Making post-Soviet counterpublics: the aesthetics of Limonka and the National-Bolshevik Party

Abstract

This article focuses on the shaping of the aesthetics and ideology of Eduard Limonov’s National-Bolshevik Party (NBP) through the pages of the radical newspaper Limonka. In order to study the making of the NBP as a political and intellectual community, the piece discusses Limonka’s editorial line, its graphic style, and the alternative cultural canon that this radical publication promoted, as well as several interviews with National-Bolshevik activists involved in this process. During its first years of existence, Limonka proposed a selection of controversial artistic, literary, and political role models, and the creation of an alternative fashion and lifestyle. The article argues that by provocatively combining totalitarian symbols, the aesthetics and posture of the historical avant-gardes, and Western counterculture, Limonka produced a collective narrative that contributed to the shaping of a new language of political protest in post-Soviet Russia. This resulted in a complex combination of stiob, a form of parody that involves an over-identification with its own object, and a neo-romantic impulse. This new discursive mode, which the article defines as “post-Soviet militant stiob,” should be seen as part of a series of tactics of radical resistance to what the National-Bolsheviks saw as the dominant neoliberal discourse of the mid-1990s.

Keywords:

• Post-Soviet
• Limonov
• National-Bolshevism
• performativity
• protest
• Russian nationalism

Notes

1. Unless otherwise indicated, all translations are my own.

2. On publics and counterpublics, and the evolution of the debate on the public sphere toward the concept of “multiplicity,” see also Cody (2011). See also Spivak (1988), Felski (1989), Calhoun (1992), Taylor (1995), Benhabib (1996), Asen (2000), and Warner (2002).

3. For a general introduction to post-Soviet history and politics during the Yeltsin era, see Medvedev (2000) and McFaul (2001).

4. Limonka is a slang name for a hand grenade, and a play on words on Limonov's own pseudonym, also derived from the word limon, that is, “lemon.”

5. See Shenfield (2001), Umland (2002), and Mathyl (2002, 2007a, 2007b). In their definition of the NBP as a “fascist” movement, Umland and Mathyl employs Griffin's concepts of “uncivil society,” “groupuscular new right,” and of “a fascist minimum,” applicable to any “political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of ultra-nationalism” (Griffin 1991, 26, 2003). For a debate about the effectiveness and the heuristic value of this approach, see Gregor and Umland (2004–2005) and Gregor (2006).

6. As an example of the development of such themes and motifs, see Limonov's semi-autobiographical novels Eto ia – Edichka (It's Me, Eddie 1979, transl. 1983a), Dnevnik neudachnika (“Diary of a Looser,” 1982), U nas byla velikaia epokha (“The Great Epoch,” 1994), Podrostok Savenko (Memoir of a Russian Punk 1983b, transl. 1990), and Molodoi negodiai (“The Young Scoundrel,” 1986).

7. Here, I am borrowing the expression that the writer Zakhar Prilepin, also a member of the NBP, used to describe the aesthetics of the movement when I interviewed him in the summer of 2013. See Zakhar Prilepin, Personal Interview, 8 August 2013.

8. On Limonov's fiction, see, among others, Kron (1979), Matich (1986), Ryan-Hayes (1988, 1993, 1995), Simmons (1993), Golynko-Volfson (2002), Rogachevskii (2003), Chantsev (2009), and Wakamiya (2009).

9. Yurchak's argument is based on Austin's (1962) theory of performativity.

10. See Yurchak (2006), 126–157. Yurchak defines “living vnye,” or, “living beyond,” as a widespread condition in late Soviet society, described as being at the same time “outside” and “inside” the system, formally and performatively participating in its rituals, while providing them with new, personal, and unexpected meanings. At the same time, Yurchak takes as an example of “living vnye” the life of various late Soviet underground communities, including the Necrorealists, the Leningrad underground poetic circle of the Mit’ki, and the Moscow conceptualists. While Yurchak claims that the performative character of late Soviet public life in fact caused the Soviet system to collapse, an interesting question that such discussion raises is whether in the context of these communities “being vnye” might be also in part seen as an active form of cultural and political resistance.

11. Interview quoted in Yurchak (2011, 328).

12. In an article that I discovered when this piece was already in production, Mischa Gabowitsch (2009) describes various forms of “fascist stiob” in Russia, including the NBP, as a way of compensating for the impossibility “ …to express political dissent or social critique in straightforward, politically constructive ways, through party competition and public debate” (8). Gabowitsch also draws on Yurchak's discussion of late Soviet performativity. More recently, stiob has been seen as a central component of Russian political culture in general, and of Russian nationalism and conservatism in particular (See Hemment 2015, Noordenbos 2016, 111–143). Here, I look at the origins and cultural underpinnings of this specifically post-Soviet mode of collective participation.

13. On the making of Limonov's public persona, see, in particular, Golynko-Volfson (2002), Rogachevskii (2003), Chantsev (2009), and Wakamiya (2009). Limonov's very eventful life has recently become the subject of Emmanuel Carrère's bestseller fictional biography Limonov, published in France in 2011 (transl. 2014), and now translated into over 20 languages. Interestingly, Carrère’s book is mostly based on Limonov's own semi-autobiographical novels (see Prilepin 2012).

14. See Kron (1979), Matich and Heim (1984), Carden (1984), Matich (1986), Ryan-Hayes (1988, 1993, 1995), and Simmons (1993). Carden significantly defined Eto ia – Edichka “ … the quintessential novel of the Russian third wave emigration” (1984, 221).

15. See Limonov Inostranets v smutnoe vremia (1992) 2007, Ischeznovenie varvarov 1992, Ubiistvo chasovogo: Stat’i 1993, Anatomiia geroia 1997, and Limonov's articles for L’idiot international, available online: http://www.limonow.de/download/download.html (last accessed April 19, 2016).

16. After Limonov's “nationalist turn,” the attitude of Western scholars and intellectuals toward his work changed drastically. As an example of this, see Gessen (2003).

17. Eto ia – Edichka was published in Russia for the first time in 1990 by the publishing house Glagol, with a total print run of 390,000. See Limonov's full bibliography on his “unofficial website” limonow.de (last accessed 19 April 2016) and the website of the publishing house Glagol old.russ.ru/info/GLAGOL/ (last accessed 19 April 2016). On Limonov’s first years in Russia, as well as on his travels to war zones in the early 1990s, see Dodolev (2012), as well as Limonov’s own memoirs (and collected articles): Inostranets v smutnoe vremia (1992) 2007; Ubiistvo chasovogo: Stat’i 1993; Ischeznovenie varvarov 1992; Anatomiia geroia 1997; SMRT 2008.

18. See Mogutin (1992, 1994, 2001).

19. Wakamiya argues that after returning to Russia and becoming involved with radical nationalist politics, Limonov distanced himself from his previous “exilic identities,” embracing “particularly defined canons …  … [and] narrowly defined national traditions.” In post-Soviet Russia, according to Wakamiya, Limonov “ … asserts his ‘inherited’ and ‘authentic’ qualities, among them an exaggeratedly heteronormative sexuality, which he defines in narrative forms that exploit hierarchical and patriarchal structures” (Wakamiya 2009, 109–112). In fact, Limonov's close association with Mogutin, and the fact that his novels were first published by Shatalov's publishing house, demonstrates that the shaping of his post-Soviet public persona was more nuanced than that (see Essig 1999, 146–149, 95, and in general on the link between queer identities and nationalism in post-Soviet Russia, 123–161). Certain elements of Limonov's writing before and after his return to Russia can indeed be interpreted as masculinist and misogynist, and the aesthetics of the NBP was indeed based on a peculiar cult of war and masculinity. However, after his return to Russia, Limonov has often harshly criticized “traditional family values,” and the position of the NBP in the sphere of gender and social politics has been far from being straightforward (see Limonov, Drugaia Rossiia, 2003, 7–21, 167–173; and my own discussion of these issues in the present article). Finally, both Limonov and the NBP have been very critical of Russian cultural institutions and literary tradition, and have promoted a fairly eclectic and cosmopolitan cultural and literary canon (see Limonov, Drugaia Rossiia, 2003, 22–43, 91–104; and my own discussion of these issues in the present article).

20. For a general introduction to the history of the NBP and its key figures, see Shenfield (2001), Savel’ev (2006), Rogachevskii (2007), and Verkhovskii and Kozhevnikova (2009), 287–299.

21. See Gessen (2005), Kozhevnikova, Verkhovskii, and Veklerov (2008, 124–128), Verkhovskii and Kozhevnikova (2009, 287–299), and Bennetts (2014, 30–43). The NBP has in fact collaborated with leftist and anarchist organizations and counted several leftists among its members since its foundation (Tarasov, Cherkasov, and Shavshukova 1997, 56–59).

22. Drugaia Rossiia (“The Other Russia”) became the name of Limonov's party in 2010, 3 years after the NBP was legally banned (see “Reshenie Mosgorsuda o zapreshenii NBP ot 19.04.2007” 2007; Verkhovskii 2007). In the 2000s, the natsboly became famous for their aktsii priamogo deistviia, that is, peaceful direct-action stunts against prominent political figures, sit-ins, and occupations of government buildings (see Gromov 2012). Because of their vocal opposition against Putin's government, during the 2000s, the natsboly were frequently imprisoned and physically assaulted by street thugs and soccer hooligans, allegedly hired by pro-Putin youth organizations (see Kozhevnikova, Verkhovskii, and Veklerov 2008, 124–128; “Napadenie na natsbolov v Moskve,” SOVA Center for Information and Analysis, 30 August 2005. Web. 20 April 2016; “Pravozashita/Programmy: Podderzhka politzakliuchennykh/Dela natsbolov,” Mezhdunarodnoe obshchestvo Memorial, 24 June 2011. Web. 20 April 2016; and, the archive of the official website of the NBP, now forbidden: web.archive.org/web/20090122065905/http://nbp-info.com/; on the NBP's “political style” and specific approach to violence, see Sokolov, 2006). The repressions against the NBP were justified by the government as part of an anti-fascist and anti-extremist policy, and pro-government media used the NBP's own nationalist rhetoric to prove Limonov's and the NBP's alleged “fascism” (Iakemenko 2006; Sud and Prizrakom. 29 November 2002. Television). At the same time, paradoxically, in 2006, a group of radical right-wing members of the NBP who disagreed with Limonov's new liberal/leftist line left the party to found, with the support of Dugin's Eurasian Youth Union and, indirectly, of the Putin administration, the more straightforwardly ultra-nationalist, anti-Western, and pro-government National-Bolshevik Front (see Verkhovskii and Kozhevnikova 2009, 196–206).

23. Later collected in: Limonov Propovedy. Protiv vlasti i prodazhnoi oppozitsii (2013).

24. See “Moskva: ‘Strategiia 31,’ Triumfal’naia Ploshchad’ 31.05.14.” Drugaia Rossiia. Drugaia Rossiia, 2 June 2014. Accessed 20 April 2016. http://drugros.ru/galeries/4086.0.html.

25. See the television program Eduard Limonov. Vstrecha v kontsertnoi studii Ostankino (1992). Pervyi Kanal Ostankino. Moscow, Russian Federation, February 1992.

26. See Konstantin Chuvashev, Personal Interview, 16 May 2015. Chuvashev was responsible of the design of Limonka up to issue 33, February 1996. On the foundation of Limonka, see also Limonov, Moia politicheskaia biografiia (2002, 23–47).

27. Limonov himself used this expression to describe the aesthetics of Limonka when I interviewed him. See Eduard Limonov, Personal Interview, 15 August 2013.

28. See Limonov, E. “Limonka protiv stukachei-intelligentov.” Limonka 2: Dec. 1994.

29. See, among others: Polkovnik Ivan Chernyi. “Pokhishchenie i kazn’ Al’do Moro” (on the Italian terrorist group “Red Brigades”). Limonka 12: Apr. 1995; “Pivnoi putsch. Munich, 1923.” Limonka 13: May 1995; “Rozhdenie partii” (on the beginnings of the National-Socialist Party in Germany). Limonka 14: May 1995; “Bog voiny-Makhagala” (on Baron Ungern-Shternberg). Limonka 15: Jun. 1995; “Skachka na tigre” (on Italian right-wing terrorism in the 1970s and 1980s). Limonka 17: Jul. 1995; “Noch’ dlinnykh nozhei.” Limonka 22: Oct. 1995; “Val’kiriia revoliutsii.” Limonka 25: Nov. 1995 (on Bolshevik leader Larisa Reisner); “Stalin. Molodye gody.” Limonka 28: Dec. 1995; “Nash Lenin.” Limonka 30: Jan. 1996; “Pervye fashisty” (on the beginnings of the Italian Fascist Party). Limonka 37: Apr. 1996. The pseudonym “Polkovnik Ivan Chernyi” was used both by Limonov, and by Andrey Karagodin, also one of Dugin’s “disciples,” and one of Limonka’s first contributors.

30. See Sil’nyi, D. (pseudonym of Daniil Dubshin). “Bol’shoi belyi chelovek.” Limonka 3: Dec. 1994 (on Arnold Schwarzenegger); Melent’eva, N. “Chernyi messiia Menson: ‘ia boikotiruiu vash mir.’” Limonka 7: Jan. 1995; Klimova, M. (compiler and translator). “Nash Lui-Ferdinand Selin” Limonka 9: Mar. 1995; Dugin, A. “Gi Debor Mertv. Spektakl’ prodolzhaetsia.” Limonka 14: May 1995; Kondratovich, T. (translator) “Zhan Zhene. Otryvki iz poslednego interv’iu.” Limonka 15: Jun. 1995; Pavel Vlasov Partizan (pseudonym of Aleksey Tsvetkov). “Doktor Gerbert Markuze.” Limonka 25: Nov. 1995; Limonov, E. “Poslednii den’ komandante Che.” Limonka 36: Apr. 1996; Burroughs, W. “Dikie mal’chiki.” Limonka 39: May 1996 (transl. of fragments from the novel Wild Boys), and “Ekspress na planetu Nova.” Limonka 41: Jun. 1996 (fragments from the novel Nova Express). NB: some of these texts, such as the fragments from Burroughs' novels and the interview with Jean Genet, were being published in Russian for the first time. The first Russian translations of Marcuse’s books were published in the mid-1990s. It is reasonable to presume that the readers of Limonka learnt about these authors and historical figures from the pages of the newspaper.

31. Dugin, A. “Novye protiv starykh.” Limonka 1: Nov. (1994).

32. Dugin, A. “Kontrelita,” Limonka 2: Dec. 1994. Dugin here is also referring to Italian sociologist Vilfredo Pareto’s theory on the circulation of elites.

33. Laura Il’ina, Personal Interview, 26 March 2015. On the Polushkin Brothers, and the beginnings of Russian alternative fashion, see also Baster (2011) and Kostrova (2011).

34. As I was able to verify when I consulted Chuvashev’s personal archive, which contains manuscripts and drafts for the first 33 issues of Limonka, Limonov personally wrote (mostly by hand) extensive sections of the newspaper at least until the beginning of 1996.

35. “Aktsiia.” Limonka 20: Aug. 1995.

36. “Smachno pomer.” Limonka 7: Feb. 1995; Limonka 10: Mar. 1995; Limonka 12: Apr. 1995; Limonka 6: Feb. 1995. The title of this satirical article is a parody of the famous early Soviet slogan Kto ne rabotaet, tot ne est, “He who does not work, will not eat.”

37. “Smachno pomer.” Limonka 6: Feb. 1995.

38. See Dubshin, D. “Vsiakaia morda blagorazumnogo fasona vyzyvaet vo mne nepriiatnye oshchushcheniia.” Limonka 29: Dec. 1995. On the relationship between Limonov and Daniil Kharms and the “Oberiuts,” see Limonov’s (1977) introduction to the almanac of the group Konkret, Apollon-77 (Shemiakin 1977); Iosif Brodsky’s postface to Limonov’s poetry collection Moi otritsatel’nyi geroi (1995).

39. See Kamennyi, A. (pseudonym of Andrey Karagodin). “ALLE GEGEN ALLE. Interv’iu nashego korrespondenta s gruppoi Laibach.” Limonka. 3: Jan. 1995. On the use of totalitarian aesthetics in the performances of Laibach, see also Žižek (1993) and Monroe (2005).

40. On Sergei Kurekhin’s TV hoax and on his participation in Dugin’s political campaign, see also Yurchak (2011) and Kushnir (2013).

41. Dugin, A. “Iz kolybeli revoliutsii.” Limonka 22: Sep. 1995.

42. Dugin, A. “Vsia vlast’ severu.” Limonka 11: Apr. 1995.

43. Dugin, A. “Gi Debor mertv. Spektakl’ prodolzhaetsia.” Limonka 14: May 1995.

44. In 1994–1995, during his tour Russkii proryv, Letov famously performed in front of a giant NBP flag. Throughout the 1990s, the history of the NBP remained closely linked with that of the post-Soviet punk, rock, heavy metal, noise, and industrial scenes. See Rogatchevski and Steinholt (2015) and Sandalov (2016).

45. See Letov, E., “Eto znaet moia svoboda,” Limonka 1: Nov. 1994; “Imenno tak vse i bylo,” Limonka 2: Dec. 1994; “Imenno tak vse i bylo,” Limonka 3: Jan. 1995. Letov’s original term for shock is “epatazh,” which more clearly evokes the original bohemian (and futurist) motto “épater les bourgeois.”

46. See Dugin, A. “K zhenshchinam.” Limonka 25: Nov. 1995; Timur Bonch (General Brusilov). “K chlenam NBP.” Limonka 52: Nov. 1996; “SEX-trenazher elitnogo partiitsa.” Limonka 55: Dec. 1996; SEX-trenazher zhenshiny partii Limonka 56: Jan. 1997.

47. Mogutin, Ia. “Bez intelligentov. Utopia.” Limonka 1: Nov. 1994.

48. Mogutin’s language evoked that of the Soviet propaganda of the 1920s and 1930s – the expression “unichtozhit' kak klass” (“destroy as a class”), for instance, echoed the famous slogan of the anti-kulak campaign, “unichtozhit' kulaka kak klass!” (“destroy the kulak as a class!”).

49. I am here borrowing Viktor Shklovsky’s famous term ostranenie, “estrangement” or “defamiliarization,” used to describe the specific type of experience produced by the reading of literary texts (Shklovsky 1917, transl. 1990).

50. Medvedeva, N. “Oda russkomu muzhiku.” Limonka 2: Dec. 1994.

51. “Razdavit’ dvukh zmei,” Limonka 29: Dec. 1995.

52. I am here borrowing the expression of one of my informants.

53. “Fashizm ili ne fashizm: konkurs.” Limonka 11: Apr. 1995.

54. See note 49.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Fox International Fellowship, Yale University.