stolypin.
It appears that, in contrast to Stalin (whose upcoming 60th anniversary of his death will likely led to another wave of heated discussions), Lenin is becoming an ever less problematic figure in our history. And this is somewhat surprising, considering the fact that “Soviet” and “revolutionary” themes remain prominent in modern art, advertising and even politics (such as the marginal National Bolsheviks).
This seems to be the essence: for the vast majority Lenin has lost much of his charisma. He has become (or is becoming) a symbol without meaning, a guy with a cunning squint that can be reproduced from time to time as a popular image – something like Che Guevara, whose famous image is imprinted on numerous tee-shirts, the wearers of which are not likely to give any serious thought to the actual prototype.
Only 20 years ago, things were much different. During Perestroika, Lenin remained an iconic figure for many Soviet citizens, who spoke returning to a purified version of socialism, Lenin’s version, as a solution to the crisis of the Soviet Union. In this regard, Sakharov and Gorbachev were in agreement, as were many representatives of the Soviet intelligentsia.
And then came the years of historic revelations. And interest in Lenin continued – whether in his reported ties to the Germans or in the juicy details of his personal life. But this was simply interest in pop culture figure and, as is always the case, this interest has drifted on to other individuals.
With the exception of the phantoms of the Soviet ers, like the Russian State Library, which is by tradition is still referred to as Lenin’s library, and the numerous streets named in his honor in cities throughout Russia, the only time his name comes up in public discussion is related to one question: whether he should be buried or remain in the mausoleum. This is really the only issue of interest with regard to Lenin among the majority of Russians. And this issue garners of interest along the lines of Alla Pugachev’s latest favorite or Joseph Kobzon’s reported ties to the Russian mafia. This level of attention from the public is a great irony of history in regard to this great and cruel person – a leader and fanatic, who seriously believed that it is possible to create a harmonious society while executing everyone who gets in the way.
It’s difficult to say why this has happened. Perhaps it is a reaction to the clumsy, overbearing cult that overwhelmed Soviet reality – from the curly haired Lenin on children’s buttons to the bust of Lenin on Soviet banknotes, from the pledge of allegiance to his teachings to the Lenin Prize itself. Perhaps it is something else, like the ordinary functioning of the laws of mass culture, and Lenin himself has nothing to do with this. It’s also difficult to say whether this is a good or bad thing. Perhaps a little of both. It simply happened to turn out this way – no one made any effort. We can hope that the situation changes and that the relative disappearance of Lenin in the collective consciousness is simply a natural fluctuation that will rebound give some time. In any case, he is too large a historic figure and his fate is too interesting to have him be a subject of interest only to professional historians.
