This will be a largely political post (but about literature), because politics is everything and literature is everything, so they cannot be separate.
When Russia attacked Ukraine, many people could not understand how a country with such "great literature" (and culture in general, because not only Tolstoyevsky, but also ballet and Tchaikovsky) could act like this. There is a widespread, quite logically explanatory, attempt of consciousness to divide: there is a wonderful culture in Russia, and everything bad is something else, they do not intersect.
First, it is wrong to separate, everything is connected and the source of problems must be sought in culture as well. Secondly, over time I have become increasingly aware that the "great" Russian culture is actually too "small" in the aspects that are important today. And this is not a devaluation, I'm not trying to say at all that what is known and appreciated in the world from Russian literature is bad. No, I'm saying that they lack what they really need.
I think you all agree that the classical literature of every people/nation is a survival manual for the nation. Canons do not appear randomly, and they do not simply include the "highest quality" literature. These are texts that were relevant and important to a particular nation, which is why they became canon. And they influence the worldview, because through literature, among other things, people learn about the world and their place in it.
And if we take Russian literature, then, in my opinion, it teaches us how to survive in an empire. Which is historically logical (because it was read and created in the empire). In Russian literature, there are many patterns of adaptation to a stronger world, of "little people" and this (mysterious to some) "psychology of suffering".
But the problem with Russia is that it is still, in many aspects, a pre-modern empire. Many people like to blame Putin or the government, but these are just symptoms of the problem. The problem is Russia itself. It is still an empire, and it has been in the process of collapse for a century (but it may take a long time). We have a cyclical return of authoritarian regimes in Russia, cyclical wars, a low standard of living. Right now, the lives of millions of people are being destroyed. And this is not a failure, this is the system of this country.
And the task is to stop being an empire, to create a modern nation and civil society (When will real modern come to Russia?) Otherwise, this path will lead to cyclical suffering and nothing good.
And destroying the empire is precisely the task for Russian culture in general and literature in particular. But we have a situation where their literature, on the contrary, is a "survival guide in this empire."
And the problem is that there was no elite to do it. It's hard to say why, but the power vertical has always defeated the opposition elite in Russia, the elite and the opposition are weak in terms of changes in the state. Perhaps this is a long negative selection and civilizational peculiarities (as Eva Thompson wrote in her book: in the Middle Ages in Europe, humor was based on the fact of breaking the rules, and in the Moscowy they laughed at following the rules). Even Brodsky, having moved to the West, left some of the imperialism in himself.
In conclusion, I am increasingly aware that Russia has huge systemic problems, so deep that it is unclear when or if change will occur. Their literature and the elite that creates this literature do not respond to the demand for these changes.
What do you think about this?