Political scientists and historians ask themselves whether the transition from the Soviet Union to Russia constitutes a case of failed or ongoing democratization, and whether the analytical instruments developed for democratic transition studies are appropriate to study the new Russia. Evidence does not allow them to provide a conclusive answer to the first question, and they differ in their responses to the second question. However, most pay too little attention to cultural developments (with some exceptions such as Billington, Etkind, Figes, and Kharkhordin). Whereas Russian writers, from Pushkin and Tolstoy to Akhmatova, have long stressed the political and transformative implications of their work, and of cultural activity. The first part of the article develops this argument.
The second half of this essay examines one contemporary attempt at cultural and intellectual transformation: European University at Saint Petersburg (EUSPB), an almost ten-year-old graduate institute, which is ranked internationally. The purpose of this institution can be interpreted as an attempt to “resurrect” the cosmopolitan Russian tradition in intellectual training and scholarship. The empirical evidence comes from direct observation (a four month teaching assignment in this institution in 2013), and interviews with colleagues and graduate students. Works of literature, political science and history (inter alia, and beside those mentioned above, Gaidar, Gessen, Grachev, McFaul, Sakwa, Urban, White) provide theoretical resources. This essay argues for a longer-term view of democratic transition in Russia, which must take cultural transformation more seriously.
