Troublesome Translations: Putting Pussy Riot in Context

So You Think You Can Blog logo. Features the mudflap girl dancing. Image by Patrick Sheehan
A SYTYCB entry

Over the course of my ten months as an English teaching assistant in Minsk, Belarus – a Russian-speaking Post-Soviet country with few people who have visited America and even fewer Americans – certain questions came up over and over again: “Do you have a warm enough coat here?” (Answer: “Does such a thing exist?”) “What do you think of Belarus?” (“People have been very friendly.”) “Russian is a difficult language, no?” (“An emphatic YES.”)

And, of course: “Do you like our Russian food?”

I had the line down: “Yes, but I should tell you that I am a vegetarian.”

I got used to the looks of courteous confusion. I was prepared long before I boarded the plane. That is, until the day I was guest teaching in an adult English conversation class, when a student to my right said: “Oh, I used to be a vegetarian too. Are you also an anorexic?”

“Anorexic?” I asked. “Hm. How do you define anorexia?”

It meant what I thought it meant. The conversation spiraled into a dialogue about eating disorders. Turns out, “I’m a vegetarian” did not just sound like “I’m a strange American with terrible taste in food,” but many of my new colleagues assumed I was not eating at all. Previous students had just been too polite to ask.

I remembered this conversation last Thursday, when I read Alicia Silverstone’s letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin, urging him to provide vegan food for Maria Alekhina, one of the three incarcerated members of the band Pussy Riot. She wrote:

“Regardless of the trial and its outcome, I’m sure you can agree that everyone has the right to show compassion and refrain from harming animals by being vegan. May I please have your assurance that Ms. Alekhina will have access to vegan foods? Thank you for your time and attention to this urgent matter.”

The thing is, I am not so “sure” President Putin will agree. I don’t think Alicia Silverstone will cause international strife with this letter. I do think the majority of the Russian public, press and presidential cabinet will laugh.

Silverstone is one of the many western stars to take up Pussy Riot’s cause. Voices from Chloe Sevigny to Paul McCartney to Pitchfork Magazine are lauding Pussy Riot as “the most important band of 2012.” . The band’s incendiary name has been on what seems like every English-speaking reporter’s lips. People from Amsterdam to Ann Arbor are wearing “FREE PUSSY RIOT!” t-shirts and wrapping their faces in symbolic balaclavas. Veganism – accompanied by a host of other Russian-American issues – seems like just another logical rejoinder to a simmering protest movement, just waiting to burst into a movement of progressive global solidarity.

But what I’m noticing – and hearing from my Russian-speaking friends across the ocean – is that east of Warsaw and Washington, the band is not receiving the same sort of attention at home: polls from Russia’s independent Levada Center show that the band members have only 6% of support in their home country. Of that 6%, most support seems to be along the lines of “forgive their sins, they’re young mothers.” Mother Jones’s David Tuller quotes Yuri Samodurov, a Russian human rights activist standing outside the courtroom in Moscow, as saying “it seemed like there were more reporters there than protestors.” Few popular Russian musicians have come out in support – in fact, stars such as pop artist Vaenga, have come out swinging against them.

My point: this lukewarm-to-hostile reception in Russia is no side-note, it’s a huge part of this story. It’s vital to understanding what Pussy Riot did – and what they didn’t do (break down in tears for the sympathy of the courtroom). Our coverage in the West presents Pussy Riot as martyrs for free speech, victims of a repressive regime and voices of a generation a la the riot grrl movement. While none of this is untrue, it is incomplete: a group like Pussy Riot reflects a fringe position that is not shared (in fact, is widely condemned) by the majority of the public. A trio of women singing “Virgin Mary, become a feminist!” has a very different connotation in Moscow’s church-that-used-to-be-a-swimming-pool than Bikini Kill playing to a supportive audience in Olympia, Washington. Literally translated, their language today is similar. In context, however, the Soviet history of feminism calls up different connotations. The concept of women’s rights gained traction during the early 20th century Marxist revolutions. Soon after, it lost (many would argue that it never really gained) cultural favor among women working an insidious unnamed double-shift; and after years of Soviet isolationism, still resonates as something of a dirty word among a huge subset of the population.

That’s not to say that there are no self-identified feminists in contemporary Russian culture. There are, and many do important work. I met LGBT activists in Belarus – a state with one of the worst LGBT rights records in the world, far behind Russia – who had been to jail multiple times. Supporting their work is one thing. Understanding it is another – and independent initiatives are not necessarily wrong, but they are different in a meaningful way. When Madonna writes the words “Pussy Riot!” on her back during a St. Petersburg concert, she is not appealing to her Russian audience as she would to fans steeped in her same history and traditions – and, predictably, Russian reactions to her performance have not been warm. Perhaps Madonna has a role to play on the global stage. Let’s not mistake it for a mass internal movement.

Why does this matter, when there are rights violations at stake? Wouldn’t feminism solve some of these problems? I think yes. But as post-colonial feminists like Chandra Mohanty might say, if an activist does not pay attention to context, she risks alienating the very people she is trying to reach. We cannot have a dialogue about connotations if we do not acknowledge that they are there. There is no shame in being a vegetarian in a meat-loving country. Frustration? Yes. Soul-searching? Yes. Is this what is on trial in Moscow right now? No. Would I support a pro-vegan movement in Russia? Yes, if someone in Russia was behind it. Echoes of old Cold War debates (“take your Western / Eastern / Communist / Capitalist propoganda and *#@& it!”) – are reminding me of another conversation I had in Belarus over and over again. I would ask: “What are your stereotypes about Americans?” Once we broke the ice, I heard versions of the same response: “Americans don’t take the time to learn about other cultures. And then you are condescending. And you make a mess.”

Both Putin and the Church say they want to make examples out of these particular dissidents because they have “offended Russians.” Pussy Riot responds that Putin has offended Russians, and many people – both fans and critics of the band – agree. I am not arguing that their trial was anything but a farce. But the fact is, the group has offended Russians – and no pro-vegetarian, balaclava-wielding movement outside of Russia will change that. Nor does it seem that Pussy Riot would want them to. As Sarah Kendzior said in the Atlantic, “Pussy Riot are the directors of their own campaign. But looking at their Western supporters, one wonders how well their message is getting across.” They are not “damsels in distress,” they are agents of a marginal political protest, taking considerable – and seemingly well-considered –personal risk. They are neither courting nor receiving widespread support at home. A Russian-speaking friend who has been following coverage in both languages said: “It seems almost as if the West is using this as a cause to celebrate anarchism rather than actually talk about the issues Russia is facing.” And, if there is any clear takeaway here, it is that Russia is facing some serious, complex issues. These are no “manic pixie dissident girls,” they are conscientious objectors facing widespread scorn like I, at least, cannot even comprehend. By glossing over the deeper cultural context of this trial, we are underestimating the risk that these women are taking, closing our own conversation to the points of view most relevant to the outcomes of the situation, and subscribing to simple narratives based on false comparisons. Though they are wearing clothing and styles we recognize; though they are in a cosmopolitan city with Starbucks in the background, they are not just an easy, obvious cause celebré.

Disclaimer: This post was written by a Feministing Community user and does not necessarily reflect the views of any Feministing columnist, editor, or executive director.

Join the Conversation