National Identity and Ethnicity in Contemporary Russian War-related Films
MA THESIS by Arunas Kastenas (ANR 563173)
MA programme in Communication and Information Sciences, specialization – Intercultural Communication Department of Communication and Information sciences, Tilburg School of Humanities
Examination committee:
Principal supervisor: Professor Jan Blommaert
Associate supervisor: Dr Sanna Lehtonen
Second reader: Dr Sander Bax
Tilburg University, 2012 Acknowledgements
There are a few people to whom I owe a great deal of gratitude for being able to finish this research. First of all I am eternally grateful to my Mom and Dad. Without your support and belief in me I do not think any of this would be possible. You have supported me not only throughout the past few months but throughout my entire life. Your faith in me has infused me with Herculean strength, which helped me more than you could expect. A very special thanks goes to Sanna Lehtonen from Department of Culture Studies of Tilburg University. I think that without your help I would have faced many more problems while writing this thesis. In more than one occasion you were my mentor and a trustworthy companion during this journey, your expertise, knowledge and interest in my topic are invaluable. Thanks for your patience, support and friendship! I would also like to thank a lot professor Jan Blommaert. Thank you for believing in my work and sharing your insights which were of vital importance. I also cherish the amount of knowledge I received during your lectures, which in a broad sense has shaped my views on the multicultural nature of the society. Also I would like to thank Sander Bax of Culture Studies Department. You were also among the people who helped me to “construct“ my thesis topic early in my studies for what I am very grateful. I owe huge thanks to the staff of both Department of Culture Studies and Department of Communication and Information Sciences of Tilburg University. Thank you for providing me help and allowing me to create my own thesis topic while balancing and “tapping” into the expertise of both departments! Also I would like to thank my friends for all the support. One particular friend knows who she is and deserves a big hug for putting a smile on my face these past few weeks. All in all hi-5 everyone and Ačiū (thanks) as we say in Lithuania!
Images on the cover: First from the bottom: a still from the film Olympus Inferno, portraying Georgian soldier. Second from the bottom: a still from the film We are from the future , portraying WW II awards. Third from the bottom: a still from the film The Edge, portraying Ignat suffocating German girl.
2
Contents
1. Introduction ...... 4
2. Literature review on films and national identity in Russia ...... 7
2.1. Film as a cultural good ...... 7
2.1.1. Film production ...... 9
2.2. National identity ...... 10
2.2.1. National identity in films ...... 12
2.2.2. Ethnic identity in relation to nationalism in films ...... 14
2.3. Problems of Russian multicultural multiethnic society ...... 15
2.4. Soviet and Russian film industry ...... 17
2.4.1. Soviet film industry ...... 18
2.4.2. Post-Soviet film industry at the time of Yeltsin ...... 18
2.4.3. Post-Soviet film industry at the time of Putin ...... 19
2.5. Historical film ...... 20
2.5.1. History in films ...... 21
2.5.2. Historical film as national film ...... 22
3. Research questions and methodology ...... 23
4. Analysis: National identity and ethnicity in Russian films ...... 26
4.1. Analysis of Край - The Edge (2010) ...... 26
4.2. Analysis of Мы из будущего - We are from the future (2008) ...... 36
4.3. Analysis of 9 рота - 9th company (2005) ...... 42
4.4. Analysis of Олимпиус Инферно - Olympus Inferno (2009) ...... 52
5. Conclusions ...... 65
References ...... 69
3
1. Introduction
In the contemporary world it would be hard to find a person who is not interested in films. Films are responsible for making a significant impact on our lives, even though we are not always aware of that. It is films that represent the reality that we want to escape into while watching them at home or in cinemas. It is films that offer role models for the younger generation. It is also films that are sometimes analysed by film critics and theorists to reveal the seemingly real or surreal lives, dreams and fears of people. At the moment the availability of films is immense. One can buy or download films, rent a DVD or go to the cinema. Every day many discussions arise about newly made films and sometimes also those unwilling to be forgotten. Every now and then domestic and international festivals are being held to recognize and award certain films and their makers for their contribution to the popular culture of the cinema world and the particular nation. Notably, films, especially the national ones, also contribute to the very lives of the audience. With the help of emotionality and excitement films enter the lives of people and can represent fictional or factual interpretations of national history thus contributing to the creation and maintenance of different cultural identities, including national identity. For emigrants media and films in particular serve as a means to reconnect with their past and national country. Soviet and Post-Soviet Russian films and film theories are well known around the globe. Russian movies interest me because I favour a special position in my life. I was born in Russia, as my mother is Russian and my dad is Lithuanian. Up to the age of seven I was living in Russia and then moved to Lithuania. Since the early days I have been a bicultural and bilingual person. While living in Lithuania I still feel connection to my land of birth. Russian films have allowed me to “tap” into the Russian culture, and have helped me to maintain the bond with the land of my Russian ancestors while living in Lithuania. Yet in the past few years certain changes in films made in Russia can be seen. After watching a number of recent Russian films during the past few years I have noticed increase of propaganda elements in some Russian movies, and the depiction of foreigners and former (and to some extent present) ethnic minorities of the Soviet Union (Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians and Caucasus ethnicities in a broader sense) being offensive in a few cases. This was not the case with the films made in the early or late 90s in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union as I have been following the film situation in Russia for nearly two decades. In addition to this, films related to various wars in Russian history have been put into a patriotic light. Furthermore, admiration of
4 the collective history, national identity, and indigenous Russian ethnicity are popular elements in contemporary Russian films. These elements are frequently presented through a contrast, by highlighting of superiority of Russians in relation to the other ethnicities and nationalities that lived and continue to inhabit greater Russia. . In a sense it can be stated that films reveal not only positive but also the negative side of the nation, by portraying stereotypes and the views of the nation concerning its collective essence. With the case of Russia this is complex, as the mainstream views might not reflect the ideas and values of the minorities within it. Russia has a rich history of both internal and external wars and ethnic conflicts, represented in historical war-related films. These films should be put into consideration. Some of the conflicts happened a few years and decades ago, some continue to be reignited and slowly and silently bear consequences. The likelihood of national films being influenced by the events of the past and present thus becomes high in Russian films. Keeping in mind that wars always bear losses, the prejudice usually prevails for a time among both sides. The national films in Russia, portraying the conflicts might be influenced by the collective history of the nation, which is likely to be represented in idealistic, emotional, nostalgic, non-critical way. In the light of national identity, which is central to any nation, national films that involve stereotypes and contrast different groups of people living in the same nation, might be harmful to the coexistence of different ethnicities in a country such as Russian Federation. Thus, analysis of war-related films and their narrative elements might help us understand what features the selected films bear and what information they reveal about not only the Russian nation and its identity, but also about its view on ethnicities, foreigners, wars. In this work I will focus on how national identity, ethnicities are represented in symbols and characters found in Russian war-related films, what meanings, values, ideologies they promote and what contrasts are highlighted between them in films. The films chosen for this study (period of years from 2005 to 2010) mark a period in Russia when political changes (The presidency of Vladimir Putin in years 1999-2008), military conflicts (II war in Chechnya in years 1999-2009; Russian Georgian war in 2008), mild tensions in foreign affairs (between Russian government and Post-soviet states, Baltic states to be precise) took place in Russian Federation. Therefore in Russia national and ethnic identity is likely to be represented due to the conflicts. The relevance of the work also lies in a fact that this work was started and initiated few months prior before the presidential elections of the year 2012 in Russia. The former presidency of Vladimir Putin influenced the film industry in Russia by making it more promotional in the case of national identity. It was unknown whether former president Vladimir Putin will be re-elected in the presidential race of the 4 th of March of 2012 however Putin has won. 5
The national identity stressing film production in Russia is therefore likely to be continued and the findings will illustrate the discussed time period and provide considerations for future researches. The analysis of the present study is dependant on the David Bordwell’s (1985) model of examining narrative elements in films in combination with interdisciplinary approach by providing socio-cultural, historical background for the elements chosen to analyze. By examining the narrative elements in the films, one can learn about the contemporary Russian ideologies and representations, views on the past and present and the idea of how patriotic, national heroes are crafted, which are very important to the successful maintenance of the country, because one way or another the collective history and memory, national identity of the nations is one complex story which can be constructed and analyzed. The structure of the thesis is as follows: Chapter 2 is the literature review of films and national identity in Russia, it introduces films as cultural goods, explains the characteristics of films in general, views national, ethnic identities and history as constructs that can be represented and effect the films, their production. Chapter 3 introduces the methodology, research questions, data of the present study it explains the criteria for the films chosen. Chapter 4 is the actual analysis of the chosen films. Chapter 5 is the chapter for conclusions of the present work.
6
2. Literature Review on films and national identity in Russia
This chapter provides the theoretical background which is needed for understanding the present study on national identity and ethnicities in contemporary Russian films. Literature review is as follows: In section 2.1. film as a cultural good is introduced. Film is seen as a popular highly available cultural good that has aesthetic value and ideologies encoded. Section 2.2. views national identity and ethnic identity as group identities that can clash, and that consequences of conflicts may be revealed in films. Importantly national and ethnic identities can be constructed and films can be potential carriers, promoters of newly constructed identities. Section 2.3. describes/focuses on characteristics of Soviet and Russian films, the evolution of Russian film making industry. Present day nation-building film popularity in Russia is discussed. Section 2.4. reveals the problems, conflicts that Russian society, which consists of culturally and ethnically diverse groups, is facing. Ethnic and identity conflicts seen being responsible for the fall of the Soviet Union and continue to characterise the problematic nature and situation of ethnicities inside Russian Federation and in its former territories (Soviet Union). Finally, in section 2.5. historical film as a genre and possibly as a national film is introduced. History is seen as a construct.
2.1. Film as a cultural good
Albert Moran (1996) believed that films are one of the most important cultural goods, which are even not destined for “physical decay and disintegration” (Moran, 1996, p. 1). Today, films are even considered as the medium of the modern mass culture (Black, 2002, p. 4). Of course, some of this is arguable, because films as material products (unless digitised and, even when digitised) surely decay at some point, however their availability, and the restoration projects maintained nowadays make them one of the most publicly available, demanded and popular cultural goods that there are. It is crucial to know that as Joel Black (2002) puts it, starting from the year 1950 film studies were introduced to the academic curriculum, and movies were started to be treated as fine arts, literature and other art forms, capable of being analysed as a coded discourse both sociologically (as a from of cultural product and mass entertainment for purposes of “indoctrination, diversion, subversion”) and aesthetically (as a construct, or a world governed by internal laws).
7
Cultural goods are important to any nation. If to quote Andy Crouch (2008), “Any cultural good, after all, only moves the horizons of the particular public who experience it. For the rest of the world, it is as if that piece of culture, no matter how excellent or significant it might be, never existed.” (Crouch, 2008, p. 69). This does not mean, however, that cultural goods are unimportant, quite the contrary they are extremely valuable to any nation. Films can be seen as cultural goods important to the nation and its people. It can be said that they frequently are “tailored” for and by particular nation members, thus reveal the values and beliefs, the imagined worldview of the particular nation. Films are unique objects of art and even though they have many similarities with other cultural goods they remain distinctively different. When compared with other visual works, such as paintings or drawings, films constitute narratives rather than depict a fixed, static view on events displayed. The advantage of films lies in a fact that they manage to create world, where each moment of “change” can be “captured” (Burstyn, 1987, p. 169). Simply put, cinematic works, unique in their representational properties are able to show temporal properties and to expand our every day notion of depiction (Abell, 2010, p. 278). One can argue that written narratives may also depict temporal properties. However, films in this case provide the audience with the additional visual cues, expanding the representational spectre. It can be said that cultural goods are also objects of art, thus they have aesthetic value. Osborne (1986, p. 331) has stated that an aesthetic object is anything upon which aesthetic attention and interest are objected. However, in addition to their aesthetic value works of art can be made to distribute, raise or lower political consciousness, facilitate a closer union with people, send signals of social status and to cognitive in addition to aesthetic purposes (Lopes, 2010, p. 520). Mazeikis (2005) proposes the idea that in all pieces of art equilibrium should be maintained between their aesthetic and other qualities. (Mazeikis, 2005, p. 100). Assumingly, sometimes other qualities, for example ideological ones, outweigh this “equilibrium”. Thus the ideological heritage of an art object tends to be irrational yet continuous; highly dependent on cultural diffusions and globalization, socio-economical and cultural processes and conflicts (Mazeikis, 2005, p. 100). As an example, “propaganda revival” was seen in Russia at the times of the Great Russian Revolution, as well as the First and the Second World Wars, when many art fields were fused with persuasive ideological messages and meanings (ibid.). The exposure to such objects of art by people may eventually even lead them to mistakenly attributing aesthetic value to something that is not necessarily aesthetically rewarding (Abell, 2010, p. 278). It means that we as evaluators of art constantly make judgments, which sometimes can be influenced externally by ideological instruments. 8
While we as viewers and critics of art objects always make conclusions about the reality encoded in those objects, they influence our understanding, sense of life, experiences, not only rational assumptions and measured decisions (Mazeikis, 2005, p. 111). This does not mean that aesthetic value has to do only with rational assessment. Yet it is the rational assessment of people that can be influenced by repressive communication instruments such as propaganda, persuasion, manipulation and so forth (Grigaliunas, 2009, p. 69). One has to remember that not only the objects of art themselves can be created with encoded ideological meanings, but the judgement of the people might be influenced externally as well. Contemporary films, while being cultural goods, frequently, yet by no means always succumb to the political ideological use of them. Therefore it cannot be held in complete isolation that films can be one of the most significant vessels for aesthetic, ideological and other functions that can be revealed in the process of decoding while watching and analysing them.
2.1.1. Film production
In order for a film to become a product to be seen on screens, it must be developed during time consuming processes. Moran (1996) introduces three important stages in the organizational structure of the making of films: production, distribution, and exhibition, and puts significant emphasis on film production, a stage that involves creation of film stars thanks to the publicity, and usage of many things such as film making equipment, editing laboratories, large amounts of financial aids and facilities and much more (Moran, 1996, p. 2). However film distribution also is a significant stage in relation to our work. Barbara Klinger (1997) proposes to take into account the social, economical, political aspects related to the film making stages at the same time addressing film distribution and its availability nationally and internationally when analysing films. In other words we can assume that there are certain factors that can influence the stages of the film production and films themselves which are reviewed by some scholars. David Taras (1995) discusses three perspectives to understand what influences the media. First, “Political Economy” or the “hegemonic” or “critical” perspective claims that media production reflects and is linked to the dominant ideological forces and values of the society to be promoted. Second, “Organizational” or “structural-functional perspective” deals with the size of budgets, the nature of the audiences, the medium used, and ownership. Finally, “Cultural perspective” deals with the way in which media is socially constructed, operate within certain culture and is obliged to use cultural symbols (Taras, 1995, p. 729.).
9
As seen the ideas of Moran (1996) and Taras (1995) provide us with an opportunity to consider certain perspectives when seeing what influences the production of films and the stages of making of films. Therefore the analysis of the political situation, ideologies and values, shared culture of the society provides researchers with knowledge to better understand not only the films but their background as well. In this case political, economical, cultural, and possibly other factors influence the film making stages of production, distribution, and exhibition and can be grouped into a notion of socio-cultural influencers of films and film making industry. Finally, when addressing films production stage from cultural perspective as one of the relevant influencers to be discussed, are cultural categorizations: we can take for example Russian cinema French cinema, German cinema, Lithuanian cinema or any other national cinema, all of which bear different characteristics, traits and history. It can be said that some films are targeted for the national audiences. Beumers (2003) believes that films frequently have “national character” which can be understood by native audience and misunderstood or missed by the foreign one (Beumers, 2003, p. 445). This means that the distribution, in a form of targeted audience also can be discussed from cultural perspective. National films are often targeted and produced for domestic audiences which can fully appreciate them in a sense of fully decoding the meanings and messages within them. However this is not a rule, and samples of national films produced for international audiences also exist and it is possible to decode their messages when bearing additional background information. National cinema is created for and by people of certain cultures, thus presumably it bears aspects of national culture and national identity. Considering all of the above, socio-cultural information as a background of film production must be taken then into account in order to successfully decode the meanings of the films.
2.2. National Identity
To begin with, we play different roles in family, society, nation and global world. Therefore we consist of different aspects of our being and existence. This section of the thesis will mostly focus on general characteristics of national identity. There is a widespread notion in academic world that identity is a rather complex and ambiguous term. Many types of identity exist, such as national, social, ethnic, racial, and cultural identities that will possibly make way for new categorizations of identities by researchers in the future. In the present scientific literature there is one major division between identities, as they can be either individual or collective. Brewer and Gardner (1996) explain that generally 10 identities can be viewed as either personal and/or social, due to the individual and social roles that we play in our personal and social lives, at the same time coexisting and influencing the understanding, interpretation and making sense of the social reality that surrounds us (Brewer and Gardner, 1996). To put it simply, sometimes one can “shift” between identities, from an “I” standing point to a collective “we” standing point and vice versa. As may be summarised, collective identities are shared by groups of people rather than sole individuals. Importantly, the relationships of individuals in in-groups, sharing collective identities tend to be strong and more likely to be initiated (Brewer & Gardner, 1996, p. 86). Thus, group identities constitute the very essence of social, yet also individual lives of people, they initiate strong bonds between them at high point influencing individuals and the society itself. Manuel Castells (2009) notes that collective identities can affect society and may increase the “power” of “dominant” institutions in society, raise certain ideologies, and finally with the help of “cultural instruments” may seek to transform society itself by challenging the historical basis of the identities to be created (Castells, 2009, p. 8). Most probably what Castells (2009) had in mind is that the ruling forces of society can reshape and create new collective identities, including national identity with the help of culture and other means. According to Smith (1991), national identity can be seen as a collective identity. Smith briefly introduces three major types of collective identity: 1) gender identity, 2) space and territory identity, which refers to notions of space and time, is aimed at locality and in the course of history is more stimulated by ideologies rather than ecologies, and 3) socio-economic identity, which is responsible for the division of people into classes and historically contributed to the initiation of military actions (Smith, 1991, p. 4) However, to find a possible place for national identity in these considerations, nation itself should be discussed firsthand. It can be speculated that each nation as a group has an identity, national identity to be specific. To begin with, a nation can be defined as a human population sharing a historical territory (homeland), having common myths and historical memories, possessing a mass public culture, a common economy and legal, social rights and duties for its members (Smith, 1991, p. 14). National identity thus is the manifestation of these aspects of a nation. Notably, national identity is also multidimensional, and can be comprised of many other types of identity, such as religious, ethnic or social, and be in fluctuating “permutation” with various ideologies, such as liberalism, fascism and communism, for example (Ibid.). Yet the closest ideology forwarding national identity is nationalism as we may presume. Nationalism can be seen as a political ideology and the attempt of the group to advance its own interests while seeing it as a myth that is created, propagated and tainted by dominant forces that pursue power or any other advantages (Walker, 1997, p. 4). By 11 referring to Ernest Gellner, Walker (1997) continues that nationalism creates nations, while it is nationalists who promote interests of the group or those of the group that they belong to. According to Smith (1991) national identity has internal and external functions to the people. (1991, p. 16). External functions are territorial, political, and economical, which together define the social, moral, historical space of individuals, national authority, and election of government and maintenance of social order (ibid.). The internal function of national identity is more complex than it seems. Even though it acts as a conductor for socialization for the members of a community as nationals and citizens, it is most often achieved through a compulsory, common public mass education system, through which individuals are infused with homogenous culture and specific nationalistic ideals and ideas (Smith, 1991, p. 16). It is important to realize that shared values, symbols or traditions can be used as a catalyst of internal national identity stimulation. To quote Smith (1991, p. 17) symbols such as “flags, coinage, anthems, uniforms, monuments and ceremonies” serve as a reminder of a common heritage and cultural kinship and as an aspect of sense of common identity and belonging formation. It may be assumed that some symbols, functions and other elements of national identity can be recognised in cultural products of the nation – films for example.
2.2.1. National Identity in films
As explained by Jasmin van Gorp (2011, p. 244), the film as a cultural good touches the notions of ideology and national identity of the country. By projecting a nation’s history and the image of how people look and their behaviour, habits, and worldviews, a film can contribute to citizens’ perception of their own nation and identity (Ibid.). As earlier suggested by Moran (1996, p. 9), the definition of “National cinema” is a slippery phrase, as it is not only a domestic film industry, but also the imaginative projection of a national community. We must also mention the role of the state in the matters discussed. Culturally speaking, construction of an ideal state requires for the necessary praise of selected elements: “persons”, “performances”, and “places” (Wilmsen & McAllister, 1996, p. 3). Simply put, the state benefits from common sense to maintain hegemony 1
1 Hegemony – hegemony in social and cultural life may refer to the “given” or imposed way or direction of how masses of people should leave their lives within a country and a nation (Lears, 1985). Notably hegemony is maintained trough projection of “values, norms, perceptions, beliefs, sentiments and prejudices” to the groups of people by the dominant culture (Ibid., p. 569). Also this can be related with a massive geo-political phenomenon explained by Anthony D. Smith (1991) who claimed that most modern Western states are aspired to become-nation states, while only a fraction of them really is, due to diversity in population and ethnic cultures, ethnic communities within their boarders (1991, p. 15). It is important to note that as a logical bridging to the further section of our work, in which we will overview the clash of national identity ant ethnic identities in details necessary. 12 and government may stimulate or construct the image or common sense of a nation by controlling stages of film making, such as production distribution and screening of films (Gorp, 2011, p. 245). Significantly, state support can be considered a popular means to achieve financial aid, support from the government, however putting aside the policies or the interest of the state in the articulation of national identity it is the filmmaker who chooses or not to do so (Ibid.). Media and films in particular can be considered possible carriers of representations of national identity and they may thus contribute to the formation of a positive image of a state and nation. To construct a positive national identity, films often praise the special moments, events, and people in the course of national history. Accordingly the first important element in this construction is collective history, including ideas and representations of “ancient” origins, conflicts of the past, war heroes, “martyrdom”, “conquests”, all of which help to constitute a nation (Gorp, 2011, p. 246). Films can also be regarded as a state’s ideological apparatus that can depict nation’s “values” and “beliefs”, and can generally contribute to a nation’s common sense (Gorp, 2011, p. 244). Gorp proposes Gramsci’s (1971) definition of common sense. To quote her article, it is a “conception of a world which is uncritically absorbed by various social and cultural environments <…> It is conceived as a spontaneous philosophy <…> unconscious process, far removed from any intentionality.” (Gramsci 1971 cited in Gorp, 2011, p. 245). It is often the common sense that influences how national identity in films is stressed and perceived by the audiences. Interestingly, common sense can be treated as a fluctuating concept. The “common knowledge” seems to be synonymous to “common sense” for example, as both concepts are related. To illustrate, Holthoon and Olson (1987, p. 2) have argued that common knowledge may include knowledge that is common, but also knowledge that might become common. On the other hand, according to Marion Ledwig (2007, p. 1) who refers to Kekes (1975), “common sense is the most secure part of our belief system.” However, neither of this contradicts in a claim that common sense (common knowledge in use) gradually becomes the most secure part of our belief system, responsible for understanding the messages encoded in films by becoming a cultural frame of references for the people living in certain cultures. Notably even in each nation there are different cultural people groups. Believing that each nation can be multicultural, national identity may have a hegemonic role in some films. By taking into account the works of Scannell and Cardiff (1991 cited in Moran, 1996, p. 10), the problematic nature of the nationality, as the “nation”, accordingly, is that it is “an imagined community that attempts to supersede loyalties to other communities”. Consequently, Moran believes that there is no such thing as “National cinema”, as national populations are actually marked by a multitude of varying cultural communities to which individuals belong in varying 13 degrees, and therefore there is no such thing as a “single national cultural identity” (Moran, 1996, p. 10). In sum, representation and understanding of national identity in films is influenced by many factors, including the influence of the state and the common sense of the nation, which may differ due to the multicultural nature of the nation-state, yet still stress the uniqueness of the nation. Positive representations of national identity in films accordingly reveal and praise the special moments in collective history - people, events, values and the common sense of the people that comprises the nation.
2.2.2. Ethnic identity in relation to nationalism in films
Considering that most of the nation states in the world are marked by multicultural aspects, another important term that frequently appears in connection with national identity needs to be introduced: ethnic identity. Even though identities may overlap, they also tend to clash. Castells (2009) favours a belief that all of the major conflicts in history have occurred because of the confrontation of opposing identities. He explains that ethnicity has become a major source of self- organization, confrontation, hatred and violence in relation to politics today (Castells, 2009, p. xxvi). It can be borne in mind that ethnic identities are also historically constructed (Wilmsen & McAllister, 1996). In this section attention will be given to the possible conflicts between national and ethnic identities that are, supposedly, occasionally “fuelled” by nationalism ideology. It is hard to describe the concept of ethnic identity as no sole definition could fill the vast amount of meanings it may hold. Liebkind (2006) links it with real or “imagined” common decent and shared culture naming “history” and “culture” as the two main “ingredients” of the ethnic identity (Liebkind, 2006, p. 78). Ethnic identity can also be seen as a “place” where people find solidarity in the in-group while being a refugee or searching for defence in terms of realia of a multi-cultural world and the existing prejudice of the dominant ethnic groups (Castells, 2009, p. xxv). In addition, Liebkind (2006, p. 78) believes that in most cases ethnic identity is used to self-label, or to self-identify with commitment and feelings of belongingness, shared values and attitudes towards one’s own ethnic group. Expanding this, ethnicity as such is also a basic attribute of self-identification, due to shared historical practices and because others remind people everyday that they are different bye skin colour, language or any other attribute falling under the explanations of multi-cultural world (Castells, 2009, p, xxv). Ethnicity therefore is not only self-identification but is also perception coming from other people. 14
Notably it is often ethnicity that stands as a material basis for resistance in form of revolts against oppression and repression coming from dominant groups (Castells, 2009, p. xxv). It can be considered that dominant groups in societies tend to refer to minority groups that are not “us”. Minority ethnicities for example in a sense are “outsiders“ in the societies they inhabit. Furthermore the identification with certain ethnicities might come from representatives themselves or from the dominant society groups. From this we may presume that ethnicities in media as well as in films can also be depicted in negative ways, or even represented as outsiders. As regards nationalism, which tends to promote the values and identity of the dominant groups in society, ethnic identities of the minorities may stand in opposition. Walker (1997, p. 6) identifies the dangers of nationalist ideology, because it may lead to historical horrors such as “Holocaust”, massed emigrations and the other examples of ethnic cleansing. No single analytical framework can successfully analyze the relation of nationalism and ethnic conflicts, but it may help to understand the political developments of regions and collective attempts of societies to forge new identities when the previous states and economic systems fail (Walker, 1997, p. 6). Walker (1997) and Castells (2009) in their works imply that nationalism and ethnic conflict contributed to the collapse of the multicultural Soviet Union, because different ethnicities within it opposed to the pursuit of the government towards Russification and homogeneity. Fearon and Laitin (2003, p. 75) see ethnicity as a variable for a civil war in multicultural multiethnic societies and suggest that a state marked by poverty, large population, instability and ethnic diversity is more likely to suffer from civil wars. Media and films can thus not only promote national identity but reflect and represent the prejudices and ethnic tensions and conflicts. Furthermore, the values promoted by the dominant groups or powers through construction of national identity in films may not necessarily constitute the values of all the ethnicities within or out of the territories ruled by these groups. Bearing in mind that ethnic identities can be seen as constructs, ethnicities and national identity can be represented in various ways with the help of media and films.
2.3. Problems of Russian multicultural multiethnic society
Russia has a long history of being constituted of a number of ethnicities and nationalities. In Soviet times, for example, the Soviet state consisted of a complex system of fifteen federal republics, and a number of autonomous republics within federal territories of republics all of which were based on territorial nationality principles (Castells, 2009, p. 36). Notably, as Castells states that in Soviet Union Soviet identity, Sovetskij narod , was attempted to be constructed even 15 though this was unsuccessful (Ibid.). In such a multicultural environment many conflicts having ethnic, democratic, religious roots were present among diverse members of society and the state itself. Several ethnic cleansings were documented in the course of history in Soviet Russia. During the period of Stalin representatives of nationalities among whom where Lithuanians, Estonians, Latvians, Ukrainians, Chechens, other ethnicities within the Soviet Union and even some indigenous Russians who were against the will of the Communist Soviet party were deported to Siberia and Central Asia (Castells, 2009, p. 36). In a sense, the signs of resistance coming from ethnicities wishing for independence and people opposing the state were oppressed this way. Notably, these ethnic cleansings, associated with prejudice towards Soviet regime entered the collective history of the nationalities within and outside former Soviet Union. Yet, despite the efforts of the state, the resistance movements against the state and its imposed ideology and Soviet identity continued. Members of certain nationalities and democratic movements within Soviet Union were in favour of using the only clear identity that was available at that time, namely collative national identity from the past (Castells, 2009). Furthermore, national flags were gaining popularity (Ibid.). Finally, in the year 1991 the Soviet Union collapsed and certain nations gained their independence and inherited their territorial boarders from the collapsed Soviet Union. Countries like Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Georgia and several others became independent. Yet, Russian government was still facing diplomatic issues with the newly formed independent countries. Even at present time, Post-Soviet countries remain regions of competing influence between the western and eastern worlds. Notably before and after independence of newly formed Post-Soviet states, ethnic Russians constituted large amounts of populations in these states, contributing to the multicultural multiethnic environments of the countries. Mazeikis (2009) argues that the present day Russian media, which is available to Russians living in other countries, sometimes negatively views the host countries where Russians live, thuspossibly creating ethnic tensions and prejudices among the ethnic groups of the countries. Furthermore, domestic ethnic tensions took also place in the Post-Soviet Russia. The first war in Chechnya is one of the major domestic military conflicts that Russia has faced (Castells, 2009). The conflict can be explained by the willingness of Chechens to also become independent and create a Muslim state, as well as growing ethnic tensions. Worthy to mentioned, that this conflict was re-ignited in a form of Second war in Chechnya at the time of presidency of Putin, and
16 it took several years (2009) until military actions of Russian forces finally suppressed the rebel forces in Chechnya, thus ending the ethnic military movements of freedom fighters. The present day Russia has disturbing aspects of a possibly racist society or at least a society that favours certain ethnicities. Mazeikis (2009) notes that Caucasian ethnicities sometimes are embarrassed of their ethnicity and tend to abandon their ethnic identities in present-day Russia where their skin colour and/or surnames are accented in negative way. Ethnicity favouring can also be seen happening in Russia. From the 19th century towards the Soviet Union, Jews in Russia were sometimes used as “scapegoats” for economic failures of the country and were occasionally followed by intolerance and hostility (Gibson & Howard, 2007). During the presidency of Putin (starting in 2000) Russia has received billions of money from the American government to improve the situation/image of Jews in Russian society (Gibson & Howard, 2007, p. 204). Therefore Chechens and the ethnicities of Caucasus rather than Jews today are indeed the objects of prejudice and hostility from perspective of Russians (Ibid., 2007, p. 218). In conclusion, Russian society is still facing problems concerning the situation of ethnic minorities in Russia. Furthermore, the inability of the government to stop the military actions and wars based on ethnic conflicts and independency seeking suggests us the possibly negative formation of views towards certain ethnicities in Russia nowadays. We may assume that cultural products, specifically historical films, may reflect the common sense of Russian society promoted by the Russian government and the negativities and prejudices related with the ethnicities that inhabit or inhabited the territory of Soviet or present-day Russia.
2.4. Soviet and Russian film industry
Russian film industry can generally be categorised into two different phases – the Soviet and Post-Soviet periods. In order to understand the contemporary Russian film industry, earlier stages of the film production periods must be taken into account. Notably, the films produced in both Soviet and Post-Soviet times bear certain similarities and differences, which according to some scholars are connected with the change of ideologies and leaders in Russia. Furthermore, Post-Soviet films can also be sub-categorised in relation to the political leaders that were at that time in charge of the country. This way films made at the time of presidency of Boris Yeltsin are quite distinctive from films made during the presidency of Vladimir Putin and later Dmitry Medvedev, which mark a promotion of films, oriented towards national identity in Russia. In the following sections attention will be focused on the Soviet film industry
17 and on the most recent period of film industry in Russia – starting with the presidency of Vladimir Putin and continuing till the present day.
2.4.1. Soviet Film industry
Soviet films have received a lot of scholarly attention. Notably, in Soviet times, cinema was sometimes considered the most important art form (Youngblood, 2001, p. 840). It is important to see this, as pieces of art can be considered the most important instruments in propaganda or persuasion creation (Mazeikis, 2005, p. 107). It can be stated that on the Soviet scene, the cult of the Great Patriotic War (that is, World War II) has manifested in a period close to the war itself (Youngblood, 2001, p. 839). As we will see, it remains a popular topic today. Importantly, myth-making and cult-building factors have distorted the documented historical reality in Soviet films (Youngblood, 2001, p. 840). Sometimes Soviet film-makers or directors used the genre of the war film not to support the dominant myth of the war as a time of uniform heroism and self-sacrifice but to resist official history as well (ibid.). Some of the historical moments of Soviet history were “crafted“ by filmmakers. Soviet film industry accordingly used films as a tool for in many ways in “mass manipulating” the Soviet audience (Beumers, 2003, p. 442). Soviet wartime movies attempted to convey the grim realities of war in the most positive, softened way, while focusing on the heroic deeds of the partisans, and women in the resistance movement (Youngblood, 2001, p. 841). Post-1945 war movies often depicted other heroic people, usually father-like figures, representing Stalin himself (Youngblood, 2001, p. 844). Inarguably, Stalin used media to spread propaganda and thus increase his power (Mazeikis, 2008, p. 34). As follows, Soviet films in general frequently can be characterised by manipulation of documented historical realities and positive representation of war, patriotic representations of war heroes – all used to stress particular national identity of Soviet Russia, based on praise of WWII, Soviet ideologies and leader cults.
2.4.2. Post-Soviet film industry at the time of Yeltsin
Post-Soviet film industry in Russia starts with the collapse of the Soviet Union and Boris Yeltsin becoming the president of the Russian Federation in 1991, continuing in his position until 1999. It was a time of change and hardships for Russian people. The country had turned away from its communist state ideology that had been shaping the minds of Soviet citizens for seven 18 decades (Gorp, 2011, p. 243). When the Soviet Union ceased to exist people were left without either power or identity, with no cognitive instruments to change anything about the dim situation (Schopflin, 1997, p. 1558). Yeltsin “inherited” a country that was facing many problems. Yeltsin was struggling to transform the previously communist state-oriented economy into a capitalist system governed by free market principles, thus keeping less attention to such matters as the building or maintenance of national identity (Gorp, 2011, p. 244). Film industry at that time apparently did not fully become an instrument to alter this “vacuum” of identity and social, ideological, political problems and issues. The situation of a film making industry in Russia during the Yeltsin’s presidency period was vulnerable. Yeltsin’s preoccupation with country’s economical problem has led to a neglect of cinema as a cultural product (Gorp, 2011, p. 248). Meaningfully, only a small proportion of movies were subsidized during that time, and there was no significant difference whether they were promoting national identity or not (ibid.). Momentarily speaking, films during that period portrayed the hardships of the society, such as dirty and overcrowded places, bad food, suicides, prostitution and violence; these dark films in Russia were called “chernukha” (ibid.), which means “black” in Russian street language. Basically these films were the opposite of the positively idealised films of the former Soviet Union.
2.4.3. Post-Soviet film industry at the time of Putin
The presidency of Vladimir Putin marks a time of changes in Russia and another stage in Russian Post-Soviet film industry. Putin was a president of Russian Federation during the period starting in 2000 and ending in 2008. Notably the period of Putin marks a new chapter in Russian military history. Chechnya, Abkhazia, and Ossetia still continue to be the problematic sources of military conflicts in Russia and the short war in Georgia has almost initiated a new cold war (Castells, 2009, p. xxiv). Nonetheless, 2000 was a year when the construction of a national identity became one of the primary goals in film making and film policy in Russia (Gorp, 2011, p. 243). However, the situation of the media during Putin’s regime is highly arguable. According to Jonathan Becker (2004) the strong role of the state can be a potential threat to the freedom of media. Accordingly, he argues that the situation of media in Russia under the presidency of Putin is suffering, but that the situation of is not as “dire” as pre-Gorbachev Soviet period (Becker, 2004, p. 139). Considering the time of Putin marked by domestic and external wars, national identity of the nation can also take a turn towards praise of military and military actions. Indeed, while military,
19 army related aspects of national identity were facilitated at the time of Putin, they are also reflected in films from that period. For Putin, nationalism and patriotism were of great importance. To enhance patriotism, he used both Soviet and Pre-Soviet methods and symbols (Gorp, 2011, p. 252). For example, military education was reintroduced, Soviet anthem (with new words) was brought back, and red star for the army was reinstalled as national symbol (ibid.). Gorp’s statements well illustrate the overview of internal functions of national identity, proposed by Smith (1991) that we discussed earlier, as symbols and national identity components such as hymns, military symbols were clearly chosen to stress the glorious past of the Soviet days and provide people with nationalistic ideas taken from the shared past to the present. Notably, it can be assumed that the overall presidency of Vladimir Putin has started national identity oriented film industry in Russia that continues to the present day.
2.5. Historical film
Historical films can be considered sources of history and historical knowledge in a broad sense. LeMahieu (2011, p. 82) believes that a recording of events and history through media has become a part of our mainstream collective live and visual information has reshaped our collective memory and popular films continue to depict parallel history both in present and ancient times, thus affecting our understanding of history. In relation to this it can be said that in contemporary Russian war-related films, constructive historical relativism can be bound to shaping or affecting the collective memory of the nation and its identity. Historical motion pictures are artistic products that portray past historical events, places and people. The source for these films comes from collective history of the people, imagination of the film maker or documented sources. Unlike documentaries, historical films are usually highly fictionalised, meaning that they alter, add, delete certain events, settings, characters Today films are one of the popular ways to transmit history to the people. Anton Kaes (1992) thinks that historical films are there for interpretation of national history to the public, frequently surpassing “schools and universities” in how they contribute to the homogenization of the “public memory”. From this it may be stated that shared or public memory which is considered a part of national identity, signals historical films to be a perfect vessel for transmission of national identity to the audiences. In the following sections the possibility to treat historical films as national films will be discussed by addressing the construction of the narratives dealing with history, national identity, drama in national historical films. 20
2.5.1. History in films
History can be seen as a “web of connections” of the past that holds a culture together, suggesting not only where we are but where are we directed to (Rosenstone, 1988, p. 1175). Most importantly it is history that tells us what we should know about our cultural sources, other traditions and explains what it is to be a human (ibid.). This means that historical films can often portray characters that might become role models for how to be a human being. Kaes (1992) adds that historical films are “meanings” given to certain historical events by creation of stories, narrative around them (Kaes, 1992, p. 309). In this case it can be stated that history in films is constructed much like national identity in films can be constructed. Yet, the amount or authenticity of “history” in historical films yet should be taken with caution. It is worth noting that the past itself can hardly be “re-experienced” as one cannot go back in time and actually see the events. Therefore history in historical films is always “reconstituted, represented” and follows the representations that exist from previous times (Kaes, 1992, p. 314). Even historiographical narrative can, in a sense, be taken as a simulation or artificial modelling, because even historians write their texts with prior assumptions, dependant on theory (Gaddis, 1997, p. 83). Therefore, the historical reality portrayed in films is only an illusion, a recreation of the past, based on recreations coming from an even earlier past. Interesting observation can be made, suggesting that any recreation of the past in film, does not matter recent or very present my eventually become a source for future recreations of the past in films, meaning that even non- historical films, portraying recent times might eventually contribute to the making of historical films by future producers. However, the history in films is influenced not only by the past recreations, it is also influenced by the present itself. It must not also be held in isolation that historical films are as much about the “past” as about the “present” (Kaes, 1992, p. 311). This means that in films historical times, events and people may actually resemble present-day realities, values, ideas and give present ideological meanings to the events from the past, which at earlier times did not have such meanings. To conclude, historical films today might act a sort of a bridge between the past, the present and the future, directing and teaching the masses of people about their culture, contributing to the collective memory, creating narrative and giving meanings to events from the past yet most often in a fictional, imagined way, far from the truth.
21
2.5.2. Historical film as national film
In relation to national identity and history, historical films frequently though not always necessarily fall under the categorization of a “national film”. Presumably films produced in certain countries for national audiences are national films. However, in addition to this, these films also may articulate the national identity. Gorp (2011) believes that there are five categories of national films that can “articulate” national identity: a) historical films, b) war films, c) heritage films (and adaptations of literary classics), d) adaptations of “myths” and e) children oriented films. It must be kept in mind that sometimes these categories may overlap, and a historical film, for example, can also be a war film, portraying the events from the past related with military actions. It can be assumed, that a nation that has a “rich” military history may use it to stress glorious collective memory in films. At present it is hard to find films solely belonging to one or another categorization, genre. Notably, many films have qualities of two or more genres. According to Emilie Altenloh (2001, p. 258), drama in general is one of the most popular genres in the film making industry and provides the audience with “plenty of action” and “lively changes of scenes” all building the “excitement” of the audience. Earlier research shows that drama as a genre is equally the most desired film genre, similarly appreciated and demanded by people of different age and gender (Fischoff et al, 1997). This means that drama as a genre is universal in terms of appreciation and is popular among producers of films to appeal to the different audiences. Subsequently films qualifying for drama genre “tend to be character and plot driven rather than action, comedy, or special effects driven“ (Fischoff et al, 1997). This may signal an aspect important to our current study. Basically, the essence of dramas lies in the events of the plot and characters, meaning that the narrative is the most important thing in them. To conclude, films that have elements of drama (genre) and history (genre, categorization) most probably are excellent vessels to transmit national identity to greater national audiences with the help of a collective past history, and the creation of narratives around it. Also the creation of narratives around certain personas taken from the past of the nation may also contribute to the national identity by creation of role models, praised characters and national heroes.
22
3. Research questions and methodology
Research questions
To stimulate the current research the following questions are addressed: 1. How is national identity represented in contemporary Russian historical war-related films? 2. How are foreigners and ethnic minorities represented in contemporary Russian historical war-related films? 3. How is (national) history represented in contemporary Russian historical war-related films?
My first research question deals with national identity. In the analysis, I am going to focus on the ways in which national identity is represented through the main characters of films as national and/or war heroes. I am going to analyze who are heroes in Russian national identity simulating films and what are their virtues and flaws. Subsequently, I will analyse how national identity is represented through the symbols of the past regimes of Russia. Furthermore, I will address the highlighting of those symbols that are chosen by the filmmakers to be applicable to the contemporary construction of Russian national identity. My second research question focuses on how the contrast between Russians and non- Russians is created in the films. I will analyse who are foreigners and ethnic minorities in the films and what are their virtues and flaws. In addition, I will discuss the possible influence of factual political tension between Russia and other countries and nationalities or ethnicities associated with them in selected Russian films. Finally, my last question addresses the possible ways of how of history is being repositioned/reimagined or manipulated in the films chosen. The attention will be given to the analysis of how historical moments/events stress national identity in Russian films and how accurate is their representation in films in relation/comparison to the moments/events discussed in scientific discourse.
Methodology
The methodology developed for the present study is mainly based on the study of narrative of the chosen Russian historical war-related films with the help of film narratology terminology and theories (see Bordwell, 1985, Narration in the Fiction Film ). As a method, the
23 narrative analysis allows the researcher to examine persuasive communicative messages that lie encoded in the films. Bordwell’s (1985) narratological approach is formalist but it offers useful analytical tools and concepts when addressing the narrative in films in detail. Notably, this form of analysis can be compensated with the analysis of socio-cultural/socio-historical context, historical analysis of films and the concepts from postcolonialist (literary/film) theory. In this analysis the formalist concepts will be replaced with modern equivalents, fabula – plot, and syuzhet – the story, narrative discourse. The analysis of narrative of films offers flexibility to the researcher and the ability to incorporate other branches of academic disciplines. Bordwell stresses that narrative can be seen as a representation of the world of the story and with all of its broader meanings, setting, time, space it can be treated as a structure with the emphasis on parts that “make” a whole such as dialogues. Finally, it can be seen as a point of view of what is considered a “normal behaviour” based on assumptions. All this gives a researcher broad range of approaches when analysing selected scenes, stylistic means and the story itself of the films chosen. Following this, main narratological tools/concepts that will be used in the analysis are introduced. First, Bordwell urges us to use terms provided by Eisenstein, famous film studies researcher of the early 20 th century who stressed the emotional essence of scenes and characters in films. Mise-en-scene , which is a scene where emotions of an individual are of major importance, mise en jeu – the overall portrayal of the character and mise en geste – individual expressive moments of characters marked by physical action. Frequently in a narrative film camera position is changed to select, stress some details and alter perspective. In this analysis, some of the significant changes of the camera and the camera position itself, in relation to the stylistic aspects of films will be discussed. When addressing the story and the characters represented in the films, the primacy effect and the redundancy , concepts will be addressed as they accordingly stress the imprints of first impression and repetitive communicative aspects of the film. The main focus of the analysis are thus: 1) the emotional essence in scenes and characters, 2) the camera position (where relevant) and 3) the primacy effect and the redundancy.
The process of the discussed narrative analysis of films can be divided into 4 steps:
Analysis of The Edge (2010) film Analysis of We are from the future (2008) film 24
Analysis of 9th company (2005) film Analysis of Olympus Inferno (2009) film
Data
The four films examined in the present study were selected on a carefully thought basis. All of the selected films are popular, successful and they are easy to acquire and to be seen due to their availability on the internet and DVDs. If one looks at the above list from the up to the bottom, it can be said that these films depict chronologically different, war related periods in Russian history. The Edge and We are from the future are centred to the events that take place during the WWII. 9th company portrays the Soviet war in Afghanistan, years 1988-1989, while Olympus Inferno reveals the most recent Russian war with Georgia, which started in started on 8th of August, 2008. The decision to choose films based on historical events comes from the willingness to compare, consider and analyse how war-related films depicting different time periods can contribute to the national identity building and the promotion of nationalism in them. In addition to this, critical acclaim and popularity of the films were also among the selection criteria. One selection criterion was based on the number of both international and domestic awards that these films have won. To be precise, The Edge has received international and domestic acknowledgment, while the rest of the films, except the last one, Olympus Inferno , were awarded with Russian cinematography awards. Moreover, if one look at the list of films from up to bottom, the selection of films is also based on the size of earnings, meaning the amount of money these films have earned is in growing progression as seen in Kinopoisk.ru. The exception is Olympus Inferno , as it was not shown in Russian cinemas. However, Olympus Inferno can be considered popular due to another criterion: it was aired on 28 th of March, year 2009 on the most popular, “first” Russian TV channel that supposedly reaches dozens of millions of Russian- speaking people. The time of film release was also one of the main criteria. All of the films selected (years 2005 – 2010) constitute a period in Russian society and government that was marked by the change of political leadership and national cinematic strategies as discussed above. Additionally to the films selected, many other films were seen, a fraction of which will be mentioned in the actual analysis to illustrate the patterns and similarities of films in relation to the contemporary film conventions.
25
4. Analysis: National identity and ethnicity in Russian films
In this part of the work, the four films will be analysed with the help of narrative theory, as well as theories and concepts concerning national and ethnic identity. All films are war- related, and have clear representations of various characters of diverse backgrounds. The main issues of the analysis are the representations of national identity and ethnicity in the selected films. Furthermore historical, cultural political (socio-cultural) contexts will be provided when necessary to illustrate the background of the films, separating and comparing the realities represented in films and documented in scientific discourse.
4.1. Analysis of Край – The Edge (2010)
The Edge (Край ) is a fictional film directed by Aleksey Uchitel in 2010. It was one of the most significant films made that year in Russia and also received a lot of attention from abroad. It was nominated for a number of internationally recognized film awards, such as the Golden Globe (USA), the Asia Pacific Screen and the Nika (Russian Academy of Arts And Sciences) awards, considered to be the “Oscar“ of Russian film awards. Notably, Край won the title of the best Film of the year 2010 of the Nika awards. Its budget was 10 million US dollars, in Russian cinemas it was seen by more than 854,000 of people, and it earned about 5 million dollars from Russian cinemas (kinopoisk.ru 2). It qualifies for the drama and historical film genres (ibid.). The theme of the World War II is popular in Russian culture. Russians frequently refer to it as the “Great Patriotic War“ ( Вели кая Оте чественная война in Russian language) and it can be seen as a source of inspiration for filmmakers, writers and spectators as it has a special place in Russian collective memory. Considering the represented reality or world of this film, certain observations can be made by looking through the lens of national identity theories combined with the narrative analysis that may reveal some aspects of the film that may escape the attention of film critics and some spectators. The plot of the film is relatively simple. The film is situated in 1945, marking the events shortly after World War II. Suffering from the psychological condition of a post-traumatic or post-war stress disorder, a WWII hero, Ignat arrives to an outpost, a labour camp deep in Siberia.
2 Kinopoisk.ru – the largest and most popular internet movie database in Russia. It serves as a Russian equivalent to IMDB.com, the largest internet movie database on the internet. 26
There people,with different backgrounds, frequently addressed as “traitors“ of homeland work and live. In this environment Ignat struggles with his memories of war and his (mental) condition. Slowly, through meeting a young, beautiful Russian woman and later engaging into a contact with a German girl residing in an abandoned train he learns of compassion, caring and possibly love. Due to his hard-working nature he is able to work along with the German girl Sofia, repair a bridge over a river and fix an abandoned train that he later starts operating with Sofia. The story has many twists and ends partially unexpectedly, portraying Ignat, Sofia and a young German boy, saved by the previously mentioned Russian woman, leaving The Edge settlement by railway. The film offers depictions of a labour camp in Siberia, and provides the historical cues necessary to understand the realm being introduced. WWII and Siberia have negative and complex place in Lithuanian and Baltic history. The roots of it can be found in The Molotov-Ribbentrop secret pact of non-aggression signed in 1939 between the Soviet Union and Nazi-Germany, demarking spheres of influence of the parties, thus Finland, Estonia, Latvia fell for Soviet Russia, and Lithuania fell in the sphere of Nazi Germany (Vico, 2008, p. 60). With the attack on Poland executed by Germany in 1939, WWII began, and subsequently Soviets entered Lithuania under premise of “mutual assistance pact“ and established authority (Ibid, 2008, p. 61). However, Germany entered Lithuania in 1941. Vico (2008) states that Lithuanians were mildly positive towards Germans, as they were seen as a hope for independence and freedom from Soviets, notably Germans insisted on mobilization of 100,000 Lithuanians for labour in Germany, which in general was not successful, lead to arrests and deportations to Germany, in this light Lithuanians again demonstrated “passive resistance” and the sense of “identity and nationhood” (Vico, 2008, p. 64). Most importantly, Siberia and its labour camps in Lithuanian history and collective memory are associated with mass forced emigrations of ethnic Lithuanians to Siberia, which frequently is associated with inhuman conditions, inability to return to homeland and ethnic terror. The deportations endured in the years 1940 – 1953, resulting in about 126,817 Lithuanians being deported to Siberia, in many cases dying (ibid.). Even children, aged between 1-18 were deported in thousands to Siberia, where they endured all the unspeakable horrors of “Gulags” (Balkelis, 2005). Considering the known facts, the narrative represents us as a spectator unlikely and a highly “polished” view of the Siberian reality and war crimes. There is little known about non- Gulag labor camps as such in Siberia in scientific literature and this mild representation of reality in a way corresponds to the overall inconsistency and ambiguity of the low credibility of the historical facts displayed. In the following, I will first discuss the representation of the Soviet national hero and then focus on representation of ethnic minorities found in the film. 27
Representation of the Soviet national hero
Ignat, the traumatised WWII hero, is the main character in the story. At the beginning of the film, through a dialogue with a local officer Kalivanov, the narrative discourse reveals the determination and strength of a hurt, yet not broken Russian soldier. Therefore this conversation introduces the main details about the character – his strong persona, heroic past, willingness to go further, deeper into Siberia to fulfil himself. The second dialogue with the officer as seen in Example 1 reveals information about the place and time of the film, or, in other words, the overall setting and even presents cues for hypothesising the possible future conflicts and events of the film. Because it introduces key characters and central themes, I have selected it for a detailed analysis. It takes place when characters are arriving to the labour camp, not a “Gulag” as stressed by Kalivanov:
Example 1. Kalivanov: There is some rotten bunch here [ looks at the camp and Ignat ] it can be said traitors of the homeland [ pauses ] that is right [ pauses ] after German camps and similar stuff… what has he been doing there at fascists? Maybe bomb for the Moscow? So you are the only one here like this. Ignat : Like what? Kalivanov : A winner. Ignat : And you? Kalivanov : Me? I am the authority. I am educating them. [ nods with the head to the people working in the camp ]
In the narrative discourse, the types of people residing in the camp serve as cues for what obstacles the main character might encounter later on in the film. The spectator might expect negativity from the context information cues provided by Kalivanov, to be precise the play of words “traitors” versus “winner”. The negativity in a form of conflict is, surprisingly, provided very soon with the first appearance of a minor character Butkus. He is introduced through a dialogue with Ignat. The beginning of the dialogue is indicated in Figure 1.
28
Figure 1. Figure 2.
Figure 3. Figure 4.
Prior to this Ignat is inspecting the train, unhappy with its condition while working and observing the train. He decides to call a master repairman to check the train as seen in Example 2. The dialogue between them can be seen in Figure 1.
Example 2. Ignat: Who is the chief? Worker: Comrade Stalin! [ pause ] Our chief [pause while working] was licking Germans’ ass [pause] Estonian bitch. Butkus: I am a Lithuanian bitch [ talks while walking towards the soldier silently ] So? [while standing near Ignat who is examining the train] Ignat: Surname! Butkus: Butkus. Ignat: Have you ever checked here? [ points to the rails ] The suspension is all rusted.
As the scene continues, the dialogue starts to reach its climax. The Lithuanian man walks a little away from the train, demonstratively not answering Ignat, and stands in front of the camera turning his back to Ignat. Ignat comes, and their dialogue continues in Example 3.
29
Example 3. Ignat: What kind of fucking mechanic are you? Butkus: I have put this engine together from scratch [ slowly answers in German ] I [ pause ]
The sentence of Butkus is interrupted by a strong punch that comes from Ignat, that can be seen on Figure 3. The Lithuanian man succumbs, and while walking away from him Ignat loudly tells him to “Learn Russian”, . as a continuation of the confrontation. Soon after the conversation Ignat succumbs to the rails of the train in pain and looses consciousness. Butkus commands other workers to join him, while Ignat desperately shouts at them ordering to stop. Scene ends when backs of workers are seen leaving the working place in Figure 4. It is interesting to note the change of position of camera just before the climax, as punching is reached. The camera provides a medium shot of Ignat and Butkus, showing the first facing the camera and the second from behind, which stresses not only clear angle of stressing not only the final words of the conversation, but also making it impossible not to notice the war awards, medals on both sides of Ignat’s chest. The camera provides a good angle to notice the punch and to stress the awards – see Figure 2 and Figure 3. The visibility of awards clearly demonstrates Ignat as a war hero. Ignat in this shot is shown from an eye-level angle and Butkus, portrayed from behind, looks larger than Ignat in this shot. Keeping in mind that sometimes people with stressed prominence are shot from a low-angle, to alter, enlarge their visual size and effect, this suggests that Ignat is not represented as an artificially “heroic“ or “large“ man. This aligns with the representation of Ignat as a complicated, hurt yet struggling character. In general Ignat is a complex character, what makes him interesting is his his contradictory nature – on the one hand, he uses violence, and, on the other hand, his “new identity” as a “family man” at the end of the film appears after his growing romantic relationship with Sofia, the German girl that he cooperates and works with early in the film.
Representation of ethnic minorities and conflicts
This section deals with the representation of Lithuanians (associated with Germans) and the conflict that arises between them (Butkus) and Russians (Ignat) in the scenes discussed in the previous section and further in the narrative discourse. The negativity coming from one the minor worker character addressing Butkus as the one “licking German ass” and “Estonian” bitch, in Example 2. and the ironic acknowledgement of being “Lithuanian” bitch by himself indicates certain historical cues in these phrases. Lithuanians, as discussed above, were occupied by Russians
30 and did not resist much when Germans entered Lithuania during WWII in hope of independence from Russian occupation. Butkus is one of the minor characters that receive a seemingly insignificant role in the film. He has little spoken lines in the film. However, those few scenes when he talks often result in confrontation with Ignat. Keeping in mind the information about the story-world provided earlier by Kalivanov, it makes sense that the soldier will face certain negativity at the labour camp. In this case it is Butkus – the lazy and impolite Lithuanian, who is not only an unwilling repairman, but is also hostile – by answering Ignat’s question in German. He is the first conflicting “traitor” to be seen in the film (see Example 1). In his book, Bordwell (1985, p. 38) refers to a term “primacy effect“ 3, which is taken from cognitive psychology and means that initial information creates a “frame of reference“ for the viewer of the film, meaning that a character introduced as being heroic or virtuous will likely to be perceived as such. It can be speculated that an opposite “primacy effect“ may be expected in films as well. Characters initially being introduced as malevolent or evil likely continue to be perceived by the spectators as being such. The character Butkus can be analysed in greater detail with the help of this term. Charles Ramírez Berg (2002), while analysing Latino images in the US movies, made an interesting observation. According to Berg (2002, p. 115), some ethnic groups portrayed in movies can be considered cultural criminals twice over: they are “traitors”, criminals of their ethnic heritage and “traitors” to the majority way of living. In this case Butkus is represented as an individual who is presumably not only a non-Russian or non-Soviet but also a traitor and hostile and non-cooperative individual. Notably, the second time Butkus appears with a spoken role, again confrontation happens. This time Ignat punches him for not willing to repair the new train that was previously abandoned in the forest. The image of Butkus as a bad guy suggests redundancy at level of narrative discourse. Redundancy as seen here is the repetition of representation of Butkus as a hostile and not cooperative individual, hostile to the Soviets and their identity. It can be speculated that Butkus is not aligned with the new forced identity of the Soviets – this is suggested in the first example where Kalivanov says that people residing here are traitors of the “homeland”. In this case it indeed seems that Butkus is a double criminal, however it must be maintained that this
3 Primacy effect – term introduced by Sternberg (1978) in his work “Expositional Modes and Temporal ordering in Fiction” as mentioned by Bordwell. In addition Kruglanski and Freund (1983) later have stressed the importance of time pressure in relation to the strength of the primacy effect. The authors declare that people build strong positive or negative impressions about other people according to the initial information given (Kruglanski and Freund, 1983, p. 452). Further article the authors address ethnic stereotyping, coming from a person concerning the impressions about groups of people (Ibid., p. 452). Consideration of time pressure in films should be taken into account when addressing this issue. As Cinema in many ways is dependant on manipulation of time (Bordwell, 1985, p. 74). 31
“homeland” is not his homeland. It is a forced identity, and a forced “homeland” of the Soviet occupants and the greater Russia. In Example 4 language plays an important role, as language can be seen an important part of national identity. Smith (1991, p. 72) notes that language constitutes an important dimension for national identity and can be seen as a vessel for nationalist ideology or correspond to it. As Blackledge (2002, p. 69) suggests, in multilingual societies homogeneity sometimes is pursued, and people who are refusing to conform to it can be marginalised or excluded from society. In our situation it seems to be a fair explanation of the previously mentioned punch seen in Figure 3. In this case, a situation when a Lithuanian man uses the German language when conversing with a Russian soldier, we see a conflict not only between languages, but also between the ideologies that are represented in them. Naturally, in the world represented in this film, Russians with Russian language are winners of war, while Germans with their language accordingly are the “bad guys”. The usage of the German language by the Lithuanian indicates his allegiance to Germans, to their ideology and identity, which is opposite to the Russian one. To put it simply, communication is maintained through language. It is language that determines usually how people perceive other people, by judging what and how they speak, thus making sense of their identity (Joseph, 2004, p. 3). The reaction of the Russian soldier punching the Lithuanian thus makes sense as the latter disrespects Russian language, ideology and identity and uses German language for communication. The confrontation of these two individuals thus suggests ethnic, national and ideological conflict which is a traditional battle between “good” (Ignat) and “evil” (Butkus). Furthermore it is a highly emotional scene, discussed in Figure 1. to Figure 4. and in Examples 1 to 4 that constitutes a clear mise-en-scene where mise en jeu overall representations of both Ignat and Butkus are revealed, and mise en geste of Ignat which reveals the character through physical action, in this case is provided in a form of a punch that comes from him. It is worth noting that in this analysis of the emotional aspects of the scene, Butkus lacks mise en geste and never throws a back punch to Ignat, which also suggests a lack of response from him, perhaps fear, weakness or confirmation of the assault and possibly the inability to do so, as Ignat is his superior.
Representation of ethnic minorities and cooperation
Only few German characters are represented in this film. However, they are not buffers for a direct aggression as the narrative discourse indicates further after the confrontation of Ignat and Butkus. Quite the contrary, this particular film, similarly to others in its tradition, is more 32 centred towards the cooperative aspect or theme rather than a revelation of Germans as aggressors during WWII. Sofia is the second most important character in the film and she happens to be German. In The Edge , the narrative discourse provides an opportunity for a an unlikely cooperation between Russians and Germans that manifests through surprising relationship between Ignat and Sofia, a German girl who has been hiding in an abandoned train for years. Ignat finds the abandoned train and together with Sofia repairs the bridge and drives the train back to the camp. In Figure 5 and Figure 6 shots from two separate scenes are taken that are worthy of deeper discussion.
Figure 5. Figure 6.
Some time after Ignat has found the train where Sofia is hiding they directly confront and Ignat forces her to work with him in order to repair the bridge to drive the train back to the camp. Cooperation begins in a form of forced labour, from Sofia’s side. Furthermore, initially their communication is complicated and Ignat nearly kills her in a scene seen in Figure 5, where he openly demonstrates his hate for Germans, as his violent reaction happens only because Sofia throws his hat into the oven of the train. However, their relationship stabilizes and with the supervision of Ignat they repair the train and go back to the camp. As the story continues, narrative discourse shows that Sofia is hated by many people in the camp. Furthermore, the people also turn against Ignat for his cooperation with Sofia. However, Sofia is a strong and determined woman. In a shot taken from a Russian sauna scene in Figure 6 she demonstrates her strength by being able to defend herself against other women assaulting her verbally and physically. Figure 6 shows Sofia in the middle of the frame, facing the camera, in aftermath of a conflict. She is depicted from a moderately low angle, stylistically enlarging her. This comes well with the posture in terms of non-verbal action – wide spread shoulders, legs, chest pushed forward – all indicating the strength of the persona, while the other women are running from her in fear.
33
Much like Ignat, Sofia is represented as a strong character that is not fit for the overall environment of the camp. Ignat is the only one of his kind, a soldier and Sofia, a German girl is treated with disrespect and prejudice, except by Ignat on the long run. Both of them are fighters by their nature, able to defend themselves physically and verbally. Their relationships become more stabilised when Ignat saves her from being raped by one of the workers and finally grows into an unexpected romance. Ignat, a man who tried to strangle her at the beginning of their relationships as seen in Figure 5 grows to be fond of her step by step, and a mutual feeling of sympathy and understanding eventually grows between the two. The film finishes with the unlikely escape of Sofia, the little German boy saved by the Russian woman and Ignat away from The Edge camp. Sofia suddenly becomes a first person voiceover narrator as the camera shows the three people going away from The Edge together. She reveals that she becomes a wife of Ignat, gifts him with children, stays in Russia, has to pretend to be deaf in order to conceal herself being German and even becomes Russianised in a sense, that her final words are that in “at our place no poor person is treated badly“, which means that even deaf people receive comfort in whatever place in Russia they end up finally. In general Germans are not represented as being utterly evil or malevolent as it might be expected from the scene where the confrontation between Ignat and Butkus occured. The flashbacks in the narrative reveal that a high-ranking officer Fishman has killed the Germans working in Siberia as the truce between Soviets and Nazi was cancelled. The father of Sofia, and young engineer Gustav are portrayed as simple men killed in the process of war due to the broken pact of cooperation between the Nazi and Soviets. The war is seen as responsible for losses on both sides.
National symbols
Notably the film is full of reoccurring symbolism, reflecting certain symbols of Russian identity. The trains that are frequently shown during the movie, both during the chronological narrative discourse and the enactment flashbacks of Ignat have Soviet symbols as seen in Figure 8. Similarly a brown bear 4 appears during the film in a couple of scenes (Figure 7).
4 The bear holds an important position in Russian culture holds. The bear is frequently a character in many Russian fairytales, folk myths, and songs. During the WWII and onwards Russia itself is sometimes called a “bear” much like China sometimes is referred to as the “dragon” in metaphoric way in various historical, fictional literature works, popular culture. 34
Figure 7. Figure 8.
Most probably the bears in film are included for their symbolic value. It can be understood both as an attribute of Siberia, Russia and of course it can be used stylistically to strengthen the overall image of wilderness atmosphere represented in the film. The bears contribute little to the plot or to the narrative discourse of the story, however there is a scene in the film, when the train with escapees runs over and kills one brown bear. The operator then takes the bear meat and divides it to the people of the camp, deciding not to leave the camp and Siberia. It can be speculated that this scene symbolically means that the “bear will not let anyone escape the wilderness” or that the Siberia itself will not let people escape. But this scene of people trying to escape and the redundancy effect concerning the appearance of the bear in various scenes might be used to stylistically stress the wild environment of Siberia. The bear itself might be a metaphorical figure or a spirit of Siberia, Russian North. Yet the figure of a bear is free for interpretations and there is little evidence in the film to support any of them. The reoccurring images of trains also support the theme of competing in the entire film. Ignat competes with his illness, the other train drivers. During these races as flashbacks the Soviet symbol, the red star frequently appears. In one of his flashbacks, as seen in Figure 8, early in the story, while he succumbs after punching Butkus, the trains in his mind are competing, bearing opposing attributes – the swastika of the Nazi and the red star of the Soviets. The Soviet train has a name of Yosif Stalin written in Slavic letters on him, and is likely to win the race in the mind of Ignat. The quality of the symbols in Figure 8 is different – the swastika is blurry, while the name of Yosif Stalin and the red star are clearly seen, highlighting their visibility, superiority, and prominence of Soviet symbols.
35
National identity and ethnicity in The Edge
Clearly national identity in The Edge is represented in many ways, mostly through the actions and the representation of the main character, but also with the help of reoccurring national symbols and contrasting non-Russians with the Russian hero. Ignat, the main character is represented as a human being – a contradictory main character, a post-war hero struggling for his beliefs and coping with his past, injuries, though never giving up. Notably, the notion of “being a war hero“ allows him to verbally and physically assault people who are hostile or do not correspond to his beliefs (which are patriotic, nationalistic), without having to pay consequences. Also it provides him with a special status in the labour camp, making him seem more hard-working and morally correct than anyone else in the camp. It may be speculated that insertion of such character can be seen as a vessel to transmit negative messages in the film, a stylistic device to project contrasting representations of Russians and non-Russians, although in a realistic way. A theme of cooperation and non-cooperation with Ignat reveals the representational aspects of the foreigners and ethnicities seen in film. The German girl eventually grows fond of Ignat becomes his partner and wife in the future, while the first negative, non-cooperative character introduced, the Lithuanian Butkus always remains a highly unpleasant individual, a person opposing the hard-working nature of Ignat, despising him and the Soviets in relation to the WWII. Finally, one should mention the highly “polished” picture of the Siberian labour camps and the manipulation of the history. The portrayal of the people working and residing in The Edge associates them with negative features, qualities that manifest in them and thus draws attention away from the factual violent deportations related with ethnic cleansings done in the past by the Soviet government.
4.2. Analysis of Мы из будущего – We are from the future (2008)
We are from the future (2008) is a film directed by Andrey Malyukov. Even though this film has not earned any prestigious international or domestic cinematography awards, it received an award for a “best fight“ on youth-oriented “Russian MTV movie awards” (2009) its budget was about five million US dollars, and in Russian cinemas it was seen by at least 1,25 million people and earned about 8,3 millions US dollars (kinopoisk.ru). As regards genre categorisations, it qualifies for fantasy, thriller, adventure, military, and historical film genres (ibid.). The majority of the narrated events are centred on four characters who travel from the
36 modern day Russia to the past, into the year 1942 with the help of a magical portal in a lake. Disrespectful towards the heroic nature and past of the fall Soviet soldiers during the WWII they make their living as relic hunters, who sell the treasures that they find on a black market. Through the opportunity of facing the seemingly real horrors of the WWII, they learn about sacrifice, teamwork and patriotism while fighting in the midst of Soviet soldiers. Finally, after returning to the modern time, they see their society in a different light. The narrative implies a boost of patriotism and the prevalence of skinheads in Russia, which are opposite to the national heroic identity of people who have fallen during the WWII while fighting the Nazi soldiers. In this analysis I will not focus on a detailed analysis of specific selected scenes focused on representation of national identity through national heroes and national symbols that occur in this film. Instead, I will offer a brief analysis of the ideas (themes and motifs) that the film “teaches” the audience, and will discuss the similar film tradition and its legacy in greater detail in a subsequent section. The analysis will be done not trough the detailed analysis of the specific scenes but by examination of themes, imagery in the film trough a few selected key scenes.
Becoming patriots
We are from the future (2008) opens with dynamic images of a contemporary city life in Saint-Petersburg in relation with overall dynamism – boats, wide bridges and city lights – everything moves in an unnaturally artificially increased speed. From the narrative discourse we learn of the characters and their backgrounds – four young men are relic hunters and sellers on the black market. The story starts with a scene, seen in Figure 9 where Borman the charismatic leader of the gang goes straight through the crowd of military cadets, pushing all of them aside and going straight to a table. This is a very brief scene, and camera angle is heightened to make a shot of action clearly seen. As story advances, we immediately see that Borman is closing a deal with a customer, during which he sells a few Soviet medals, military awards seen in Figure 10. These prestigious awards are zoomed-in so that the spectator may see them clearly. Soviet attributes can be seen on them – a red star, a red flag, a head of Lenin. Simultaneously a conversation between three other men is taking a place in a trendy yellow jeep, while they are waiting for their leader to return. Here we learn of their identities – a neo-Nazi muscular, shaved headed Cherep (meaning “Skull” in Russian language), a rapper called Spirt, and a geeky gamer called Chukchia.
37
Figure 9. Figure 10.
Figure 11. Figure 12.
A cue for hypothesizing about the nature of the film and the main character is revealed from the first narrative scene shown in Figure 9. The nature of the business – selling of awards at the black market reveals the main features of the characters at the beginning – their disrespect of the past, military forces and the symbols of Soviet and, thus, in a sense the Russian Great Patriotic war (WWII) and most importantly the Russian national identity itself. During the first conversation of our characters while the deal is being made by Borman, we learn that they are interested in this relic hunting business only because of the money – it pays well. In Figure 10 and Figure 11 the subsequent part of the narrative is seen. The young men are driving trough the city having fun and often images from a video game, as seen in Figure 12, are incorporated into the rapidly changing shots. In this military game that Chukchia is playing, various explosions, tanks and other military resources are shown, as this game involves a first- person shooter and is centered around the military theme. This scene clearly shows that these young people do not take the WWII seriously. This part of the film and the scenery are also accompanied by a popular Russian rock music and frequently flashing pictures of girls and the city scenery. As the narrative discourse unfolds the characters arrive to a digging site, where some of the events of the WWII have taken place. During their stay here, prior to the “time travel” experience, an interesting confrontation takes place between Cherep and Spirt, as seen in Figure 13 and Figure 14.
38
Figure 13. Figure 14.
Important conversation takes place between them. An excerpt of it can be read in Example 4 where the characters start talking about why have they have come here, and about their different views on WWII and skinheads. Notably during this conversation. the Nazi/Skinhead eagle symbol is seen frequently, as seen in Figure 13. In this shot it occupies a centre of the frame, signifying its visibility. Furthermore, during the spoken lines of Cherep, the camera position maintains a close-up, mid chest view of Cherep, much reminding the plan américain 5 camera position, a classical narrative attribute. Emotional analysis reveals intensity, as mise-en-scene of a lonesome forest road is adequate for a confrontation scene, while the aggression of a soldier and his arguable ideology portrays the mise en jeu of this character supported by mise en geste seen in Figure 14.
Example 4. Spirt: So you guys read Mein Kampf in Chorus ? [ ironically ] Cherep: By the way it is a good book. Spirt: So you guys pray for the Hitler? [ ironically ] Cherep: If I were at the place of Stalin, I would cooperate with him to push America to its knees.
As their conversation continues it reaches a point of a conflict which results in Cherep holding Spirt, sitting on him on a dominant position. Cherep takes out his pocket knife and cuts the hair from Spirt’s head. With the zoomed in face of Spirt being in pain the scene ends. The mentioning of “America” by Cherep is important. However, America is mentioned in Mein Kampf 6 but it was an ally of the Soviet Union during the WWII. The words of
5 Plan américain refers to a medium long “knee” shot, which allows a number of characters to be seen in the screen, to highlight their profiles, at certain moments – for example dialogues (Bordwell, 1985). Notably it is also an attribute of a classical/Hollywood narrative. 6 Mein Kampf is a literary work created by Adolf Hitler, explaining his foreign expansion agenda during his reign. In his book Hitler sees Germany and America as the two most powerful forces (superpowers) opposite in governing 39
Cherep thus make little sense as Hitler actually planned to conquer Russia, not to cooperate with it as it is indicated in Mein Kampf, meaning that Cherep actually has little knowledge of history, or sense of the Russia/Soviet past. Therefore he is actually mocked in the dialogue where Spirt openly makes fun of him. It is impossible not to notice how the four main characters change after they travel through a time portal to the WWII and assume the identities of fallen soldiers, fight at the battlefield and finally come back. The change is clearly visible in the last shots of the film after the characters travel back home into the modern times.
Figure 15. Figure 16.
The last of the moments of the film can be seen in Figure 15 and Figure 16. Again in classical narrative manner plan americain angle is used to illustrate the invisible confrontation of the characters that have faced the horrors of WWII and look negatively at the young people, skinheads who are presumably drinking alcohol in the streets, favoring the Nazism as their ideology, and at the same time being associated with Germans, thus being manifestation of a “wrong” Russian national identity. The film ends with no narrative voiceover, much like a silent movie. The spectators are offered a view that emphasises the negativity of neo-Nazism as a potential vessel for national identity. Thus the narrative provides the audience with a nearly subliminal message criticizing Nazism and its followers, who constitute the opposition to the efforts and loses endured by Soviets during WWII in pursue for victory. Basically, at the end film it is suggested that modern Russian national identity is everything that neo-Nazism (associated with the actions of Germans during WWII) is not, in this case – that is, Russian national identity should draw on WWII patriotism (based on actions of Soviet soldiers during the WWII).
principles, ideology that would eventually clash (Hillgruber, 1974). Additionally his plans also included the conquest of European Russia (ibid.). 40
National identity and ethnicity and film legacy in We are from the future
We are from the future (2008) was a popular film (keeping in mind the amount of money it earned and the number of people have seen it in cinemas) addressing a lot of problems of the Russian society introduced – lack of patriotism among young people, the undermining of the significance of WWII in Russian history and the emergence of neo-Nazism, as a “wrong” type of nationalism or national identity. There is no surprise, that the “frame” of this successful film, consisting of a simple Hollywood classic narrative type (introduction of characters who face obstacles, and after the events as obstacles, endured change in their persona, simultaneously introducing complementary love story, while following the primary one) and plan américain camera positions were replicated more than once. This is not a unique film in its portrayal of national identity; for example, a sequel, We are from the future 2 (2010) and another recent film The fog (2010) are nearly identical with We are from the future (2008) in their story, again introducing the time travel of young people to WWII, Soviets fighting Nazis, and the theme of “becoming of national patriots” in the films. It may be speculated that the film producers, after noticing the popularity of We are from the future (2008) decided to repeat its success by making similar films and sequels. Therefore, the time travel narrative combined with the WWII setting can be an interesting combination appealing to both the fans of historical films and the youth favouring science fiction and fantasy films, while clearly also contributing to the positive representation of the WWII in relation to Soviet heroism, as a contributor to the contemporary national identity in Russia. Films can be seen as one of the most popular cultural products, directly related with the entertainment industry. Combining different genres and themes in order to appeal to younger Russian generations which nowadays are “bombarded“ with popular culture, seems to be a successful attempt of the film producers in Russia to build a contemporary Russian national identity based on WWII. However, as we may assume wars should not be the only aspect of culture that national identity is based on, yet possibly they offer more possibilities to create interesting plot lines, rather than, for example, traditional fairy tales or folk songs that may not be as appealing to the Russian (young) people influenced by the global mass culture.
41
4.3. Analysis of 9 рота – 9th company (2005)
The 9th company is a film released in 2005, directed by Fyodor Bondarchuk. It is a historical war film seemingly based on true events. In the year 2006 it won an award for the best actor role at Cinemanilla International Film Festival. It was also nominated for several categories and won a Nika award for the best film. It was screened internationally at Cannes film festival and its availability abroad is visible through release of a DVD in a few continents and many countries. Notably its budget was about 9,5 million US dollars, about 6 million people have seen it in Russian cinemas, it earned roughly about 25 million US dollars in Russian cinemas (kinopoisk.ru). It is considered to fall under the categorization of thriller, drama, military and historical films (ibid.). It can be claimed, that the war in Afghanistan 7, which was initiated as a form of political expansion initiated by the Soviets and ended in their retreat did not “sovietise” the Afghanistan. Rather, the Soviets took this type of war along with same missiles and rockets to Tajikistan, Georgia, Moldova and other parts of the former USSR (Galeotti, 1995, p. 1). The Afghanistan war has a special place in Russian collective memory, as thousands of people of various nationalities died in futility there. Notably, the ethnic composition of the soldiers who took part in the Afghanistan War, according to the numbers reveals that Russians, Ukrainians and Byelorussians were the bulk force behind the enemy lines, and composed the elite force, followed by Central Asian nationalities, while other nationalities constituted a minor part of the composition (Galeotti, 1995, p. 28). The events of the film take place in the years 1988 and 1989 during the last years of the USSR existence. Frequently the timeline and scenes are accompanied by indications of days that have passed since the recruitment of the main characters. The Soviet troops are slowly backing away from Afghanistan. After months of hard training in the mountainous region the main characters, seven young Siberians, recruits for a professional army are faced with an order of defending a strategic point in the mountains until the support arrives. An ambush happens and the sole survivor Lyutyy is left after this massacre, standing his ground and victorious, yet morally broken. It is revealed subsequently that the battle was irrelevant and the military forces leaving Afghanistan suggest the fall of the Soviet Union and the futility of the battle.
7 Afghanistan war, referred to as the “bleeding wound“ in 1986 by Gorbachev, started with the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, lasting from 1979 to 1989 and was one of the most important chapters in the history of the Cold War (Halliday, 1999). The war was between Mujaheddin (Afghani freedom fighters supported by the US and the Soviets and their allies – Afghani military on the other side (Reuveny & Prakash, 1999). It lowered the image of the Red Army, contributed to the fall of the Soviet Union, formed a big number of Afgantsi – Afghan war veterans in Russia and former USSR (Ibid.). 42
In this film characters, represented as becoming professional soldiers will be analysed in greater detail. Also the role and image of war veterans will be taken into account. The plot that deals with the making of heroes and the array of national symbols that are encountered in the film contributes to the overall the image of the army, veterans and the war itself. Another proportion of analytical attention will be forwarded towards the representation of the enemy – in this case ethnic “others”, in the form of discussing the representation of Islam and Afghans in the film.
The making of heroes
In this film examples of the change of the persona of characters can be analysed. Similarities can be found here with the previously analyzed The edge and We are from the future as in these films characters also change their nature. Here young men, knowing little of war and fighting become professional soldiers and in a sense national heroes of the Afghan war. The aspects related with this change deserve a broader analysis. The 9th company begins with introductory scenes of the seven main characters of the story. The setting initially takes place in Siberia, where seven young Russian men begin preparations for leaving Siberia in order to fulfil their duty. These men, representing different personalities and interests, decide to join the professional army. One of the most interesting ones is Lyutyy, a character of arguable morality. In a scene at the beginning of the film taking place at the recruitment office Lyutyy punches the soldier who is shaved his head carelessly and mockingly offered to buy his suit, implying the fact that Lyutty will not require it at war, while the soldier will need it to impress the girls in the future. Lyutyy smiles to the man showing his metal tooth, waits till he finishes shaving and then reacts rapidly to the insult.
Figure 17. Figure 18.
In Figure 17 Lyutyy is seen brutally shaving the soldier who insulted him while previously carelessly shaving his head. Prior to the action displayed in Figure 17 he has punched him in the face. The man is kneeling as Lyutyy is above him holding him from behind and painfully
43 tearing locks of his hair with a shaving machine. In Figure 18 Lyutyy is seen leaving the room, he touches his newly shaved head, and in the facial display we can recognize the qualities of aggression and strength. The eyes of Lyutyy are fixated on the camera, and we as the audience are intimidated by his gaze, which in unusual: conventionally characters do not look straight to the camera and seemingly go into the audience confronting it, filling the screen with presence. It is suggested in the film that Lyutyy is a young man with a complex past, as he is of young age, but yet has a metal tooth, an aggressive voice and is able to struck fear into the other soldiers in the room who want to help their fellow only because of his aggression, tone of voice and wielding of a shaving machine, which reminds of the skills of knife wielding. Emotional spectre is high in the scene discussed, as in relation to representation of Lyutyy, mise-en-scene of a shaving room, and the physical strong actions of punching and shaving the head of a soldier constitute the mise en jeu of this contrasting character. In sum, a criminal or dark past of this character is implied. A positive side of this character is revealed very soon in one of the subsequent scenes, when all seven future soldiers meet and have simple conversations and laugh in the barracks after being shaved. Notably, it is Lyutyy who encourages the others to be polite to Vorobey, a young, shy man who joins the group last. It is Lyutyy who assumes the position of leader in a gang and is the first one to shake hands with him, while introducing him to the others: Dzhokonda an artist, Chugun a newly wed man of an instable temperament, also Ryaba who chooses military career instead of going to jail and, finally, Seryy and Stas who receive little representational space in the film. The following scene is already in Uzbekistan, near the boarder of Afghanistan. The group of Russians mentioned meet a Chechen, a young man who is given a nickname of Pinochet by Lyutyy. The gang is sitting on the ground in waiting for the supervision. Sergeant Dygala arrives. His first appearance can be seen in Figure 19 and Figure 20. In this scene, the camera switches between the two shots a few times while the conversation in Example 5 takes place. During this conversation we learn the ethnicities of the young men.
Figure 19. Figure 20.
44
Example 5. Chugun: Isn’t that ours? [ points with a finger seemingly into the camera ] Ryaba: What a face [ in ironic tone showing disgust, in Russian he uses a word “rozha” instead of face, which means ugly face in street language ] Dygala: Where are you clowns from? Ryaba: From Siberia sir officer. Dygala: My name is drill sergeant Dygala. Ryaba: What? Dygala: Someone has hearing problems? [suddenly shifts into an aggressive and loud voice ] Get up, now run! Stand up! In line, fast! Put on the head equipment while in line! [ more aggressively and leaning head forward to the standing men ] In line! I hope that there are no blind ones here! This hill is ours! Beyond here lies Afghan and for those of you not to die there like dogs from first day I will fuck you constantly for 3 months not taking “it” out 24 hours round starting from this minute. Have questions? No questions! Turn and follow me to the quarters, run when I command! Run! Elbows bent! Go! [ sits into his car and drives away, while young men hurry to follow him ]
During the professional army training period of three months the young soldiers indeed learn about military tactics, and due to the harsh training and supervision provided by Dygala they rapidly advance in their military training. The words of Dygala in Example 5. followed by explicit language in communicative terms predict the future of the men in the training camp – they will be authoritatively, harshly and violently trained by Dygala. During this period of training they are frequently referred to as future “desantniki”, and the elite human force within the Soviet military. At this flow of events Lyutyy slowly reveals elements of his past to his fellow soldiers, as the bond between them grows strong. Hunger in childhood, criminal gangs and women of low morale have accompanied his young life. In general this is the period when gaps about the background of the characters are filled as they themselves are on their way towards change. During the period of training combat skills of soldiers and their character and persona changes – they become aggressive, able to stand for themselves and for those close to them, fellow soldiers to be specific. They learn teamwork as well. Dzhokonda, the artist becomes a master sniper, Vorobey, the shy one learns to protect himself in physical combat, while Lyutyy clearly becomes the leader of the team. As the story advances the narrative also reveals more about the drill sergeant Dygala who is an interesting character. He is experienced, yet “scared” by war emotionally and visually, thus suffering from post-war stress. It is he who “makes” the bunch of boys into men, hardened by military training. The strong representation of him in the scene discussed in Example 5 and as 45 shown in Figure 19 and Figure 20 contributes to the primal image of him as a strong, authoritative soldier. However, as the narrative proceeds, certain gaps of the information concerning this character are filled during the times of his sincerity as he finally opens up to his trainees – he is revealed in the narrative discourse as a traumatised war veteran, who wishes to go to war but is always rejected due to his health. Later the narrative discourse tells that even though he seems to be strong, he does not believe in a brighter future that would involve him leaving the military for good and finding a wife. The scar on his face thus symbolises him being wounded not only outside but also inside, yet not completely broken.
Figure 21. Figure 22.
In Figure 21 Dygala is seen “raging like a bull” on his soldiers, randomly punching some of them and shouting nonsense. He wears a uniform that has many military awards. After this scene ends and the young men learn that Dygala is not allowed to join them in war, they do not feel anger but compassion towards him. Figure 22 illustrates the subsequent scene, where Dygala is “framed” at the centre of the shot, portrayed crying while sitting among red coloured flowers which is the last scene where Dygala is seen. The flowers here symbolically represent his rage combined with the overall contrasting representation of him being violent at one moment and a suffering character in the next moment. In many ways this scene illustrates the complete, real persona of a Dygala, who acts tough, but is “broken” inside, though willing to fight further. He is a national hero, although too damaged to be able to go back to war. Apart from Lyutyy, the lives of the most of the characters who are members of the 9 th company result in death. Two battles are being fought, both depicting the losses for both sides. Lyutyy, as seen in Figure 24, becomes the sole survivor of the ambush of Afghani soldiers as represented in Figure 23.
46
Figure 23. Figure 24.
Figure 23 shows the frequent representation of enemy forces in the film. Long range shots are used frequently, which visually contribute to the number of objects, as soldiers portrayed, however it also creates an effect of “being outnumbered” in the case of the Russian characters. The enemy also seems distant – the Afghans are not represented as individuals (unlike the young Russian soldiers) but as a group. Thus it is easier to sympatise with the Russians and distance oneself from the Afghans. During the battles, the enemies frequently appear seemingly out of nowhere, contributing to the “ambush” (surprise) effect that is present in the entire film. Notably this comes in contrast with the representation of the main characters and Soviet soldiers who are frequently seen from a medium or close angle. At the end of the film we learn that Lyutyy is the sole survivor if his company. Narrative reveals a part of the monologue spoken by Lyutyy as he is leaving Afghanistan. He tells: “We were leaving Afghanistan, 9 th company, we won our war, we did not know a lot back then, we did not know that the country we were fighting for will disappear and it will become unfashionable to wear the military awards of non-existing country <…>”. These words clearly demonstrate the national identity aspects, and indicate how military awards, as well as the country (USSR) and the Afghanistan war all become insignificant. If one compares Figures 24 and 18, there is a great difference in the representation of the same character. In Figure 24 Lyutyy is seen more of a mature man, a veteran with hardened, yet sad eyes, which is in contrast with the first time when he is portrayed as a criminal type of a man. While Lyutyy’s narrative voiceover continues at the end of the film, shots are being changed, either portraying the retreating military machinery seen in a long shots or Lyutyy seen in a mid-range, from a slightly low angle perspective similar to that of Figure 24. Lyutyy is clearly seen as not the man that he has been earlier. He is now a courageous, experienced man, saddened by the loss of his comrades. He is a hero, a veteran, wearing many prestigious military awards. His monologue clearly reveals his patriotic and heroic representation. Furthermore, he gives credit not only to himself but also to the solders that have died in the battlefield. The
47 monologue gives a little more information implying the futility of war and the dim future of the veterans as the film ends.
Representation of a mythic Soviet soldier
Figure 25. Figure 26.
In one of the scenes taking place in Afghanistan the party of soldiers travels to the base. Dzokonda is sitting in a military vehicle with other fellow officers, drawing something in his notebook but he is interrupted by Khokhol, his superior and urged to look around, which implies that they are in a dangerous environment. In a piece of dialogue in Example 5, Dzokonda explains that he was sketching an image of a muscular soldier with black sunglasses as seen in Figures 25 and 26.
Example 5. Dzokonda : Monumental man [ pause ] a bronze statue of him should be made. [ shot similar to Figure 9 is shown ] Soldier : Kograman [ pause ] Kograman, dushmani nicknamed him [ pause ] in translation – evil giant. Only one like that in our company and entire Afghanistan. Three times he has been nominated for a war hero, after he gets back home smashes face of someone [ pause ] but you cannot turn him to the tribunal, so he lost his star again.
This “Evil giant” is not a main character of the film. He is a silent type, a veteran. He is introduced as a legend, in a form of a “gossip”, building a semi-mythical background. The case of the “Evil giant” can be seen as an example of creation of a myth, or legend that makes ordinary people look more prominent, more glorious than they really are, and myths, as discussed above, constitute a part of a national identity. Shots similar to one in Figure 25 imitating the eyesight of Dzhokonda as camera angle is on the eye level, are shown in good detail while the conversation in
48
Example 5 takes place. A tattoo can be seen on the right arm of the fighter, a word “AFGHANISTAN” is spelled there. Even though he is a minor character, he is a “doer” rather than “speaker”, meaning that he has very few spoken lines in the film. However, when he is represented as in Figure 26 he is seen as usual not wearing any armor, wearing sunglasses, portrayed in a low angle perspective, which increases his size when in action. The “Evil giant” is a respectable man, a leader, a true fighter. He makes a borderline between the representation of new recruits and veterans, the latter nearly a surreal force behind the Soviet army. There is a visual similarity when comparing the “Evil giant” and image of Lyutyy when he becomes a hero. Clearly both men wear moustache, and their faces are marked by a cue of “seriousness”. In a sense the “Evil giant” represents an ideal veteran, while the last scenes of the film depict Lyutyy as being similar to him. Clearly these two characters are the national heroes – one shrouded in mystery, the other the newly formed one.
National symbols
Figure 27. Figure 28.
As discussed in the theoretical section on national identity, flags and military symbols constitute a significant part of the national identity in its representational, visual form. In 9th company , flags appear in several instances, always bearing the Soviet symbols. In all of the scenes when the flags are seen fluttering in the wind (Figures 27 and 28), they are accompanied with either distant or moving images of war machinery. For example, the scenes following Figure 28 portray dozens of tanks, helicopters, and soldiers in great detail. In this case flags appear only in specific moments to justify unfolding moments of depicting military resources. A concept of third meaning 8 can be applied to the subtopic being discussed now as not only flags appear during the exhibition of military forces, but they are brightly red in colour. Red colour prevails and is intensified in the narrative discourse as it unfolds. When taking a closer look
8 Bordwell (1985, p. ??) mentions of a third meaning that sometimes may be decoded/interpreted by the viewers of film, when revealing partially narrative, partially stylistic aspects of films. As we presume this is a highly interpretative concept. 49 at all of the shots provided and judging the colour spectre of the film, it can be seen that film starts with a lesser proportion of the red colour, while as the narrative advances the red colour occurs everywhere – in the background, symbols, the faces of people. This can be complementary to the overall perception of the emotional meanings encoded in the film, as the red flags and the blood of Soviet soldiers also appear in the scenes more frequently, increasing the unfolding intensity of the film. It is true that this is clearly stylistically connected with the representation of national identity through the use of the Soviet flags and red Soviet blood shed while defending one’s nation. Importantly, throughout the film the camera frequently gives a good angle for the spectator to see the Soviet symbols nearly everywhere – on flags and military equipment, doors, walls, coins, bags, belts, military awards and other objects. The spectator is frequently “bombarded” by the richness of the Soviet symbols surrounding the characters. An additional observation can be made about representation of military awards through the fixation of camera during highly emotional moments in the film, as in Figures 21, 22, and 24. In emotional scenes, it frequently seems that the people wearing the awards become the central part of the frame, which increases the emphasis on the military awards.
Representation of ethnic minorities and Islam
In 9th company a significant proportion of the story is given to the representation of Islam and the ethnicities related with it, including the Afghani people. The first Muslim character introduced in the story is Pinochet, a Chechen that joins seven young Russians early in their training supervised by Dygala. No significant negativity associated with him can be found in the film, instead, he bonds with the seven Russians quite well. In the film special attention is given to the study of Islam and the Afghanistan with minorities residing there in a form of a lecture during the three-month training period. Islam as a religion is represented as powerful one whose followers sometimes blindly go into the battle, sacrificing their lives to get into “heaven”. Islam, as described by the lecturer is not only another religion, it is another world. Thus Islam, and the customs of the locals, which allow “killing of the unfaithful” (meaning Christians in this case) outside of their houses present it as a dangerous religion. No detailed information in the film is actually given concerning “why” Islam is another world. Yet the lecturer also tells that Afghani people are a whole variety of different ethnicities scattered through the country, which is in contrast with the military training and the resources that Soviet have – the latter are controlled, fight under one “flag” and are organized. Often the representation of national identity is based on contrasts: the enemy is all that
50
“we” (here, the Soviets) are not. If the enemy is passionate and unthinking, this often implies that “we” are rational and logical.
National identity and ethnicity in 9th company
Clearly, in this film the narrative discourse focuses on the heroic representation of Soviet soldiers rather than putting emphasis on ethnic minorities. Ethnic minorities that are on the Soviet side (Afghani allies and a person of Asian nationality, Soviet soldier) are a few times portrayed as being inferior, lazy and cowardly when compared to ethnic Russians, however that does not result in any serious conflicts. Superiority of Soviets, specifically Russians is stressed, naturally displaying other ethnicities weaker or less intelligent than ethnic Russians. The representation of the war-hardened veterans, professional soldiers as patriotic, national heroes illustrates this contrast. Notably, the film demonstrates a few types of heroes possible – either it is a “criminal” that eventually becomes a hero (Lyutyy) or an injured, yet not broken veteran (Dygala) or even a semi-mythical “evil giant” that all have multidimensional moral traits, and all of which demonstrate patriotism, the strength and values of Soviet soldiers. Considering all this, an insertion of a minor character Pinochet, who is Chechen 9, seems an interesting aspect of the film. Even though the enemy in the films are Afghani people, the insertion of a Chechen, who is also Muslim, makes him a “good” Soviet soldier, fighting on a “right“ side, despite him being a Muslim, and non-Russian. Simultaneously, 9th company was produced in 2005, at the time of second war between the Russians and the Chechen freedom fighters. Several researchers stress the image of Islam in Russian Federation, becoming synonymous with the “international”, “Islamic” terrorism starting in the years 1999-2000 in Russia (Radu, 2004; O’Loughlin, O’Tuathail and Kolossov, 2004). Furthermore, in the process of election of 2000 Vladimir Putin has stressed “Russian national-patriot“ feelings of the entire nation through addressing Chechens as enemies of the state (O’Loughlin, O’Tuathail and Kolossov, 2004, p. 282). Following this, the insertion of a submissive and supportive character, Pinochet, seems to be the
9 Chechen people, Chechens constitute the largest ethnic group in North Caucasus and its history dates about 6000 years back. They have retained their language, customs, and traditions even though all Russian governments since the 16 th century, including Tsars, Soviet and Post-Soviet rulers, have used mass-deportation of Chechens and repopulation of Chechnya with Slavic ethnicities to cleanse the area of its native inhabitants or assimilate them (Nichols, 1995). Islam that was introduced in the 17 th century remains an important aspect of Chechens cultural and ethnic identity (ibid.). In Russian history, Chechens have a negative image related with the First (1994-1996) and Second (1999-2009) Chechen wars. During the Second Chechen War Russian military was fighting Chechen freedom fighters, which was marked by losses from both sides. However, the Russians restored Russian Federal control over Chechnya – autonomous republic within Russian Federation. Ever since the wars, Chechen rebels or freedom fighters in other words, have always been represented as “bandits’, and “terrorists“ within Russian media (O’Loughlin, O’Tuathail and Kolossov, 2004, p. 282).
51 wise decision of the film producers not to portray and ignite the violence related with the war that was taking place in the real life, not only in the screens of Russian cinemas. Secondly, the overall analogy might still arise in the minds of viewers of the film between the Afghanistan war and the Second Chechen war, which was taking place at the time when the film was released inside Russian autonomous republic of Chechnya. Notably, frequently in political discourse analogies between the Chechen war and the Afghanistan war were provided (O’Loughlin, O’Tuathail and Kolossov, 2004, p. 287). Bearing this in mind, the production of a film like 9th company , portraying brutal realities of the Afghanistan war, had in general little to do with the “safe” representation of the Caucasus, Islam, and the ethnicities related at the time of war in Chechnya.
4.4. Analysis of Олимпиус Инферно – Olympus Inferno (2009)
Olympus Inferno , directed by Igor Voloshin, is a film that depicts the events taking place in 2008 during the first day of Russian-Georgian 10 war. Unlike the previous films discussed, that received international attention and awards or were seen in cinemas or film festivals abroad, this film was clearly marketed for national audience and was shown to the Russian audience on the “Pervij Kanal“ (First Russian National Channel) in March 2009 (kinopoisk.ru). Later it was released on DVD as well. As can be seen, the film was broadcasted less than a year after the actual war in Georgia broke down. According to Kinopoisk.ru, Olympus Inferno falls under the genres of thriller and drama films, but also portrays very recent historical events, which is the basis of this film. The plot of the film is simple. A young American entomologist Michael and his Russian female companion, journalist Zhenia come to South Ossetia to film a scientific documentary about the rare species of butterflies residing in that specific region. However, their actions are interrupted due to the start of military actions by Georgia against its ethnic autonomous republic of South Ossetia. First captured, then released by the Georgian military they eventually become survivors in the battlefields. As the film advances the main attention becomes focused on a computer hard drive that the two young people are carrying with them. The hard drive includes a
10 Russian-Georgian war – a war in Georgia, starting in 2008.08.08 involving 4 parties – Georgians, Russians, Ossetians and Abhkazi. Sestanovich (2008) sees it as Russia’s action/initiative to restore its influence in post-Soviet states, Georgia specifically, and to put a stop on Georgia’s aim to join NATO. Notably, after the collapse of the USSR, Abkhazia and South Ossetia were administrative territories created by Soviets, and even after Georgian independence they were marked by existence of violent ethnic separatist movements seeking independence or re-attachment to Russian territory (Sestanovich, 2008, p. 921). Notably in the Olympus Inferno only the events supposedly happening the first day of war are revealed, not introducing the military actions of Russian military. Summarising, Russia wanted to increase its political influence in Georgia by initiating, provoking military actions (Sestanovich, 2008; Mullins, 2011). 52 documented proof of Georgian aggression. In the infernal battlefield, full of poverty, dead bodies, fire and destroyed houses Michael and Zhenia slowly struggle their way towards the Russian military peace-keeping forces in the hope of escape. During this, the Georgians learn of the existence of the tape and seek to destroy it and again capture the main characters. In this “infernal” place Michael and Zhenia meet Ossetian refugees who tell them about the horrors of war and help them to escape. With the help of Ossetians they manage to reach the Russian military, as one of the Ossetians kills Vagho, a malevolent Georgian officer trying to stop them by all means. However, even though the two young people and the precious hard drive reach safety, it is not destined for the taped truth about the war to be seen in the US due to the country’s corruption and the information wars, which are implied throughout the entire film. This film has a clear division of “good” and “bad” characters. Russians, along with their military are frequently referred to as the peace-keeping force and Ossetians are seen as the victims of the military actions. Americans represent the supporters of Georgians, who in this case are represented in most negative terms. The ethnic representations encoded and national identity elements found in Olympus Inferno can be analysed from an array of angles, including the concepts of national and ethnic identity conflict and emotionality. Therefore the following sections deal with the representations of selected ethnicities, which is the main issue to be analysed. Notably, the reframing and manipulation of documented events, including war crimes will be taken into account where relevant.
Representation of Georgians
As mentioned above, the Georgians in this film are represented as clear aggressors 11 and manipulators of war. The only brutality consisting of war crimes12 is coming from their side,
11 Aggressors in war. By early August in 2008, Russia and Georgia were already preparing for the upcoming war (Mullins, 2011). Following the tension between Georgian police and South Ossetian irregulars, Russia increased the size of its troops near the Georgian boarder, and both sides exchanged fire. After a number of military actions Georgian army had to withdraw deeper into the country, while Russians along with Ossetian and Abkhazian irregulars contributed to the expansion and attack on Georgia, which lasted until the 13 th of August (ibid.). The Russian forces withdrew from Georgian territory, but Ossetia and Abkhazia were still occupied by Russian forces in May 2011 (ibid.). Therefore, it is complex to state which side was the actual aggressor in this war. However, the political tension between the countries stimulated military actions of both. Unlike in Olympus Inferno , in real-world sources the Russians are often seen as aggressors of this war (Sestanovich, 2008; Mullins, 2011). 12 War crimes – during the war discussed, war crimes were coming from all 4 parties involved. 199 war crimes were documented in terms of Violation of Geneva convention (Mullins, 2011). Raping, destruction of private and cultural property, killing of civilians and similar crimes when analysed and indicate, that Georgians have 21 violations, Russians 53 which is in sharp contrast with the documented facts in the real war between Russia and Georgia. As the narrative advances spectators learn that Georgians have tricked Americans into believing that it is the Russians who have started the war. Considering the possible primacy effect, the first unnamed Georgian character introduced in the film is a sneaky smuggler that offers to give a ride to our characters as they arrive to the Ossetian boarder. Later in the narrative, in a dialogue between main characters and the Ossetian driver who takes Michael and Zhenia to the place where the butterfly called Olympus Inferno resides, the Georgian smuggler is being referred to as the one who “would sell his own mother“ for a right price. The shots below show Vagho, a high-ranking Georgian officer always wearing the Georgian uniform, the main antagonist in the film who is on a bloody pursuit after the main characters. Through his interactions with various characters (Georgian soldiers, Americans, Russians) a significant amount of representational information is provided in the film.
Figure 29. Figure 30.
The first substantial negativity in the representation of Georgians is seen when Zhenia and Michael are brutally captured by the Georgian military early in the film because of coincidentally being in a way of Georgian military actions. The brutality of the events is marked by the actions of Georgians, who push Zhenia onto the ground and she fells in pain. Vagho is also seen as a collaborator to the corrupted American media when talking with an American war journalist, who reveals him that Zhenia and Michael have acquired filmed evidence of Georgians starting the war. The American journalist suggests that if this hard drive reaches media, no one will come out “clean“ when this media and military collaboration depicting Georgian initiative for starting the war is made public. Thus Vagho clearly becomes a central antagonistic force in the film, fuelled by the aim to acquire and destroy the evidence or Georgian military aggression.
– 82, Ossetians – 94, Abkhazian – 2 of total of 199 violations (Mullins, 2011, p. 924). Notably, if to see the results in the form of allies we have 21 of Georgian violations versus 178 violations of combined Russian, Ossetian, Abkhazian forces. 54
It is important to note that in both Figures 29 and 30 Vagho acts violently, is willing to takes lives of the innocent, as in both examples he is willing to kill civilians, which is one of the biggest war crimes. In each scene, the opponents that he chooses characterise Vagho – either it is a weak old Ossetian man, or a young Russian girl, incapable of resisting, which reveals his treacherous nature and his hate towards certain ethnicities. Additionally, the face of Zhenia (in Figure 30) is marked with great despair and the viewer is invited to empathise with her when seeing such a heart-breaking picture Few scenes directly represent Vagho as a malicious person. For example, in Figure 29, close to the end of the story he threatens to kill a random civilian unless Zhenia and Michel give him the hard drive. Not willing to sacrifice the life of an innocent for a greater good the characters give him the hard drive which he immediately destroys. However, soon after the narrative reveals that a copy of a hard drive has been made and hidden. While Michael searches for the hard drive in the ruins, Vagho appears holding Zhenia from behind by her hair in Figure 3. and the dialogue transcribed in Example 6 occurs. . Example 6. Vagho: Your parents are in America yes ? [ pause ] mh? [ pause ] is it good to live there? Michael: Not bad [ slowly in lowered voice ] Vagho: It is a pity you did have not left [ looks at Zhenia ] Your fiancée? Michael: [slowly] Wait… [ Michael is interrupted as Vagho shoots Zhenia while holding her as seen in Figure 4. The bullet goes through her and she succumbs on the ground ].
As Vagho is trying to leave the place of a crime, he is suddebly shot by an Ossetian driver, the one mentioned at the beginning of the story, who has been hiding and seeing the events. Vagho is killed with a straight shot to the head and the couple, along with one Georgian soldier who agrees to cooperate, save the girl by taking her to the Russian military. The faith of Zhenia at that point in the narrative is unknown because she is unconscious and heavily injured. However, it is not only Vagho who is seen as a negative force in this film. In numerous occasions Georgian military forces are seen and referred to as genocide bringers and civilian killers. An important conversation takes place when Zhenia and Michael meet dirty, tired Ossetian refugees who are escaping the Georgian military as they travel through a tunnel. The conversation between them occurs as Gabo, an Ossetian man comes from the shadows. While being cautious at first, the Ossetian refugees become very friendly towards the main characters as soon as they learn that they are Russians. As Michael and Zhenia join the travelling refugees, people give
55 them food and the conversation, transcribed in Example 7, recounts the horrors of war that these people have suffered because of the Georgian military.
Example 7. Zhenia: And where are you going? Gabo: I am going to Schinval to fight. Mother of Gabo: Shut up! We are going to the mountains to our relatives. Gabo, you are the only one left to me now. Yesterday his father was killed just in the backyard with tanks. Me and Gabo wanted to take the body but the neighbours told us that the soldiers have put mines on the body. Zhenia: What does it mean, put mines? Gabo: They put a grenade under the body, and when the relatives come they explode. Mother of Gabo: We did not even have time to burry the father [ gives food to Michalel and Zhenia ] eat eat son.
It can be clearly seen how one conversation, part of which is seen in Example 7 puts a contrast between how different ethnicities are represented in the film. Russians as seen friends of the Ossetians, with whom they share food and are willing to cooperate, while the Georgians are depicted as performers of genocide in very inhumane ways. The action of putting grenades under the dead bodies in order to kill more civilians, as well as the nature of the killing by using tanks, marks the wicked, inhumane actions of the Georgian army. As the narrative discourse advances it “illustrates” the words of the mother, as what main characters see is not that different from her words, or even appear to be worse, as seen in the extracts discussed below. After being first time captured and released from the Georgian military and meeting the refugees Zhenia and Michael take the hidden hard drive and as they continue their journey to safety they see the horrors of war. They run in fear while hiding in various places in Ossetia seeing the outrageous actions of the Georgian military. The scenes also illustrate the emotions of fear, desperation, and horror that follow the characters.
Figure 31. Figure 32.
56
In Figure 31 Georgian soldier is seen shooting civilians and filming his actions on a mobile phone. This scene is preceded by a clearly heard voice of a soldier enjoying his shooting “safari” while simultaneously explosions and shots are heard off-screen. Subsequently a civilian running man is depicted succumbing on the ground after being shot. The Georgian soldier also shoots at car and it explodes. The events can be interpreted as a sense of “pleasure” experienced by the Georgian military forces who are killing civilian Ossetians. Notably, these scenes are supposedly “seen” from the perspective of the main characters as the camera does not show a clear view of what is going on, but rather a fractional view due to exposed obstacles of sight as seen in Figure 31. The fluctuating camera positions also occur in the following, similar scenes, supposedly imitating the movements of the characters trying to hide during a constant run from the Georgians and thus also contributing to the representation of the emotion of fear. Similarly, the following scenes that are imbued with representation of fear can be taken into account. In one scene (Figure 32) Zhenia can be seen hiding from Georgian soldiers who sit on a military vehicle, marked by the Georgian national flag, while shooting everything. Her facial expression is marked by fear as she waits for the Georgian convoy to pass in the background stressed shot. In sum, Georgians in this film are represented in the most negative way, always associated with the ideas of fear, treachery, and the bringing of death. The redundancy of their negative representation gives little room for interpreting them as anything but evil.
Representation of Russians
Two of the most vividly represented characters in the film are Zhenia and Michael. At the beginning of the story it is learned that Michael is an ethnic Russian who has emigrated to the US at a very young age with his parents. Michael is introduced as a bit selfish, comic character who speaks Russian with a slight accent. In the course of the film, Michael grows fond of his Russian female companion, starts to change, and becomes more and more Russian – meaning helpful, as the narrative portrays Russians as the “good guys”. As the story progresses he starts to use less and less English words in his speech, while his American accent also disappears. Zhenia, on the other hand, is a less complicated character – she is a purely Russian journalist, accompanying her childhood friend, who happens to be Michael. Both of these characters are represented as people running away from the battlefield, away from the Georgian army, as innocent people who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. 57
Figure 33. Figure 34.
Important scene is introduced in Figure 34 where early in the film just after retrieving the hard drive, Zhenia and Michael are hiding in an abandoned nearly ruined home. The previous camera movement pictures cracking windows and explosions, prior to the military forces devastating everything in their way. The camera movement in this part of the film imitates the action of an observer, as it first follows Georgians firing weapons all around them including houses (Figure 33) and later enters the house, where it slowly looks around, seeing turned on TV showing image of Medvedjev, Russian president speaking, as well as windows broken by explosions coming from outside, all of this provided with an off-screen noises of shooting guns. Finally, as the poor house is explored, the observer sees Zhenia and Michael hiding from the army, as they sit on the ground and tremble in fear while hugging themselves. They appear to look very small and are shown from a high angle, increasing the image of their vulnerability (Figure 34). The idea of injustice is also strengthened by providing actual genuine excerpt of speech 13 of Russian president Medvedjev, replying to the events in Ossetia, who talks (off-screen voice) that Ossetians are “peaceful people, women and children, old people and majority of them are citizens of the Russian Federation. Following the Constitution and the Federal Laws, I as a president of the Russian Federation must protect lives and values of Russian citizens 14 , wherever they are. We will not allow the deaths of our citizens go unnoticed”. As the speech is over, blasts and shootings intensify and get louder as the characters try to survive while hiding.
13 This speech was given by Medvedjev on the 8 th of August, 2012, when it was aired on “OPT” during the evening news TV programme at 21.00. 14 Before the Georgian war in August 2008, the Russian government was providing the Abkhaz and Ossetian minorities of Georgia with Russian passports, worsening international relations between the two countries (Mullins, 2011, p. 922). Therefore, the newly “coined” Russian citizens (Ossetians, Abkhazians) are kept in mind here. 58
Notably, the Russian military forces are referred to as the peace-keepers 15 by Russian and Ossetian characters throughout the film. The Russian military forces appear only at the end of the film, while the main characters finally reach them.
Figure 35. Figure 36.
The events portrayed in Figures 35 and 36 show the events taking place soon after Zhenia is being shot in the scene discussed above (Example 6). n Figure 35, a chain of Russian military vehicles is seen for the first time in the film. The scene begins with a dim light coming from the fog, as the long shot contributes to the suspense. The overall stylistic settings of fog, dim lights, and retardation in movement constitute to the atmosphere of hope and peace which is in contrast with the previous representations of the Georgian military bearing Georgian flag, always associated with rapid shootings, deaths, killings and fear. As at the critical moment, when Zhenia is injured by Vagho and is supposedly dying, at the time of great need, Russian flags, for instance, are essential in marking the approaching troops as “us” and not the enemy (and this creates the hopefulness, supported by the peaceful atmosphere). Subsequently, the flags as national identity symbols will be analysed below. Unlike the Georgian military that has been shooting everything around, the simple Russian soldiers show certain signs of nobility while treating the captured Georgian soldier as seen in Figure 36. Notably, even the face of the Russian soldier and others do not project aggression or prejudice. Conversation occurs displayed in Figure 36. and Example 8.
Example 8. Georgian soldier: Listen brother lend me your telephone to write an sms to my relatives to tell them I will be alive.
15 Sestanovich (2008) discusses the overall ambiguity concerning Russian military forces, and the title of the “peace- keepers“ they were given by the Russian government. The author finds it misleading to refer to the aggressors of the war (Russians) as “peace-keepers” in general. 59
Russian soldier : Listen guys, I have a brother lost and found here [ long pause while camera shifts various angles showing other soldiers in close-up pointing guns towards the Georgian soldier ] Ok here you go [ gives a mobile phone ]
The Russians indeed represent the peace-keeping force, as not only the Russian soldier treats Georgian in a rather humane manner (brutal use of force against main characters who are taken into captivity early in the film by the Georgian soldiers creates a contrast), he also gives him his own phone to call. This contributes to the overall “myth” that has been maintained throughout the film about the Russian military forces as the ones that come for peace and help, not destruction.
Representation of Americans
The Americans in this film have a complex representational place. There are only few Americans that can be found in this film. They are not completely negatively represented, but each of the characters and his actions show some negative traits. In a scene that follows the early first capture and release of Michael and Zhenia by Georgians, Captain Adams, an American soldier is seen talking with Vagho. At the time when Zhenia and Michael are captured by the Georgian military for the first time, Captain Adams, afro- American officer unexpectedly appears and initiates a conversation with Vagho as seen in Example 9.
Example 9. Adams: Excuse me. Captain Adams. It was reported to me that you have arrested an American citizen. Vagho: False information Captain. They are Russians. Adams: This man is under the protection of the American flag. Vagho: It is a false passport. Mind your own business Zhenia: [voices comes off-screen ] He is American [ shouts ] Adams: Excuse me [ talks to walkie-talkie ] Control. Captain Adams. Michael Oriah was arrested by Georgian forces. Yesterday his visa has been extended [pause] Vagho: [talks in Georgian language ] You scum [ pause ] If you were not American I would [pause] Adams: [talks in Georgian language ] I have had an opportunity to learn your language captain.
60
During this conversation, the “American flag” can be seen as the actual synonym for the US and the American nation. What is also notable is that Vagho holds some prejudice for an American, even though they are the allies. An interesting cue that may escape attention, is the time required to learn a language, as Adams mentions having the opportunity to learn it. If we see Georgians as aggressors in this war, it is indirectly stated that Captain Adams, representing Americans and American military, is a long- term collaborator with Georgians. Thus, in this case, the American Adams is represented as a supporter of the Georgian military, partially “inheriting” the amount of negativity associated with the actions of Georgians as discussed previously. On the other hand, Adams is clearly confronting the Georgians here and sets himself as an American apart from them. The Georgians here have a negative reaction towards the Americans, making the first double criminals – not only they are brutal and hostile towards their enemies, but they also disrespect their allies, in this case the Americans. A conversation between Michael and Adams starts soon after the dialogue between Adams and Vagho. Michael is released and addresses Adams in the following excerpt:
Example 10. Michael : You must set her free as well! Adams: I don’t care about the citizens of other countries. Michael: She is my fiancée. Adams: I repeat! Michael: I am telling you, she will get the US citizenship after the marriage [ pause ] we have all the documents! You want me to stay here?
Adams apparently does not care about the citizens of other countries, in this case Zhenia, who is Russian. Even though the previous scenes have portrayed the brutality coming from the Georgian soldier towards Zhenia, we as a spectator do not know whether Adams is aware of that. However, the spectators of the film, introduced with the brutality of Georgians in this scene, are faced with a seemingly positive American character (he demands the release of Michael), who is not willing to release the Russian girl. However, after Michael lies that Zhenia is his fiancée, Adams orders the Georgian to release her as well. This clearly shows lack of empathy among the Americans towards Russians. After Michael and Zhenia finally reach the Russian military forces, an unspecified gap in time occurs and the action shifts to the US, to a media studio. Figures 37 and 38 below illustrate the events. 61
Figure 37. Figure 38.
During this “tv show” scene, Michael and his fiancée are introduced. The TV host mentions controversial evidence related to the war in Georgia that Michael has collected in Ossetia, and urges the supposed American audience to watch it. In Figure 37 Michael is shown with a concerned and unhappy face, while his future wife smiles seemingly indifferently to the events discussed. The background image in the studio says: “Russian Aggression in Georgia”. However, surprisingly, only a brief excerption of the video recording is shown, revealing a butterfly slowly flying in the background (Figure 38). The rest of the video recording, which supposedly captured the invasion of Georgians into Ossetia, is not shown. This is symbolical, as the American tv host clearly makes fun of Michael and his claim of the Georgian aggression during the war, thus Michael feels betrayed by the media and Americans and leaves the studio. The film ends with Michael entering a hospital room where wounded Zhenia is lying, taking flowers and hugging her. The narrative discourse does not reveal how and why Michael end up in a Russian hospital. Even though the last scene is, again, free for interpretation when it comes to whether Michael has left the US temporarily or permanently, the last scenes of the film mark the disgust of Michael for the Americans and his love for Zhenia, for whom he has left his second homeland, the US, behind.
Representation of Ossetians
The ethnic minority of Georgia, Ossetians are represented as casualties of the war throughout the film. Poorly dressed, dirty and running in fear, they are frequently portrayed as direct victims of Georgian military aggression. The Georgian military is depicted blowing up and
62 shooting at the Ossetian property and houses. Ossetian war crimes 16 are not seen in the film. Frequently, however, they are supporters of the main characters on the run. The first Ossetian character, a polite and hospitable driver is introduced in a very positive way. Furthermore, it is the same driver, who reappears in the narrative discourse seemingly out of nowhere, and kills the antagonistic Vagho. The Ossetians can also be seen as non-conflicting people in the film, who run, rather than directly resist the Georgian military actions in a form of genocide. As mentioned earlier, the Ossetians are depicted as victims of war, refugees. Yet, inter-ethnic association can be spotted here, as the Ossetians are more than favourable towards Russians, see them as their supporters, and even share the little food that they have with them (Example 7). The roles given to the Ossetian representatives depict them as helpful by their nature, whether it is a driver, who opens his doors to strangers or a shooter that saves the main characters.
National Identity symbols
National flags, both Russian and Georgian, constitute an important part of the film. The military vehicles and soldiers bear either Russian or Georgian flags, or identification marks on their uniforms. Notably, the circumstances and the overall emotional content associated with the military forces, specifically the nations that stand behind the military forces that the flags actually represent, differ significantly. The Georgian military, bearing their national flags is nearly always associated with negative meanings. Whether it is brutality, use of force, or cleansing patrols – all is represented in the most negative way. Furthermore, the flags actually mark who are the “good” or in this particular case, the “bad” guys. The events shown in Figures 31, 32 and 33, as well as in scenes throughout the entire film illustrate the negative emotional signposts associated with the Georgians – the main characters are always running and hiding from Georgian military, fearing for their lives.. The Russian flags and military forces appear only at the end of the film. “Our peace- keepers”, as the main characters of the film almost always refer to the Russian military, are seen in the scene marked by Figure 35. Unlike the rapidly changing scenes where the brutality of Georgian military was represented, in this scene Russian forces appear as the last hope to the characters, in the time of great need as Zhenia has been shot and is supposedly dying. In a moment of suspense,
16 There are documented crimes as breaches of the Geneva Convention coming from the Ossetian side. South Ossetian forces and militia conducted the highest amount and the most severe crimes the of documented ones, meaning that 94 of the 199 incidents (47%) as a total during the War if to rely on Mullins (2011, p. 924). 63 slowly in contrast to rapidly moving Georgian vehicles earlier in the film, Russian military vehicles appear, and only gradually they come out of the fog completely. Russian flags mark the appearance of Russian military, or in other words the “peace-keepers” and the saviours of Zhenia’s life as narrative discourse implies.
National identity and ethnicity in Olympus Inferno
Olympus Inferno has a lot of interesting representations, manifestations of national and ethnic identity to analyze. Similarly as in the previous movies discussed, the Russian national identity in this film is connected with the portrayals of military power. Notably in this film, the majority of the attention is focused on the “bad guys”, who in this case are Georgians, the Georgian military. The Russians along with a minority ethnicity in Georgia, the Ossetians, are represented as the victims of war. The film does not portray the representations of the Georgians realistically they never appear to be showing any positive traits, which puts their representations in a substantial contrast with the overall positive representations of the Russians and Ossetians. The role of the Americans in this film is speculative – at some points they do show signs of common sense and positive virtues, yet the final scenes of the filmy clearly represent them as manipulators of war and information media. The flags, as bearers of national identity are always associated with military in this film. Either the Georgians, or the Russians always have flags on their uniforms and military vehicles always making a clear distinction between “them” (Georgians) and “us” (Russians). The appearance of the Georgian flags brings destruction and fear, while the Russian flags carry the notions of help and hope. Overall this film is a perfect example of how film producers may clearly represent certain ethnicities in a rather simplistic manner (completely negative or positive), without ever needing to doubt who are the positive and main characters/forces of the film. They can even “taint” or distort the historical, documented war related information. Finally, the theme of cooperation can also be spotted in this film, revealing the inter-ethnic relations of the characters introduced. The Russians who cooperate with the Ossetians are the “peace keepers” while the Georgians and the Americans on the other side are the aggressors and the manipulators of the media .
64
5. Conclusions
The present study was conducted to reveal how national identity, ethnicities and history are represented in contemporary Russian war-related films. The study shows that with the help of narrative analysis, providing socio-cultural background information it is possible to successfully analyze films. The conclusion which emerges from this study is that national Russian identity in the chosen films is represented mainly through the plot lines, historical settings of the films, characters, symbols and structural dialogues that occur between the characters in the films discussed. Even though the films are cultural products of entertainment, the national identity represented in them is not only about entertainment. Films, even though being cultural products can be influenced by politics, ethnic, military, diplomatic tensions and conflicts. The analysis of the present work offers results and raises discussion on issues about the representations of the heroic characters, national identity symbols, ethnicities, history in the selected films. Two main types of characters and their features seem to repeatedly appear in the analysed films. First of all, the representations of Ignat ( The Edge ) and the minor character Dygala (The 9th company) portray national heroes, who are post-war traumatised heroes, frequently using violence and re-experiencing their wars. Spiritually and physically broken, yet not defeated they struggle with their lives after the wars, which is often accompanied by violent, physical actions towards their opponents who usually are not war heroes, and are ideologically (and especially in The Edge , ethnically) different. The representations imply an idea that even after the war is over it always stays with the veterans, influencing their actions, and emotionally “allowing” them to attack other people physically or verbally, in a sense because of being war heroes, veterans. Second, some of the characters or their features can be grouped into the category of violent-contradictory ones. Ignat ( The Edge ), Dygala ( 9th company ), Lyutyy ( 9th company ), and Cherep ( We are from the future ) all are violent characters that often physically abuse other characters found in the film that do not correspond to their values. In the case of Ignat and Dygala, the audience is firstly introduced with their violent side, however later their sensitive side is revealed. In the case of Lyutyy and Cherep, we see a former criminal and a neo-Nazi, who attack all the people who do not correspond do their views. Notably these two characters also change or their emotional, sensitive side is revealed as they become patriots of wars, national heroes abandoning their previous false ideologies, false values (Lyutyy – criminal side, Cherep – “wrong“ nationalism in a form of neo-Nazism). The aspect of change here is also important – Michael even though not being violent also changes – he leaves America, nearly completely abandoning his “American”
65 identity for the sake of truth, honour, as it is associated with Russian identity ( Olympus Inferno ). Notably in all films discussed characters abandon their “false” beliefs in the name of Russian patriotism, and in a sense in the name of Russian identity. The presence of characters having dual, ubiquitous, changing nature suggests realistic representation of characters, as in real life all people are neither “good” or “evil” solely. Notably, in all four films discussed similar ideas of national identity are emerging – on the one hand, the horrors and downside of wars are shown, but, on the other hand the creation of war heroes, veterans becomes synonymous to the concept of a national hero in these war-related films. The national identity symbols can be found in all of the examined films. Usually Soviet symbols are stressed in flags, military awards, and military vehicles (The Edge, 9 th company, We are from the future ). Apart from a few exceptions (the image of bear in The Edge ), in all the films national identity symbols are always associated with military resources and “Us” (Soviets/Russians) instead of “Them” (non-Russians). In Olympus Inferno contemporary Russian flags appear at moments when help and hope is needed, and Russian military is there to give hope. Similarly as in the three other films, where Soviet flags frequently appeared symbolising military and its action, power, the Russian flags here have positive associations. To conclude, in some of the films symbols from the past, Soviet symbols, contribute to the construction of the contemporary Russian identity that is based upon the patriotic feelings of WWII and the Afghani war. Similarly, contemporary national identity symbols, such as national flags mark positive emotional moments in the representation of the recent Georgian-Russian war. However, national identity stresses the superiority or Russians in contrast to other ethnicities found in the films, also in those about wars during the Soviet era. The representation of foreigners and ethnic minorities in the selected films is based on a distinction between Russians and non-Russians. It can be claimed that for a national hero to become a fully developed as carrier of national identity, the person needs to be ethnically Russian in the films chosen. Ethnicity (Russian) therefore plays a crucial role in construction of the national hero. In three of the selected films the representation of ethnicities is based on their complex (historical) relations with Russians/Soviets ( The Edge, 9 th company, Olympus Inferno ). For example, in The Edge , a prejudice from Russians is beamed towards the Baltic nationalities (Estonians and Lithuanians in particular). The Soviet war hero is able to work together with a German girl and fall in love with her, while he is incapable of cooperating with a Lithuanian repairman who is represented as a bad person, due to his connection with the Nazi and disrespect towards the Soviet war heroism, identity, Russian language, and unwillingness to help the main 66 character to repair a train. It can be assumed though that in some films representation of ethnicities other that Russians are represented to stress the superiority of Russians versus certain ethnicities. Even the young Chechen Pinochet ( 9th company ) who seemingly joins the brave young Russian men in training and war in Afghanistan never receives much credit for his less prominent military actions, and remains a rather static and naïve minor character in comparison to the main characters, ethnic Siberian Russians. Similarly in The Edge , the uncooperative lazy Lithuanian Butkus few times receives a punch but never strikes back to Ignat, a war hero, thus almost acknowledging his inferiority. In addition to this, the scene about the surreal mythical Russian veteran “Evil Giant” as a part of the Soviet army versus the representations of the ethnic Afghani fighters who fight on the Soviet side who are depicted as disoriented, disorganised and small people ( 9th company ) also signifies the contrasting representations of Russian superiority. The completely negative representation of Georgians in Olympus Inferno , always depicting them either torturing, threatening, shooting killing people suggest lack of realism in their representation, portraying them nearly completely evil. Similarly Americans, who cooperate with completely evil Georgians receive rather negative representation, all related to their direct support of Georgians, and according to the narrative discourse untrue, inhumane actions ( Olympus Inferno ). The Afghani fighters/Muslims fighting Soviets are also depicted in most negative way, winning their battles only because of their quantity and brutality, sneak attacks (9th company ). In contrast to this, certain ethnicities in the analysed films are depicted positively, for example the German girl, who helps Ignat to repair a rusty train ( The Edge ), the Young Chechen man, even though being a Muslim, helps Soviets to fight Afghani people at war ( 9th company ) and the Ossetians who share their food with the Russian main characters and help them in any ways possible to escape, and survive the war, the terror coming from Georgians (Olympus Inferno ). Two of the selected films have clear manipulations of representation of factual historical events. For example in The Edge the very mild, unrealistic representation of a Siberian labour camp might be offensive to the contemporary Baltic nationalities and Lithuanians in particular. Not only the narrative discourse stresses that this is not a gulag (while in actuality, scientific discourse knows little about such “non-gulag” camps) but it also represents a Lithuanian man as one of the traitors, the negative characters in the film. In the Lithuanian collective memory, Siberia with its camps and WWII have a painful position – mass ethnic cleansings, starvation, forced deportations of innocent people are associated with it. Keeping in mind that The Edge was targeted for both international and domestic audiences it is (from the Lithuanian perspective) a rather negative turn taken by the Russian film producers. 67
In Olympus Inferno that was targeted for the national audiences, it is not only that the representation of the aggressors (Georgians) as completely negative, inhumane does not correspond to the documented history where the violence was coming from all sides, but it provides the Russian audience with a “manipulated” view of the most recent Russian-Georgian war that has been seen by millions of people in Russia and Russian speakers abroad, watching in on the first national Russian TV channel. Olympus Inferno has clear propagandist features, and basically holds the most negative representations of any ethnicities in the films discussed. Notably, it may be assumed that of the films analysed here, Olympus Inferno could potentially have the largest Russian-speaking audience out of all of the films discussed as it was shown on the first Russian television channel, thus was available to millions of Russians worldwide. Keeping in mind that many ethnicities have access to Russian films and continue to inhabit Russia and neighbouring Post-Soviet countries, the negative representation of these ethnicities in films is unadvisable for filmmakers as it harms the inter-ethnic and intercultural communication between culturally and ethnically diverse people groups. The “sacrifice“ made/chosen by the film producers to stress the national identity, Russian superiority in contrast to negative depiction of certain ethnicities is evident. The nationalistic tendencies in Russian films started during Putin’s presidential period, have moved the contemporary Russian film industry closer to the Soviet one – the praise of war heroes (and in a sense wars), state and nation and the distortion of history suggest similarities with the Soviet film industry, previously discussed. The ongoing ethnic tensions within and outside Russian Federation (Chechnya, Georgia) and the very recent re-election of Putin as a president on 4 th of March in 2012 Russian presidential race, implies that the ongoing production of films in Russia that stress national identity and possibly negatively represent certain ethnicities within and outside the Russian Federation, at the same time providing national and foreign audiences with manipulated historical settings and historical facts within them is likely to continue. This work contributes to the fields of national identity, ethnic relations, intercultural relations, international relations, history, and cinematography. It illustrates films as possible carriers and contributors in construction of national identity. Similar researches could be done to analyze the representations of national identity, ethnicities in films produced by nations “marked” by internal and external ethnic conflicts, war history, and diplomatic tensions. In the case of contemporary Russian media, similar researches could be conducted to analyze the representations of selected ethnicities, foreigners in TV shows, series, films primarily targeted for the national audiences due to their possibly highly negative, offensive representations.
68
References
Primary sources
Bondarchuk, F. (Director). (2005). 9 рота (9th company) [Motion picture]. Russia: Gemini.
Malyukov, A. (Director). (2008). Мы из будущего (We are from the future) [Motion picture]. Russia: Nashe Kino.
Uchitel, A. (Director). (2010). Край (The Edge) [Motion picture]. Russia: Central Partnership.
Voloshin, I. (Director). (2009). Олимпиус Инферно (Olympus Inferno) [Motion picture]. Russia: Music Trade.
Secondary sources
Abell C. (2010). Cinema as a Representational Art. British Journal of Aesthetics , 50(3), 273-286.
Altenloh E. (2001). A Sociology of the Cinema: the Audience. Screen , 42(3), 249-293.
Balkelis T. (2005). Lithuanian Children in the Gulag Deportations, Ethnicity and Identity Memoirs of Children Deportees, 1941–1952. Lithuanian Quarterly Journal Of Arts And Sciences , 51(3). Retrieved from http://www.lituanus.org/2005/05_3_2Balkelis.htm.
Becker J. (2004). Lessons from Russia A Neo-Authoritarian Media system. European Journal of Communication , 19(2), 139–159.
Berg C. R. (2002). Latino images in film: stereotypes, subversion, resistance. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Beumers B. (2003). Soviet and Russian Blockbusters: A Question of Genre? Slavic Review , 62(3), 441-454.
69
Black J. (2002). The reality effect: film culture and the graphic imperative. New York: Routledge.
Blackledge, A. (2002). The discursive construction of national identity in multilingual Britain. Journal of language, identity, and education , 1(1), 67-87.
Bordwell D. (1985). Narration in the Fiction Film . Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Brewer M. B., Gardner W. (1996). Who Is This "We"? Levels of Collective Identity and Self Representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(1), 83-93.
Burstyn J. N. (1987). History as Image: Changing the Lens. History of Education Quarterly , 27(2), 167-180.
Castells M. (2009). The Power of Identity– The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crouch A. (2008). Culture Making: Recovering Our Creative Calling. Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press.
Fearon J. D., Laitin D. D. (2003). Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War. American Political Science Review , 97(1), 75-90.
Fischoff S., Antonio J., Lewis, D. (1997). Favourite Films and Film Genres As A Function of Race, Age, and Gender . Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Convention, Chicago. Retrieved from http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/sfischo/media3.html.
Gaddis J. L. (1997). History, Theory, and Common Ground. International Security , 22(1), 75-85.
Galeotti M. (1995). Afghanistan, the Soviet Union's last war . London: Cass.
Gibson J. L., Howard M. M. (2007). Russian Anti-Semitism and the Scapegoating ofJews. British Journal of Political Science , 37(2), 193-223.
Gorp, v. J. (2011). Inverting film policy: film as a nation builder in Post-Soviet Russia, 1991 – 2005. Media Culture Society, 33(2), 243-258. 70
Grigaliunas M., (2009). The Researches into New Media and Popular Culture in Contemporary Propaganda: Theoretical and Methodological Prerequisites. Inter-studia humanitatis , 9, 66-83.
Halliday F. (1999). Soviet foreign policymaking and the Afghanistan war: from “second Mongolia” to “bleeding wound”. Review of International Studies, 25, 675–691.
Hillgruber A. (1974). England's Place in Hitler's Plans for World Dominion. Journal of Contemporary History , 9(1), 5-22.
Holthoon v. F. L., Olson D. R. (1987). Common sense: the foundations for social science. Lanham: University Press of America.
Joseph J. E. (2004). Language and Identity National Ethnic Religious. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kinopoisk.ru Все фильмы планеты . Retrieved February 2, 2012, from http://www.kinopoisk.ru/.
Klinger B. (1997). Film history terminable and interminable: recovering the past in reception studies. Screen , 38(2), 107-128.
Kruglanski A. W., Freund T. (1983). The Freezing and Unfreezing of Lay-Inferences: Effects on Impressional Primacy, Ethnic Stereotyping, and Numerical Anchoring. Journal Of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 448-468.
Lears T. J. (1985). The Concept of Cultural Hegemony: Problems and Possibilities. The American Historical Review , 90(3), 567-593.
Ledwig M. (2007). Common sense: its history, method, and applicability. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
LeMahieu D. L. (2011). Digital Memory, Moving Images, and the Absorption of Historical Experience. Film & History: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Film and Television Studies, 41(1), 82- 106.
71
Liebkind K. (2006). Ethnic Identity and Acculturation . In: Sam D. L., Berry J. W. (eds). The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lopes D. M., (2011). The Myth Of (Non-Aesthetic) Artistic Value. The Philosophical Quarterly , 64(244), 518-536.
Mazeikis G. (2005). Art Criticism Without Abstracting: From Counterpropaganda to the Body of Fantasy. Inter-studia humanitatis , 2, 89-123.
Mazeikis G. (2008). Issues of Master of Power. Inter-studia humanitatis , 6, 8-40
Mazeikis G., (2009). Cleaning Horror as a tentative Means of Persuasion. Inter-studia humanitatis , 8, 7-27.
Moran A. (1996). Film policy – international, national, and regional perspectives. London: Routledge.
Mullins C. W. (2011). War Crimes in The 2008 Georgia-Russia Conflict. British Journal of Criminology, 51, 918–936.
Nichols J. (1995). Who are the Chechen? Newletter of the Center for Slavic and East European Studies (UC Berkeley). Retrieved from http://iseees.berkeley.edu/articles/nichols_1995- chechen.pdf.
O’Loughlin J., O’Tuathail G., Kolossov V. (2004). Russian geopolitical storylines and public opinion in the wake of 9–11: a critical geopolitical analysis and national survey. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 37, 281–318.
Osborne H. (1986). Aesthetic Experience and Cultural Value. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism , 44(4), 331-337.
Radu M. (2004). E Notes Russia’s Problem: the Chechens or Islamic Terrorists? Foreign Policy Research Institute . Retrieved from http://www.fpri.org/enotes/20040903.russia.radu.chechensislamic.html.
72
Reuveny R., Prakash A. (1999). The Afghanistan war and the breakdown of the Soviet Union. Review of International Studies, 25, 693–708.
Rosenstone R. A. (1988). History in Images/History in Words: Reflections on the Possibility of Really Putting History onto Film. The American Historical Review , 93(5), 1173-1185.
Schopflin G. (1997). [Review of the article Ethnic Conflict in the Post-Soviet World: Case Studies and Analysis by Drobizheva L., Gottemoeller R., McArdle Kelleher C., Walker L.]. Europe-Asia Studies , 49(8), 1557-1559.
Sestanovich S. (2008). What Has Moscow Done? Foreign Affairs , 87, 12-28.
Smith A. D. (1991). National Identity. Reno: University of Nevada Press.
Taras D., (1995). The Struggle over "The Valour and the Horror": Media Power and the Portrayal of War. Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue canadienne de science politique , 28(4), 725- 748.
Vico, M. (2008 ). Lithuanian diaspora: An interview study on the preservation or loss of Pre-World War Two traditional culture among Lithuanian Catholic Émigrés in Western Australia and Siberia, in comparison with Lithuanians in their homeland (Doctoral thesis) . Feremantle, WA: University of Notre Dame Australia.
Walker L., (1996). Nationalism and Ethnic conflict in the Post-Soviet Transition . In Drobizheva L., Gottemoeller R., McArdle Kelleher C., (eds). Ethnic Conflict in the Post-Soviet World: Case Studies and Analysis. New York: M. E. Sharpe.
Wilmsen E. N., McAllister P. A. (1996). The politics of difference - ethnic premises in a world of power. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Youngblood D. J. (2001). A War Remembered: Soviet Films of the Great Patriotic War. The American Historical Review , 106(3), 839-856
73