The good people over at Russophile.com were not only kind enough to post a link to my research observations, but also confirmed what I've long suspected: the previous layout of white text on a black background is a bit hard to read. I suppose I've just been in denial, as I'm quite fond of the red on black color scheme. Also, I don't really read my blog (I've found the author to be a bit long-winded at time, and I'm a busy person), so it hasn't bothered me much in the past.
But, for the sake of readers' eyes, we'll give this new color scheme a test drive. Still has a nice chilling "darkness" feel to it, and is hopefully easier to read. Any comments, opinions, or suggestions are, of course, welcome!
01 June 2007
31 May 2007
Notes from the Field
I'm sitting inside a run-down bus station in a little village about 2 hours outside of Lipetsk, which is itself about 10 hours from Moscow by train. The sun is struggling to force its way through the dirty windows of the terminal, but despite the shade provided by the thick layer of grime on the glass, the stifling heat penetrates just the same. It's somewhere around 96 degrees, I think.
The bus to Lipetsk is already 20 minutes late, and I'm worried about making my train back to Moscow. Never did I think I would long for Moscow so intensely, but after a week in and out of provincial towns and villages (all without hot water), Moscow is like an oasis on the horizon, rising out of the parched earth. But only if the bus shows up.
The red tiled floor of the bus station is wet, as an old woman has been mopping the floor for the last hour or so. Actually, my week in the provinces has taught me that people here look a lot older than they really are. So she's probably in her mid-50s. Every once in a while she shuffles back over to her bucket of muddy water to wring out the towel before wrapping it back around the broom. Thus is her "mop."
The bus station has that pleasant smell of water and dirt mixing, almost like when it rains. It's the smell I remember from my childhood when I had to clean the garage and after moving out all the bikes, tools, and other junk, got to hose it all down - the only fun part about garage cleaning day. Except now in the bus station, the water is quickly evaporating, taking with it the freshly-washed smell. In its place, the stations usual odor returns, something akin to a public restroom though thankfully not quite as intense. But it confirms my suspicion that perhaps in their more inebriated moments some Russians do use it as such.
Sitting across from me is quite literally the ugliest woman I've ever seen in my life. The only reason I'm sharing this with you is because it's not an exaggeration - this is the really the most unattractive woman I've ever seen, and so I feel like this is an important event in my life worthy of sharing. I'm not trying to be mean, just telling the facts. I guess "she-bear" is probably the most succinct way to describe her. I avoid making eye contact for fear that she-bear will bite my head off.
Naturally, I wonder to myself, "how in God's name did I end up in this place???"
Well, I'll tell you how, in hopes of gaining if not your respect and admiration for the rigors of social science, then at least maybe some pity. Pity for the long series of poor life choices that brought me to this bus station, beginning with the idea that graduate school would be a good thing. It's times like these when I wonder why I didn't go to law school...
First, I gathered lots and lots of data on each of Russia's 89 administrative regions. All sorts of economic, political, and social indicators for each region. While I complained about the tedious nature of this at the time, the thought of sitting in front of a computer in my room in Moscow sifting through statistical yearbooks now sounds like heaven on earth.
Once I had all my relevant data, I ran it through a series of calculations to produce pairs of regions that are identical except for one key variable. Thus, Tambov and Lipetsk oblasts have virtually identical economic growth rates, unemployment rates, higher education levels, urbanization levels, and ethnic compositions. Even their most recent regional elections were equally competitive. The only difference is that Lipetsk has a GDP per capita that is nearly twice that of Tambov. So, if we believe that wealth is an important factor shaping an individual's political beliefs, then in this pair of regions we would expect that difference to be apparent.
So now I have two regions, but then what? Since we want both urban and rural people represented, we start with the regional capitol. One voting district in the city is randomly selected, followed by a street within that district randomly selected. From there, we begin knocking on doors at the first house/apartment on that street. If they answer the door and agree to take the survey, we're in luck. If not, we move four apartments ahead and try again. If a person does agree, the fun doesn't stop there. Then we ask to speak to the person who most recently had a birthday - they're the lucky winner who gets to spend 30 minutes answering questions about politics in the muggy heat of the hallway (few people invite us into their apartments).
The process is basically the same for the rural areas - a rayon (district) is randomly selected, followed by a town randomly selected within that rayon, then a specific settlement within that town. And instead of having the luxury of going up stairwells knocking on doors of apartments, we trudge along in the heat going from house to house. Oh, and in the villages we have to watch out for dogs which don't seem to appreciate social scientists very much. I don't blame them, really.
Now, what's the point of all of these silly random headaches? I guess the proper answer, the one that my professors would want me to tell you, is that it's good social scientific methodology. By randomly selecting at every stage, we avoid introducing any voluntary or involuntary bias into who we select to talk to. Thus, while it might be tempting to select that apartment building over there because it doesn't look so scary and run down, it probably means there are wealthier people living there. And rich people think differently than poor people, so like it or not, you've just biased your sample.
Of course, the real reason I'm going to all this trouble is self-defense. It's so that when I stand up in front of my peers to present my work (or worse, in front of a hiring committee), nobody can accuse me of selection bias. One less fatal arrow shot my way, though it's still quite a pain in the ass. I also wonder whether it really matters if you've been shot by 21 poisonous darts rather than 20. In other words, there will be plenty of other fatal flaws in my work, I'm sure. But not selection bias!
Now, I'm sure most of you could care less about social scientific research design. And those of you that do care are probably my classmates whose brains have been turned to mush thanks to the infinite wisdom of KKV already. But to reward any of you who are silly enough to still be reading this, here are a few general observations I've drawn from my 20 interviews in Tambov and Lipetsk. Mind you, this is a small sample - 10 rural and 10 urban respondents, and while there's not selection bias, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's representative of all of Russia. But I would bet that I've talked to 20 more "regular Russians" about these political issues than most pundits in Moscow, not to mention outside of Russia. So in the very least, just know that these opinions are out there among the Russians...
1) Many respondents understand the pluses and minuses of democracy and authoritarianism. They know that under authoritarianism people can't select their leaders and can't criticize the regime. But they also believe that under authoritarianism things are more orderly, the state fulfills its functions better, and the economy is more stable. And so while they know that there are bad things about authoritarian government, many people seem to believe that the "positives" still outweigh the negatives.
2) At the same time, many respondents don't have a consistent set of beliefs about democracy and authoritarianism. Thus, they answer that "having a strong leader who doesn't have to worry about things like elections or parliament" would be a good thing. But for the very next question they also say that "having a democratic political system" would be a good thing. Thus, for many people these things are not mutually exclusive. This would suggest that either they don't really understand what democracy means, or that they're working with a very different definition of democracy than we do.
3) On that note, if you ask them to talk about problems that come along with democracy, they start talking about low pensions, unpaid wages, unemployment, high prices, and crime. Notice that none of these things really have anything to do with democracy per se. They are not components of the classical definition of liberal democracy. But this is what democracy means to Russians because this is what they had in the 1990s when they had supposed "democracy." This doesn't necessarily mean that Russians don't want the classic "goods" of democracy - free speech, elections, freedom of assembly, free press, etc. - but it does mean that any political elites trying to carry the mantle of democracy will have a hard time convincing people to follow them. Democracy and democrats have a bad name in Russia.
4) But how much do Russians really want the classic "goods" of democracy? When asked what the most important problems facing Russia today are, nobody - nobody - said anything about loss of freedom of speech, the loss of a free press, the strengthening of the state, the erosion of political competition. Again, it was all about pensions, unemployment, wages, and prices. Nor did people believe that protecting liberal rights are among the most important functions to be fulfilled by the state.
5) Regardless of what the want or don't want, the respondents with whom we spoke are extremely passive when it comes to politics. While nearly everyone could give examples of policies made by the state in the last 15 years that they were unhappy about, the vast majority of respondents expressed their dissatisfaction by talking about it with friends and family. Nothing more. A few people said they had or might be inclined to sign a petition in the future, but hardly anyone said that they would be likely to attend a demonstration, for example.
What does this mean for Russia's political development? It seems clear that the state has systematically be reducing the number of independent poles of political power - the media, the duma, political parties, the courts, the governors have all had their wings clipped by the Kremlin. It seems that the only force remaining that might be able to exercise political power in opposition to the state are citizens themselves by taking to the streets in large numbers. But as the many demonstrations in Russia in the last few months have shown, even this method is being severely restricted by the state. But beyond the state's actions discouraging mass protest action, my interviews demonstrated that most people are simply apathetic to political action and are unlikely to take to the streets anytime soon. So those of you waiting for a new revolution shouldn't hold your breath....
6) A series of questions were asked whereby respondents had to rate whether some of Russia's neighboring countries are more democratic or more authoritarian. Not surprisingly, their answers didn't really reflect the true democraticness of the countries under question, but rather reflected subjective opinions about what they thought of those countries. Thus, Estonia and Ukraine were most often labeled as fairly authoritarian countries, whereas Belarus is downright democratic. After all, "that Lukashenko is a good muzhik!"
7) People were asked to rate the political system in the Soviet Union under Brezhnev. Not surprisingly, they rated it fairly positively. However, when asked whether such a political system would suit Russia today, most answered that it would not, stating that "that was a different time, and things have changed now." I found this surprising, as most superficial surveys you read about in the news assume that because people rate the Brezhnev era highly they must want things to be like they were in "the good old days." Many people did mention problems with the Brezhnev era - empty shelves being the most frequent answer - but, like it or not, now they have a new system with new problems. So they'll get by.
So, there are some tentative observations. I'll again repeat the warning that this is a small sample and isn't necessarily representative of all of Russia. There will be another 20 interviews coming from Yaroslavl and Nizhny Novgorod, but even at 40 it won't be representative. The main attraction will come later this fall when we conduct a representative nationwide survey of 1,500 Russians. Then I might be able to say something definitive, though you'll probably have to wait for the dissertation to get the juiciest material. But like those waiting for the revolution, I wouldn't hold your breath - it might be a while...
The bus to Lipetsk is already 20 minutes late, and I'm worried about making my train back to Moscow. Never did I think I would long for Moscow so intensely, but after a week in and out of provincial towns and villages (all without hot water), Moscow is like an oasis on the horizon, rising out of the parched earth. But only if the bus shows up.
The red tiled floor of the bus station is wet, as an old woman has been mopping the floor for the last hour or so. Actually, my week in the provinces has taught me that people here look a lot older than they really are. So she's probably in her mid-50s. Every once in a while she shuffles back over to her bucket of muddy water to wring out the towel before wrapping it back around the broom. Thus is her "mop."
The bus station has that pleasant smell of water and dirt mixing, almost like when it rains. It's the smell I remember from my childhood when I had to clean the garage and after moving out all the bikes, tools, and other junk, got to hose it all down - the only fun part about garage cleaning day. Except now in the bus station, the water is quickly evaporating, taking with it the freshly-washed smell. In its place, the stations usual odor returns, something akin to a public restroom though thankfully not quite as intense. But it confirms my suspicion that perhaps in their more inebriated moments some Russians do use it as such.
Sitting across from me is quite literally the ugliest woman I've ever seen in my life. The only reason I'm sharing this with you is because it's not an exaggeration - this is the really the most unattractive woman I've ever seen, and so I feel like this is an important event in my life worthy of sharing. I'm not trying to be mean, just telling the facts. I guess "she-bear" is probably the most succinct way to describe her. I avoid making eye contact for fear that she-bear will bite my head off.
Naturally, I wonder to myself, "how in God's name did I end up in this place???"
Well, I'll tell you how, in hopes of gaining if not your respect and admiration for the rigors of social science, then at least maybe some pity. Pity for the long series of poor life choices that brought me to this bus station, beginning with the idea that graduate school would be a good thing. It's times like these when I wonder why I didn't go to law school...
First, I gathered lots and lots of data on each of Russia's 89 administrative regions. All sorts of economic, political, and social indicators for each region. While I complained about the tedious nature of this at the time, the thought of sitting in front of a computer in my room in Moscow sifting through statistical yearbooks now sounds like heaven on earth.
Once I had all my relevant data, I ran it through a series of calculations to produce pairs of regions that are identical except for one key variable. Thus, Tambov and Lipetsk oblasts have virtually identical economic growth rates, unemployment rates, higher education levels, urbanization levels, and ethnic compositions. Even their most recent regional elections were equally competitive. The only difference is that Lipetsk has a GDP per capita that is nearly twice that of Tambov. So, if we believe that wealth is an important factor shaping an individual's political beliefs, then in this pair of regions we would expect that difference to be apparent.
So now I have two regions, but then what? Since we want both urban and rural people represented, we start with the regional capitol. One voting district in the city is randomly selected, followed by a street within that district randomly selected. From there, we begin knocking on doors at the first house/apartment on that street. If they answer the door and agree to take the survey, we're in luck. If not, we move four apartments ahead and try again. If a person does agree, the fun doesn't stop there. Then we ask to speak to the person who most recently had a birthday - they're the lucky winner who gets to spend 30 minutes answering questions about politics in the muggy heat of the hallway (few people invite us into their apartments).
The process is basically the same for the rural areas - a rayon (district) is randomly selected, followed by a town randomly selected within that rayon, then a specific settlement within that town. And instead of having the luxury of going up stairwells knocking on doors of apartments, we trudge along in the heat going from house to house. Oh, and in the villages we have to watch out for dogs which don't seem to appreciate social scientists very much. I don't blame them, really.
Now, what's the point of all of these silly random headaches? I guess the proper answer, the one that my professors would want me to tell you, is that it's good social scientific methodology. By randomly selecting at every stage, we avoid introducing any voluntary or involuntary bias into who we select to talk to. Thus, while it might be tempting to select that apartment building over there because it doesn't look so scary and run down, it probably means there are wealthier people living there. And rich people think differently than poor people, so like it or not, you've just biased your sample.
Of course, the real reason I'm going to all this trouble is self-defense. It's so that when I stand up in front of my peers to present my work (or worse, in front of a hiring committee), nobody can accuse me of selection bias. One less fatal arrow shot my way, though it's still quite a pain in the ass. I also wonder whether it really matters if you've been shot by 21 poisonous darts rather than 20. In other words, there will be plenty of other fatal flaws in my work, I'm sure. But not selection bias!
Now, I'm sure most of you could care less about social scientific research design. And those of you that do care are probably my classmates whose brains have been turned to mush thanks to the infinite wisdom of KKV already. But to reward any of you who are silly enough to still be reading this, here are a few general observations I've drawn from my 20 interviews in Tambov and Lipetsk. Mind you, this is a small sample - 10 rural and 10 urban respondents, and while there's not selection bias, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's representative of all of Russia. But I would bet that I've talked to 20 more "regular Russians" about these political issues than most pundits in Moscow, not to mention outside of Russia. So in the very least, just know that these opinions are out there among the Russians...
1) Many respondents understand the pluses and minuses of democracy and authoritarianism. They know that under authoritarianism people can't select their leaders and can't criticize the regime. But they also believe that under authoritarianism things are more orderly, the state fulfills its functions better, and the economy is more stable. And so while they know that there are bad things about authoritarian government, many people seem to believe that the "positives" still outweigh the negatives.
2) At the same time, many respondents don't have a consistent set of beliefs about democracy and authoritarianism. Thus, they answer that "having a strong leader who doesn't have to worry about things like elections or parliament" would be a good thing. But for the very next question they also say that "having a democratic political system" would be a good thing. Thus, for many people these things are not mutually exclusive. This would suggest that either they don't really understand what democracy means, or that they're working with a very different definition of democracy than we do.
3) On that note, if you ask them to talk about problems that come along with democracy, they start talking about low pensions, unpaid wages, unemployment, high prices, and crime. Notice that none of these things really have anything to do with democracy per se. They are not components of the classical definition of liberal democracy. But this is what democracy means to Russians because this is what they had in the 1990s when they had supposed "democracy." This doesn't necessarily mean that Russians don't want the classic "goods" of democracy - free speech, elections, freedom of assembly, free press, etc. - but it does mean that any political elites trying to carry the mantle of democracy will have a hard time convincing people to follow them. Democracy and democrats have a bad name in Russia.
4) But how much do Russians really want the classic "goods" of democracy? When asked what the most important problems facing Russia today are, nobody - nobody - said anything about loss of freedom of speech, the loss of a free press, the strengthening of the state, the erosion of political competition. Again, it was all about pensions, unemployment, wages, and prices. Nor did people believe that protecting liberal rights are among the most important functions to be fulfilled by the state.
5) Regardless of what the want or don't want, the respondents with whom we spoke are extremely passive when it comes to politics. While nearly everyone could give examples of policies made by the state in the last 15 years that they were unhappy about, the vast majority of respondents expressed their dissatisfaction by talking about it with friends and family. Nothing more. A few people said they had or might be inclined to sign a petition in the future, but hardly anyone said that they would be likely to attend a demonstration, for example.
What does this mean for Russia's political development? It seems clear that the state has systematically be reducing the number of independent poles of political power - the media, the duma, political parties, the courts, the governors have all had their wings clipped by the Kremlin. It seems that the only force remaining that might be able to exercise political power in opposition to the state are citizens themselves by taking to the streets in large numbers. But as the many demonstrations in Russia in the last few months have shown, even this method is being severely restricted by the state. But beyond the state's actions discouraging mass protest action, my interviews demonstrated that most people are simply apathetic to political action and are unlikely to take to the streets anytime soon. So those of you waiting for a new revolution shouldn't hold your breath....
6) A series of questions were asked whereby respondents had to rate whether some of Russia's neighboring countries are more democratic or more authoritarian. Not surprisingly, their answers didn't really reflect the true democraticness of the countries under question, but rather reflected subjective opinions about what they thought of those countries. Thus, Estonia and Ukraine were most often labeled as fairly authoritarian countries, whereas Belarus is downright democratic. After all, "that Lukashenko is a good muzhik!"
7) People were asked to rate the political system in the Soviet Union under Brezhnev. Not surprisingly, they rated it fairly positively. However, when asked whether such a political system would suit Russia today, most answered that it would not, stating that "that was a different time, and things have changed now." I found this surprising, as most superficial surveys you read about in the news assume that because people rate the Brezhnev era highly they must want things to be like they were in "the good old days." Many people did mention problems with the Brezhnev era - empty shelves being the most frequent answer - but, like it or not, now they have a new system with new problems. So they'll get by.
So, there are some tentative observations. I'll again repeat the warning that this is a small sample and isn't necessarily representative of all of Russia. There will be another 20 interviews coming from Yaroslavl and Nizhny Novgorod, but even at 40 it won't be representative. The main attraction will come later this fall when we conduct a representative nationwide survey of 1,500 Russians. Then I might be able to say something definitive, though you'll probably have to wait for the dissertation to get the juiciest material. But like those waiting for the revolution, I wouldn't hold your breath - it might be a while...
23 May 2007
Off to find Russia
It turns out that I'm in Russia to do more than blog about funky food and collect Lenin busts. I almost forgot about that dissertation I'm supposed to be doing research for...
And so, I'm getting out of Moscow tonight to start doing surveys/interviews with "real Russians" in the provinces of Tambov and Lipetsk. It's a long and boring social scientific story about how I came to choose those oblasts, so I'll spare you the pain.
In any case, I'm hoping I'll have some good stories and pictures for the blog when I come back online in about a week. I have a feeling I'll get some good material: for example, I'm doing a homestay in Tambov with an older woman who reportedly makes moonshine and sells it from her house. Should bring in some colorful characters!
And so, I'm getting out of Moscow tonight to start doing surveys/interviews with "real Russians" in the provinces of Tambov and Lipetsk. It's a long and boring social scientific story about how I came to choose those oblasts, so I'll spare you the pain.
In any case, I'm hoping I'll have some good stories and pictures for the blog when I come back online in about a week. I have a feeling I'll get some good material: for example, I'm doing a homestay in Tambov with an older woman who reportedly makes moonshine and sells it from her house. Should bring in some colorful characters!
22 May 2007
What were you looking for?
Siberian Light, one of the top Russia blogs out there (for good reason), recently posted a link to a new set of rankings of the English-language Russia blogosphere which has promted a debate over whether it's appropriate to make a blog's site traffic data publicly available. (In case you're wondering, yours truly ranks 31st. I like to think that's respectable, but there are lots of things I like to think that aren't entirely true).
I choose not to make my site data public because I think it infringes on the privacy of my readers. But what I do like to do is look at my stats privately which is quite amusing. One of my favorite past-times is looking at the Google searches that brought people to my blog.
It helps that my blog shares a title with a work of far greater literary genius, Arthur Koestler's Darkness at Noon. In fact, putting in that reference right there probably just bought me another 10 hits a day. And so, high school and college students trying to find "symbolic meaning of darkness at noon" often have the misfortune of stumbling onto my blog where they're more likely to find the symbolism of a well-cured pickle.
The other one that has come up recently with surprising frequency is a search for "Lenins n Things." I can only imagine they're really looking for the store, "Linens n Things," and that it's a typo or they can't spell. But why would you click on a link that's clearly not advertising sheets, towels, or kitchenware if that's what you're looking for? Maybe they really are looking for Lenins n things. Goodness knows I've got a lot of Lenins. And things.
Finally, my favorite which just popped up tonight (and prompted this post) was a search for "picture of the fall of the Soviet Union." I had to chuckle at this, as it implies that there was a precise moment when the Soviet Union "fell," much like the Berlin Wall fell, and that maybe there was a lucky photographer who captured that split-second moment with his camera. I suspect the searcher might be a 10th grader writing a history report who needs to do a bit more reading to realize that the fall of the Soviet Union is better measured in weeks, months, even years.
Nonetheless, it brings up an intriguing question for you Russianists reading this: if you could pick a single photo (or maybe a couple) that somehow capture "the fall of the Soviet Union," which would it be? Yeltsin on the tank? Yeltsin confronting Gorby at the podium? The final lowering of the hammer & sickle over the Kremlin?
If anyone has any nominations, send them to me (an actual photo is best, but if all you've got is a description of a photo you once saw, that's OK) and I'll put them all up.
Email: rubashov17 [at] gmail [dot] com
I choose not to make my site data public because I think it infringes on the privacy of my readers. But what I do like to do is look at my stats privately which is quite amusing. One of my favorite past-times is looking at the Google searches that brought people to my blog.
It helps that my blog shares a title with a work of far greater literary genius, Arthur Koestler's Darkness at Noon. In fact, putting in that reference right there probably just bought me another 10 hits a day. And so, high school and college students trying to find "symbolic meaning of darkness at noon" often have the misfortune of stumbling onto my blog where they're more likely to find the symbolism of a well-cured pickle.
The other one that has come up recently with surprising frequency is a search for "Lenins n Things." I can only imagine they're really looking for the store, "Linens n Things," and that it's a typo or they can't spell. But why would you click on a link that's clearly not advertising sheets, towels, or kitchenware if that's what you're looking for? Maybe they really are looking for Lenins n things. Goodness knows I've got a lot of Lenins. And things.
Finally, my favorite which just popped up tonight (and prompted this post) was a search for "picture of the fall of the Soviet Union." I had to chuckle at this, as it implies that there was a precise moment when the Soviet Union "fell," much like the Berlin Wall fell, and that maybe there was a lucky photographer who captured that split-second moment with his camera. I suspect the searcher might be a 10th grader writing a history report who needs to do a bit more reading to realize that the fall of the Soviet Union is better measured in weeks, months, even years.
Nonetheless, it brings up an intriguing question for you Russianists reading this: if you could pick a single photo (or maybe a couple) that somehow capture "the fall of the Soviet Union," which would it be? Yeltsin on the tank? Yeltsin confronting Gorby at the podium? The final lowering of the hammer & sickle over the Kremlin?
If anyone has any nominations, send them to me (an actual photo is best, but if all you've got is a description of a photo you once saw, that's OK) and I'll put them all up.
Email: rubashov17 [at] gmail [dot] com
21 May 2007
Marriage, the Universal Language
I witnessed an exchange today between my host parents that confirms the fact that marriage is marriage the world around:
Host Mom: Enters apartment after a very long day's work. Looks at the box laying on the floor and asks, "What's this?"
Host Dad: "That's a weed whacker." [I confess, I don't know the word for "weed whacker" in Russian, but I understood the other word in the two-word sentence (это) and I knew what the box was for, so I used my well-honed skills of contextual translation.]
[In fact, an hour earlier Host Dad had been giddily putting it together, even taking it for a test run in his bedroom. I was watching when he accidentally weed-whacked the bed skirt. Oops, just hope Host Mom doesn't see that...]
Host Mom: "What do we need that for?"
Host Dad: "For the dacha."
Host Mom: "But we don't need it. How much did you pay?"
Kind of reminds me the time I brought home the deli slicer...
Host Mom: Enters apartment after a very long day's work. Looks at the box laying on the floor and asks, "What's this?"
Host Dad: "That's a weed whacker." [I confess, I don't know the word for "weed whacker" in Russian, but I understood the other word in the two-word sentence (это) and I knew what the box was for, so I used my well-honed skills of contextual translation.]
[In fact, an hour earlier Host Dad had been giddily putting it together, even taking it for a test run in his bedroom. I was watching when he accidentally weed-whacked the bed skirt. Oops, just hope Host Mom doesn't see that...]
Host Mom: "What do we need that for?"
Host Dad: "For the dacha."
Host Mom: "But we don't need it. How much did you pay?"
Kind of reminds me the time I brought home the deli slicer...
20 May 2007
My Broken Slav-O-Meter
It used to be pretty easy for me to tell the Russians apart from the non-Russians on the Metro and in the streets of Moscow. Seven years ago when I first studied in Moscow, I figure I could identify foreigners (of which I was one) with accuracy somewhere around 95-98 percent. Of course, I never actually stepped up to someone and asked them, "excuse me, are you a foreigner?" so I guess I don't really know my success rate. But I like to think I was pretty good.
Now, the Russians who are reading this blog are probably not impressed. I'm sure they can identify foreigners with 99.999 percent accuracy, and they do most days. How did that waitress know to pull out the English menu before I even opened my mouth? I think it's easier to identify a handful of "the others" when the majority are "the selves," than vice versa. Or, to put that into an intelligible sentence, it's easier for Russians in Russia to identify foreigners than it is for Americans in Russia to identify foreigners (or Russians, for that matter). In a country that was trained for 70 years to view foreigners with skepticism, it's no wonder they're good at rooting us out.
Given this fact (which is really just a guess rather than a fact), I was pretty proud of my high accuracy rate (which was really just a guess rather than a rate). And besides, what else is there to do on the Metro for entertainment besides try to figure out who's Russian and who's a foreigner. It's not like I'm going to pull out my copy of Dostoevsky in English and start reading - then the other bored American in the wagon will be able to pick me out. Even worse, the babushka sitting across from me will start staring at me with alternating looks of intense suspicion and utter revulsion. No, the book stays in the bag. Besides, nobody reads Dostoevsky on the Metro, no matter what the language.
It's best to work by process of elimination. In other words, it's easiest to establish that someone is a Russian using a variety of indicators or "tells." If the person is coded as "Russian" along a sufficient number of indicators, he or she is set aside and the next subject is analyzed. If the individual cannot be coded as Russian along any of the indicators, then he or she is concluded to be "foreign."
Granted, it's not as scientific as it sounds (but what social science is?). Some indicators - fur coats dyed purple with gold trim, for example - are sufficient conditions for declaring Russianness. Others, like squared-toed shoes on men, are simply "probable" indicators, which in conjunction with other indicators might jointly indicate Russianness. Of course, the art lies in those difficult calls where there are just a couple of "probables" but no definite indicators.
I usually start by looking at a person's shoes. I used to sell men's shoes at a department store during summers in high school, which is probably why I'm biased towards shoes as the first indicator. Russian men tend to wear black dress shoes with squared toes. If it's a European-style squared toe, you might have to move to another indicator. If the toe extends out 2-3 inches beyond where a normal shoe would end, getting pointy and even maybe curling up like an elf bootie before squaring off, he's probably a Russian. Oh, and if they're white slip-ons, that's a pretty sure sign too. In the event that it's a European-looking shoe, check for the black dress shoe/blue jeans combination, as that's generally a sufficient identifier.
Among women the shoe trick is usually quite reliable for the simple reason that few American women would subject themselves to the torture of wearing high-heels all the time. All I can say is I'm glad I'm not a Russian woman (and not just because of the uncomfortable shoes...). Additionally, the "super pointy toe that's about 4 inches too long" helps identify Russian women.
At this point I should mention that really we're dealing with the younger generation here. The older Russians on the Metro are, well, unmistakably Russian. It's at the fringes, in the younger generation, where the real identification work is to be done.
If the shoes don't give away the answer, then it's time to move on to another indicator. Next I'll usually move to another reliable one, hair style. Apparently the mullet, whether for men or women, is quite fashionable in Moscow these days. Alas, if you've got one, there's no way you're from America unless you're 1) from the deep South or 2) being really ironic. Similarly, the abundance of bangs, severely cut in a straight line across the forehead of young women, is usually a sign of a likely Russian.
If shoes plus hair haven't given you your answer yet, it's time to move on to clothing. In this category it's easiest if you know what's in fashion or at least acceptable in your own country. Outfits that don't fit into either group are indicators that the wearer is operating under a different set of fashion norms. Examples include: fur, fur, fur. Whereas it's only for the very wealthy in the U.S., even ordinary Muscovites are covered in it in the winter. I even saw a fox shawl that still had the head attached, poor fella! Also, lots of sparkly gold things attached to a matching skirt and jacket with patches of revealing lace. Among young men, the "adiddas" track suit (note the extraneous "d") and the aforementioned blue jeans/dress shoe combo are pretty good indicators.
Here we're starting to run out of options. Facial structure is occasionally helpful, as there is a classic Slavic look. But many Russians don't really have the look, nor is it impossible for foreigners to have it too. Maybe take a look around for accessories: does the person have a book bag or a fancy Jansport backpack? Is he reading a book? What language is it in (actually, you should have noticed this long ago, shame on you for being inattentive!). Is she smiling on the Metro (definitely not a Russian, unless it's a girl who's giggling because her boyfriend has her hands all over her). Are he and she locked in an epic battle, each apparently trying to suck the other's face off? Public making-out (which is really too gentle a term for what goes on) should probably be declared a national pasttime.
If all else fails, you can hope that he or she has a friend there. Is the friend unmistakably Russian? Better yet, are they speaking fluent Russian to each other? (again, if you missed this from the beginning and have been wasting your time until now, you need to refine your observation skills).
If, after all this, the individual cannot be coded as "Russian," chances are he or she is a foreigner.
But that was 7 years ago. The thing is, it seems my Slav-O-Meter, my ability to tell (with 95-98 percent accuracy, I think) Russkiis from innostrantsy isn't working very well lately. I'm having a much harder time telling Russians from foreigners these days.
It's not that the foreigners are cleverly blending in now, adopting pointy shoes and gaudy coats as camouflage in Moscow's subterranean jungle. No, the foreigners are still foreigners. Rather, it seems that the jungle is starting to resemble the invaders. That is to say, the Russians are starting to look more and more like westerners, which really throws a wrench in my system.
Sure, a good portion of young Russians still are characteristically Russian in appearance. But it's getting harder to tell, as some of them have undergone complete and convincing transformations. Black dress shoes and pointy heels have been replaced by Reebok and Adidas (one "d") athletic shoes, sparkly sweaters replaced with hooded sweatshirts. Columbia parkas are taking the blace of furs and black leather coats, while brightly colored backpacks are slung over shoulders. While mullets, tragically, are still the rage, at least there are gelled and spiked dos interspersed among the guys these days.
This has all been a bit disconcerting for me. On several occasions, I've been convinced that a young woman across from me was an American, probably a student studying abroad like I once did. She even has a friend, also clearly an American by the looks of things. Maye I should go introduce myself and fidn out what they're studying. Yep, there they are, two Americans...that speak flawless Russian. Well, so much for the system. Glad I didn't make a fool of myself.
I was about to give up hope of recalibrating my system when the most magical event happened: it hit 80 degrees in Moscow last week. Apparently heat is the great Russifyer, as all those Russians who were cleverly disguising themselves as westerners showed their true colors once summer struck hard. Out came the see-through shirts that reveal everything down to the lace pattern of her bra. Unfortunately, my first sighting of such a shirt was a rather doughy woman who's been hitting the smetana a little too hard it seems. I thought this pudgy princess couldn't be topped until I saw a woman wearing a similar transparent shirt the next day, only she was about 8 months pregnant. Where pants and skirts once resided there are now little strips of fabric too small to really be called skirts. More like "rts," since they're only half-skirts (fortunately most "rts" wearers do have the assets to back up their fashion statements...) And it seems that shirts have been replaced with silky napkins stolen from the Chinese restaurant, delicately laced to one's body with a couple of strings.
Nor has the revealing power of summer been limited to Russian women. Among men there has been a sudden proliferation of the ubiquitous sleeveless t-shirt, allowing the wearer to show off his pasty white guns. And as he clings to the bar above his head on the Metro, it allows us to remember that Russians have yet to become obsessive about deodorant like Americans. You can imagine what July on the Metro smells like...
And so, while it has traditionally been the Russian winter that has destroyed the foreign invaders, now it seems that the Russian summer can take some credit for allowing the Russian people to throw off their foreign chains (by which I mean sweatshirts) and be who they really are: Russians, through and through.
Now, the Russians who are reading this blog are probably not impressed. I'm sure they can identify foreigners with 99.999 percent accuracy, and they do most days. How did that waitress know to pull out the English menu before I even opened my mouth? I think it's easier to identify a handful of "the others" when the majority are "the selves," than vice versa. Or, to put that into an intelligible sentence, it's easier for Russians in Russia to identify foreigners than it is for Americans in Russia to identify foreigners (or Russians, for that matter). In a country that was trained for 70 years to view foreigners with skepticism, it's no wonder they're good at rooting us out.
Given this fact (which is really just a guess rather than a fact), I was pretty proud of my high accuracy rate (which was really just a guess rather than a rate). And besides, what else is there to do on the Metro for entertainment besides try to figure out who's Russian and who's a foreigner. It's not like I'm going to pull out my copy of Dostoevsky in English and start reading - then the other bored American in the wagon will be able to pick me out. Even worse, the babushka sitting across from me will start staring at me with alternating looks of intense suspicion and utter revulsion. No, the book stays in the bag. Besides, nobody reads Dostoevsky on the Metro, no matter what the language.
It's best to work by process of elimination. In other words, it's easiest to establish that someone is a Russian using a variety of indicators or "tells." If the person is coded as "Russian" along a sufficient number of indicators, he or she is set aside and the next subject is analyzed. If the individual cannot be coded as Russian along any of the indicators, then he or she is concluded to be "foreign."
Granted, it's not as scientific as it sounds (but what social science is?). Some indicators - fur coats dyed purple with gold trim, for example - are sufficient conditions for declaring Russianness. Others, like squared-toed shoes on men, are simply "probable" indicators, which in conjunction with other indicators might jointly indicate Russianness. Of course, the art lies in those difficult calls where there are just a couple of "probables" but no definite indicators.
I usually start by looking at a person's shoes. I used to sell men's shoes at a department store during summers in high school, which is probably why I'm biased towards shoes as the first indicator. Russian men tend to wear black dress shoes with squared toes. If it's a European-style squared toe, you might have to move to another indicator. If the toe extends out 2-3 inches beyond where a normal shoe would end, getting pointy and even maybe curling up like an elf bootie before squaring off, he's probably a Russian. Oh, and if they're white slip-ons, that's a pretty sure sign too. In the event that it's a European-looking shoe, check for the black dress shoe/blue jeans combination, as that's generally a sufficient identifier.
Among women the shoe trick is usually quite reliable for the simple reason that few American women would subject themselves to the torture of wearing high-heels all the time. All I can say is I'm glad I'm not a Russian woman (and not just because of the uncomfortable shoes...). Additionally, the "super pointy toe that's about 4 inches too long" helps identify Russian women.
At this point I should mention that really we're dealing with the younger generation here. The older Russians on the Metro are, well, unmistakably Russian. It's at the fringes, in the younger generation, where the real identification work is to be done.
If the shoes don't give away the answer, then it's time to move on to another indicator. Next I'll usually move to another reliable one, hair style. Apparently the mullet, whether for men or women, is quite fashionable in Moscow these days. Alas, if you've got one, there's no way you're from America unless you're 1) from the deep South or 2) being really ironic. Similarly, the abundance of bangs, severely cut in a straight line across the forehead of young women, is usually a sign of a likely Russian.
If shoes plus hair haven't given you your answer yet, it's time to move on to clothing. In this category it's easiest if you know what's in fashion or at least acceptable in your own country. Outfits that don't fit into either group are indicators that the wearer is operating under a different set of fashion norms. Examples include: fur, fur, fur. Whereas it's only for the very wealthy in the U.S., even ordinary Muscovites are covered in it in the winter. I even saw a fox shawl that still had the head attached, poor fella! Also, lots of sparkly gold things attached to a matching skirt and jacket with patches of revealing lace. Among young men, the "adiddas" track suit (note the extraneous "d") and the aforementioned blue jeans/dress shoe combo are pretty good indicators.
Here we're starting to run out of options. Facial structure is occasionally helpful, as there is a classic Slavic look. But many Russians don't really have the look, nor is it impossible for foreigners to have it too. Maybe take a look around for accessories: does the person have a book bag or a fancy Jansport backpack? Is he reading a book? What language is it in (actually, you should have noticed this long ago, shame on you for being inattentive!). Is she smiling on the Metro (definitely not a Russian, unless it's a girl who's giggling because her boyfriend has her hands all over her). Are he and she locked in an epic battle, each apparently trying to suck the other's face off? Public making-out (which is really too gentle a term for what goes on) should probably be declared a national pasttime.
If all else fails, you can hope that he or she has a friend there. Is the friend unmistakably Russian? Better yet, are they speaking fluent Russian to each other? (again, if you missed this from the beginning and have been wasting your time until now, you need to refine your observation skills).
If, after all this, the individual cannot be coded as "Russian," chances are he or she is a foreigner.
But that was 7 years ago. The thing is, it seems my Slav-O-Meter, my ability to tell (with 95-98 percent accuracy, I think) Russkiis from innostrantsy isn't working very well lately. I'm having a much harder time telling Russians from foreigners these days.
It's not that the foreigners are cleverly blending in now, adopting pointy shoes and gaudy coats as camouflage in Moscow's subterranean jungle. No, the foreigners are still foreigners. Rather, it seems that the jungle is starting to resemble the invaders. That is to say, the Russians are starting to look more and more like westerners, which really throws a wrench in my system.
Sure, a good portion of young Russians still are characteristically Russian in appearance. But it's getting harder to tell, as some of them have undergone complete and convincing transformations. Black dress shoes and pointy heels have been replaced by Reebok and Adidas (one "d") athletic shoes, sparkly sweaters replaced with hooded sweatshirts. Columbia parkas are taking the blace of furs and black leather coats, while brightly colored backpacks are slung over shoulders. While mullets, tragically, are still the rage, at least there are gelled and spiked dos interspersed among the guys these days.
This has all been a bit disconcerting for me. On several occasions, I've been convinced that a young woman across from me was an American, probably a student studying abroad like I once did. She even has a friend, also clearly an American by the looks of things. Maye I should go introduce myself and fidn out what they're studying. Yep, there they are, two Americans...that speak flawless Russian. Well, so much for the system. Glad I didn't make a fool of myself.
I was about to give up hope of recalibrating my system when the most magical event happened: it hit 80 degrees in Moscow last week. Apparently heat is the great Russifyer, as all those Russians who were cleverly disguising themselves as westerners showed their true colors once summer struck hard. Out came the see-through shirts that reveal everything down to the lace pattern of her bra. Unfortunately, my first sighting of such a shirt was a rather doughy woman who's been hitting the smetana a little too hard it seems. I thought this pudgy princess couldn't be topped until I saw a woman wearing a similar transparent shirt the next day, only she was about 8 months pregnant. Where pants and skirts once resided there are now little strips of fabric too small to really be called skirts. More like "rts," since they're only half-skirts (fortunately most "rts" wearers do have the assets to back up their fashion statements...) And it seems that shirts have been replaced with silky napkins stolen from the Chinese restaurant, delicately laced to one's body with a couple of strings.
Nor has the revealing power of summer been limited to Russian women. Among men there has been a sudden proliferation of the ubiquitous sleeveless t-shirt, allowing the wearer to show off his pasty white guns. And as he clings to the bar above his head on the Metro, it allows us to remember that Russians have yet to become obsessive about deodorant like Americans. You can imagine what July on the Metro smells like...
And so, while it has traditionally been the Russian winter that has destroyed the foreign invaders, now it seems that the Russian summer can take some credit for allowing the Russian people to throw off their foreign chains (by which I mean sweatshirts) and be who they really are: Russians, through and through.
16 May 2007
Good News/Bad News
Bad news: the hot water hasn't worked for two days. I like showers. I bathed using the teapot and sink today. Tomorrow I may have to use a friend's shower.
Good news: I got my hair cut yesterday which included shampoo, etc., so it was OK that I didn't take a shower yesterday.
Bad news: I forgot to tell the stylist not to touch the few remaining hairs on top, which she cut very short (I inherited my father's hair genes, and the male pattern baldness is, well, patterning). Now it's kind of fuzzy up there and I feel naked.
Good news: I sprung for a 30-min back massage at the haircut place. It felt SO good, even if it was a Russian man with his hands all over me.
Bad news: the most intimate physical contact I've had with anyone in a month is a Russian man, and I had to pay for it.
Good news: I got two fabulous Lenin sculptures this weekend, along with a licensed copy of Pirates of the Caribbean 2.
Bad news: the DVD is a legit copy with a region 2 (Europe/MIddle East) code, so I can't watch it on my computer. So much for buying legal DVDs instead of pirated ones (which can be watched anywhere in the world)
Good news: Hmm...
Bad news: I've run out of good news.
Good news: I've also run out of bad news.
Good news: I got my hair cut yesterday which included shampoo, etc., so it was OK that I didn't take a shower yesterday.
Bad news: I forgot to tell the stylist not to touch the few remaining hairs on top, which she cut very short (I inherited my father's hair genes, and the male pattern baldness is, well, patterning). Now it's kind of fuzzy up there and I feel naked.
Good news: I sprung for a 30-min back massage at the haircut place. It felt SO good, even if it was a Russian man with his hands all over me.
Bad news: the most intimate physical contact I've had with anyone in a month is a Russian man, and I had to pay for it.
Good news: I got two fabulous Lenin sculptures this weekend, along with a licensed copy of Pirates of the Caribbean 2.
Bad news: the DVD is a legit copy with a region 2 (Europe/MIddle East) code, so I can't watch it on my computer. So much for buying legal DVDs instead of pirated ones (which can be watched anywhere in the world)
Good news: Hmm...
Bad news: I've run out of good news.
Good news: I've also run out of bad news.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
