Belov Sergey Igorevich

This study is devoted to problematic aspects in the implementation of the Russian politics of memory. The methodological basis of the work is a descriptive analysis of expert interviews. The eff ectiveness of the politics of memory is evaluated by the experts from a pragmatic point of view: its main tasks are seen as the creation of a positive Russian image in the domestic and foreign policy arenas; the formation and strengthening of nation-state identity; and the consolidation of Russian society. Attempts to use politics of memory as an instrument for settling international relations via concessions are assessed negatively by the experts. The building of a national politics of memory is assumed solely on the basis of the “memory of the winners.” An appeal to a discourse on “the memory of the vanquished” is seen as a destructive approach fraught with serious political risks. Among the latter are the erosion of Russian identity; the particularization of society; the growth of social anomie; and an increase in the infl uence of political and religious radicals. The article further emphasizes the principal “sore points” of Russian politics of memory: its opportunistic nature; the controversial, complex nature of the content side; a disregard for foreign experience; and the presence of outdated elements among the tools for infl uencing the target audience. Another problem is the presence in Russian mass culture of such patterns as the theme of the hero’s victory “in spite of the system” and the physical and moral anti-esthetics in demonstrations of “our own” [svoi] being passed off as realism.

The purpose of this article is to clarify the term “historical myth” and to defi ne its relation to the notion of “political myth.” The goals of the research are to determine the content of the concept “historical myth,” to understand the essence of the concept “political myth” and to compare the meanings of the two terms. The author uses traditional and typological analysis, and also applies the method of expert interview. The article argues the position that the historical myth is a particular form of the myth of the political. Accordingly, the historical myth initially represents an artifi cially constructed form of perception of the world, based on an appeal to the sphere of emotions and aimed at manipulating the public consciousness. At the same time, it has the property of acquiring autonomy over time, infl uencing its own creators. The specifi c factor diff erentiating the historical myth is that it is constructed with the help of historical facts and changes the perception of reality by changing the model of perception of events of the past.