We want to (better) know our history. Largely because without this knowledge it is difficult to understand the present, determine one’s civic position and answer children’s questions.
I was sincerely surprised when I realized that the offer to give a course of lectures on Russian history in private was made quite seriously. And now, every week, on Fridays, for almost a year, adults, successful businessmen, came to my house to listen for two or three hours in a row about the Norman theory, the Golden Horde, Ivan the Terrible, the Decembrists, the reforms of Alexander II … Then, over a cup of tea or a glass of cognac ask questions, argue, talk about the current problems of the country. Actually, they turned to me precisely for this, having decided that the lack of humanitarian knowledge prevents them from consciously defining their civic position and convincingly answering the questions of their children.
The study of history is a kind of psychoanalysis, an attempt to understand the past, to understand what happened to us.
At first I was sure that this was a whim and soon it would all be over. But the interest of the listeners only grew, the disputes became more and more acute. In general, the fashion for history turned out to be surprisingly persistent. Or is it not just fashion anymore?
History is in demand already because it is interesting to study it. The study of history is a kind of psychoanalysis, an attempt to take a closer look at what was left behind, to understand and realize how everything really happened and why it led to certain results. What is it for? To answer the questions that torment today, to part with the ballast of erroneous ideas and a set of vicious means … Yes, we live here and now. But without a connection with the past and a focused look into the future, support and guidelines are lost. On the other hand, “an excess of history harms life,” Nietzsche warned. He even called this excess interest a «historical disease.» Where people get sick with it, there people “are no longer able to use the past as healthy food”, they either overeat or feel that they have been poisoned.
Russia today is a «sick» country with a «hot memory». Unlike «cold» memory, which stores facts but denies change, conserves dates and names, but deprives them of meaning, «hot» tries to insert the past into today’s agenda. If «cold» memory is limited to history, then «hot» goes into politics, setting fire to the present. The struggle for the past becomes a choice of worldview, turns into a clash of myths and a competition of projects for the future.
And we did not avoid this general trend at our meetings. After completing the first cycle of lectures, our small community did not disintegrate, but turned into a kind of club. Now, once a month, we order from experts an up-to-date report on a topic chosen jointly — “Orange Revolution”, “Caucasus”, “Nazism”, “French Revolution”…
The book Apology of History begins with the son’s question: «Explain why history is needed?» And ends with the words of the father: “Causes in history, as in any other field, cannot be postulated. They must be sought.»
* F. Nietzsche «On the benefits and harms of history» (Folio, 2009).
** M. Block «Apology of History» (Science, 1986).