俄罗斯民主的遗产渊源:从帝国资产阶级到后共产主义中产阶级

IF 0.3 4区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY Journal of Interdisciplinary History Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1162/jinh_r_01918
T. Dennison
{"title":"俄罗斯民主的遗产渊源:从帝国资产阶级到后共产主义中产阶级","authors":"T. Dennison","doi":"10.1162/jinh_r_01918","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Histories of Russia focus almost exclusively on discontinuities—the “Time of Troubles” in the sixteenth century, the Emancipation Act of 1861, the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Such emphases have reinforced a general view of Russian society as perpetually lurching from crisis to crisis. There is certainly value in the study of Russian upheaval; episodes of instability can shed light on larger questions about social and political organization in the past. But, according to Lankina, the (often overlooked) continuities across ruptures can teach us at least as much, as is borne out by the findings of her ambitious new study of the Russian middle class. In this book, Lankina investigates the reproduction of Russia’s small but (as she shows) constant bourgeois stratum from the imperial era, across the turmoil and upheaval of the twentieth century, to the postSoviet present day. She is interested in the transmission of values across generations and the implications of this phenomenon for social, political, and economic development. Can we connect those estates (socio-legal groups, or soslovii in Russian) associated with “bourgeois” values in the imperial period to the Soviet intelligentsia in the twentieth century, and further, to groups with more positive views of democratic reforms in Russia today? And can we draw any larger lessons from the Russian case? These are, as Lankina herself acknowledges, big, complicated, and difficult questions to answer; refreshingly, she approaches them as such. Instead of reducing the problem to one narrow question that she can address using data alone, she takes a truly interdisciplinary approach, consulting literatures and methodologies from a range of fields, including history, sociology, and quantitative political science. She uses both textual and quantitative evidence and formulates her hypotheses in relation to a broad range of disciplinary concepts from Weber’s notion of the Ständestaat and Bourdieu’s idea of “cultural capital” to de Vries’ “industrious revolution” and Piketty’s recent work on inequality. Lankina moves comfortably between micro-history and statistical analysis, between a local archive filled with textual sources and large data sets. She quickly introduces us to a local community in Samara province in the nineteenth century, the fortunes of which she follows across generations. These people’s actions and words—the way in which they perceived their social identity and values and the choices that they","PeriodicalId":46755,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interdisciplinary History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Estate Origins of Democracy in Russia: From Imperial Bourgeoisie to Post-Communist Middle Class by Tomila Lankina\",\"authors\":\"T. Dennison\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/jinh_r_01918\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Histories of Russia focus almost exclusively on discontinuities—the “Time of Troubles” in the sixteenth century, the Emancipation Act of 1861, the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Such emphases have reinforced a general view of Russian society as perpetually lurching from crisis to crisis. There is certainly value in the study of Russian upheaval; episodes of instability can shed light on larger questions about social and political organization in the past. But, according to Lankina, the (often overlooked) continuities across ruptures can teach us at least as much, as is borne out by the findings of her ambitious new study of the Russian middle class. In this book, Lankina investigates the reproduction of Russia’s small but (as she shows) constant bourgeois stratum from the imperial era, across the turmoil and upheaval of the twentieth century, to the postSoviet present day. She is interested in the transmission of values across generations and the implications of this phenomenon for social, political, and economic development. Can we connect those estates (socio-legal groups, or soslovii in Russian) associated with “bourgeois” values in the imperial period to the Soviet intelligentsia in the twentieth century, and further, to groups with more positive views of democratic reforms in Russia today? And can we draw any larger lessons from the Russian case? These are, as Lankina herself acknowledges, big, complicated, and difficult questions to answer; refreshingly, she approaches them as such. Instead of reducing the problem to one narrow question that she can address using data alone, she takes a truly interdisciplinary approach, consulting literatures and methodologies from a range of fields, including history, sociology, and quantitative political science. She uses both textual and quantitative evidence and formulates her hypotheses in relation to a broad range of disciplinary concepts from Weber’s notion of the Ständestaat and Bourdieu’s idea of “cultural capital” to de Vries’ “industrious revolution” and Piketty’s recent work on inequality. Lankina moves comfortably between micro-history and statistical analysis, between a local archive filled with textual sources and large data sets. She quickly introduces us to a local community in Samara province in the nineteenth century, the fortunes of which she follows across generations. These people’s actions and words—the way in which they perceived their social identity and values and the choices that they\",\"PeriodicalId\":46755,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Interdisciplinary History\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Interdisciplinary History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/jinh_r_01918\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interdisciplinary History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/jinh_r_01918","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

俄罗斯的历史几乎完全集中在不连续性上——16世纪的“动乱时期”、1861年的《解放法案》、1917年的布尔什维克革命和1991年的苏联解体。这种强调强化了人们对俄罗斯社会的普遍看法,认为俄罗斯社会永远在一场又一场危机中挣扎。研究俄罗斯剧变当然有价值;不稳定的事件可以揭示过去关于社会和政治组织的更大问题。但是,根据兰基娜的说法,破裂之间(经常被忽视)的连续性至少可以教会我们同样多的东西,正如她对俄罗斯中产阶级雄心勃勃的新研究结果所证明的那样。在这本书中,兰基娜调查了俄罗斯小但(正如她所展示的那样)不变的资产阶级阶层的再现,从帝国时代到二十世纪的动荡和剧变,再到后苏联时代的今天。她对价值观代代相传以及这一现象对社会、政治和经济发展的影响感兴趣。我们能把帝国时期那些与“资产阶级”价值观相关的庄园(社会法律团体,俄语中的soslovii)与20世纪的苏联知识界联系起来吗?我们能从俄罗斯的案件中吸取更大的教训吗?正如兰基娜自己承认的那样,这些都是需要回答的重大、复杂和困难的问题;令人耳目一新的是,她这样对待他们。她没有将问题简化为一个可以单独使用数据来解决的狭隘问题,而是采取了一种真正的跨学科方法,查阅了历史、社会学和定量政治学等一系列领域的文献和方法。她使用了文本和定量证据,并就一系列学科概念提出了自己的假设,从韦伯的Ständestaat概念和布迪厄的“文化资本”概念到德弗里斯的“勤劳革命”和皮克提最近关于不平等的工作。Lankina轻松地在微观历史和统计分析之间移动,在充满文本来源的本地档案和大型数据集之间移动。她很快向我们介绍了19世纪萨马拉省的一个当地社区,她的命运代代相传。这些人的行为和言语——他们感知自己社会身份和价值观的方式,以及他们的选择
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Estate Origins of Democracy in Russia: From Imperial Bourgeoisie to Post-Communist Middle Class by Tomila Lankina
Histories of Russia focus almost exclusively on discontinuities—the “Time of Troubles” in the sixteenth century, the Emancipation Act of 1861, the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Such emphases have reinforced a general view of Russian society as perpetually lurching from crisis to crisis. There is certainly value in the study of Russian upheaval; episodes of instability can shed light on larger questions about social and political organization in the past. But, according to Lankina, the (often overlooked) continuities across ruptures can teach us at least as much, as is borne out by the findings of her ambitious new study of the Russian middle class. In this book, Lankina investigates the reproduction of Russia’s small but (as she shows) constant bourgeois stratum from the imperial era, across the turmoil and upheaval of the twentieth century, to the postSoviet present day. She is interested in the transmission of values across generations and the implications of this phenomenon for social, political, and economic development. Can we connect those estates (socio-legal groups, or soslovii in Russian) associated with “bourgeois” values in the imperial period to the Soviet intelligentsia in the twentieth century, and further, to groups with more positive views of democratic reforms in Russia today? And can we draw any larger lessons from the Russian case? These are, as Lankina herself acknowledges, big, complicated, and difficult questions to answer; refreshingly, she approaches them as such. Instead of reducing the problem to one narrow question that she can address using data alone, she takes a truly interdisciplinary approach, consulting literatures and methodologies from a range of fields, including history, sociology, and quantitative political science. She uses both textual and quantitative evidence and formulates her hypotheses in relation to a broad range of disciplinary concepts from Weber’s notion of the Ständestaat and Bourdieu’s idea of “cultural capital” to de Vries’ “industrious revolution” and Piketty’s recent work on inequality. Lankina moves comfortably between micro-history and statistical analysis, between a local archive filled with textual sources and large data sets. She quickly introduces us to a local community in Samara province in the nineteenth century, the fortunes of which she follows across generations. These people’s actions and words—the way in which they perceived their social identity and values and the choices that they
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
20.00%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interdisciplinary History features substantive articles, research notes, review essays, and book reviews relating historical research and work in applied fields-such as economics and demographics. Spanning all geographical areas and periods of history, topics include: - social history - demographic history - psychohistory - political history - family history - economic history - cultural history - technological history
期刊最新文献
Weather-Based Disasters and Farming Communities in the Western Alps, 1650–1850 The Paradox of Abolition: Sugar Production and Slave Demography in Danish St. Croix, 1792–1804 Money for Everyone English Private Money, 1648–1672 The Lumumba Legacy and the Enduring Tragedy of the Congo
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1