Russian folklore thrives on the character of Holy Fool, a protagonist typologically resembling a Sufi dervish, in the Hodja Nasreddin vein.
If anything, this elucidates the Asian nature of Russia this side of a few Westernised writers. Still, though this Russian Sufism is too gnostic for my taste, there’s no harm to it.
But there’s a difference between a Holy Fool and a downright schizophrenic. Such as Pyotr Pavlensky, who faces a long prison sentence for setting on fire the door of Moscow’s KGB/FSB headquarters to express his protest against Putinism.
This act is being hailed by the few opposition websites remaining in Russia, and in our own Guardian, as sheer heroism. True enough, taken in isolation, the arson betokens recklessness rather than madness.
But it’s not in isolation: Pavlensky has form venting his civic conscience in much more radical acts. This is what I wrote about him two years ago:
On 10 November the Petersburg conceptual artist (whatever that means) Pyotr Pavlensky travelled to Moscow to score some valid political points about police curtailing the freedom of political self-expression.
He went to Red Square, stripped naked and affixed his scrotum to the pavement with a huge nail hammered into the cobbles.
The police removed the nail, wrapped the conceptual artist in a blanket and took him to hospital. He had chosen the site well – had he done the same thing in a less visible place, the cops would have probably yanked him to his feet without bothering to remove the nail.
It has to be said that young Pyotr has a bit of previous with that sort of thing.
In July 2012 he had his naked body wrapped in a cocoon of barbed wire and delivered to the main entrance of the Petersburg Legislative Assembly. There he stayed until the police released him with garden shears.
That particular performance was called ‘Carcass’. The aim was to symbolise… well, you can guess what.
A few months later he went even further, this time to protest against the imprisonment of the Pussy Rioters, the young girls who themselves had protested against something or other by singing obscene rap lyrics in a cathedral. Their prior political action took the form of public copulation in a museum.
In defence of their God-given right to register protest, Pavlensky turned up at Petersburg’s Kazan Cathedral, his mouth sewn up with a thread. He was carrying a banner saying, ‘Action of Pussy Riot was a replica of the famous action of Jesus Christ (Matthew 21:12–13)’.
Without entering into a full-blown theological debate, one should instead comment on the lamentable state of Russian psychiatry. For after his protest was all sewn up, Pyotr was found sane.
His nail stunt was called ‘Fixation’ – by affixing his private parts to the cobbles he was making a statement about the people’s fixation on something they shouldn’t be fixated on. A bit weak as far as visual puns go, but there we have it.
“A naked artist, looking at his testicles nailed to the cobblestone is a metaphor of apathy, political indifference and fatalism of Russian society,” declared Pavlensky in his statement to the media. I suppose this clarifies the matter.
Far be it from me to suggest that there’s nothing to protest against in Putin’s Russia. On the contrary, Russia is already bearing every hallmark of a fascist state, and things are getting worse.
But surely every normal person must realise that the escapades of an obvious madman trivialise all serious protest? The next time a meaningful anti-Putin action is undertaken it will be lumped together with self-mutilation, blasphemy and public indecency.
Yes, any normal person would realise this. That’s why it’s particularly worrying to read comments by the crème de la crème of the Russian intelligentsia. One may get the impression that normal Russians are in short supply. To wit:
Kirill Serebrennikov, film director: “…A powerful gesture of absolute despair… Affixing one’s sex organs to the cobbles of the country’s main square is a fixation on one’s own impotence… Everything is perfectly honest.”
Marat Gelman, political technologist (whatever that means): “I think it’s a sign of despair. I think, yes, a normal person won’t act in this way. But evidently the situation in the country isn’t normal…. It’s a MANIFESTO OF IMPOTENCE.” Also its possible cause, the cynic in me is tempted to add.
Irina Kosterina, culturologist (whatever that means): “The meaning and message are absolutely intelligible: this is political art-activism. Alas, those to whom this message is addressed aren’t sufficiently advanced to understand it.”
Evidently neither am I. However, if you still think there’s hope for Russia yet, such comments – among many – should disabuse you of this notion.
A country is hopeless when its intellectual elite sees disgusting self-mutilation as a valid form of political protest. As to the frankly pathetic attempts to intellectualise madness, Russia has a long, if not necessarily honourable, tradition along those lines.
A desperate disease requires a dangerous remedy and all that, and at least this time Pavlensky mutilated an inanimate object, not himself. However, given his history, any civilised country would put him in hospital, not in prison.
But then who said Russia is a civilised country?