Epstein M. N. Russian Spirituality and the Secularization of Culture. USA: Frank-Tireur, 2011. - 153 p.

Russian readers who follow the work of Mikhail Epstein and are interested in his works will probably not find much new in this book by the Russian-American cultural critic: it was previously published in Russian in the magazine Zvezda (1999. N1 and N2), as described in the introduction of the reviewed book. In addition, the main ideas of the book (about the dual nature of Russian culture and the need for a "middle ground" in it), as well as a number of images and examples, are found in the author's articles published in Russian fat magazines 6. They are also heard in M. Epstein's speech at the Liberty Award ceremony (A star. 2001. N7).

5. Here Luhrmann refers to: Hohn H.-J. Postsakular: Geselschaft im Umbruch-Religion im Wandel. Paderborn: Schoningh, 2007.

6. See, for example: October. 1996. N 9; 2000. N 7; Continent. 1999. N 102; Star, 2000. N4.

page 523
The main leitmotif of the book is reflections on the polarity of Russian culture both in the pre-revolutionary era and during the existence of the Soviet Union. This peculiarity of Russian culture turned out to be possible, according to the author, because Russia did not survive either the Renaissance or the Reformation and entered the path of secularization only in the XVIII century, leaving it by the middle of the next century. The main material on which the author is based is literature, and therefore the understanding of "secularization" in Russian history is based on the analysis of Russian literature of the XIX century: According to the author, with the return of religious fanaticism to literature (p. i) and the burning of the second volume of Dead Souls by Nikolai Gogol (p. 16), secularization in Russia is being replaced by the dominance of the Russian Orthodox Church. The subsequent period of one hundred and forty years, which ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, M. Epstein calls the Russian "neo-Medieval period". And right now, according to the author, it is very important to return to the path of secularization of Russian culture - the path of finding the " middle ground "(between the poles) and moving to the "ternary" system instead of the "binary"one. This book is about how this transition is possible, what the "middle ground" of Russian culture should be, and how its polarity is expressed.

Each section of the book (there are several of them) is mainly devoted to the disclosure of one of these key issues. At the same time, the book can be divided into two parts with a similar structure. M. Epstein begins the first part with a reflection on the failures of the "first secularization" in Russia and offers the reader a description of the" polar structure " as it developed in the Russian culture of the XIX century. Then he goes on to reflect on the need for a" middle ground "for Russia and presents a critique of the development of the" trinity model " of culture in Europe. At the end of this first part, he summarizes all that has been said about the "binary model" and presents his thoughts on the "ternary model", describes its characteristics and ideal character: and it is interesting that, in his opinion, none of the existing models of culture in the entire history of mankind has come so close to this "ternary" model (p. 48-49).

In the second part of the book, which we have conditionally selected, the author returns to the characteristics of Russian culture, already referring to the experience of the XX-XXI centuries. The author devotes the last two sections to the place of Orthodoxy in the "trinity" structure

page 524
Russian culture and the "second secularization" in Russia, which began after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The two parts we have highlighted and the sections that make up them successfully intersect and complement each other.

Let's take a closer look at these key thoughts of the author. Illustrating the polarity of Russian culture, M. Epstein uses examples from literature (for example, the confrontation between superreligiosity in the person of N. V. Gogol and religious atheism in the person of V. G. Belinsky). These two poles, having nothing in common between them, touch, "come together and connect, forming an incredible tension at the border" (p. 78). This is the main drawback of the "binary" culture system - the fusion of polarities leaves no place for the culture itself: it simply does not fit "on the narrow threshold" between them. In addition, the confluence of polarities creates new conflicts and contradictions - "twists" and "fractures" (p. 74): in Russian literature, for example, hyperbole can become litota, and praise-ridicule (p. 75-77); refusal to see the border between the world and the church (again in Gogol and Belinsky) It leads to the worship of both the former and the latter at the same time (in Blok and Mayakovsky); the connection of the sacred with the animal leads to the search for high meanings in the low manifestations of human nature: the holy fool as the central figure of holiness (p. 88);" holy drunkards " Yesenin, Yerofeyev and Vysotsky (p. 92). These shortcomings of the" binary "system allow the author, following Y. Lotman and B. Uspensky, to declare the need for a" middle foundation "for Russian culture, which will allow us to move to its"ternary model". This" middle ground", according to the author, should be humanism, the path to which is through the secularization of Russian culture. Already at the very beginning of the book, the author expresses an important idea that secularization should stand on neutral positions in relation to religion; secular, M. Epstein is convinced, is not the opposite of religious (p. 20). "Average" in the "trinity" structure of culture should not unify or neutralize polarities (p. 48 - 49) - such a structure cannot be reduced to either polarity or unity; its elements (religious, social, etc.) are incompatible, but also inseparable (p.46). The "middle base" prevents one polarity from dominating the other. It is the interaction of opposites in the "average" and on the border with the "average" that gives rise to the development of culture (p. 126).

page 525
The author, however, makes a reservation that as much as the presence of only opposing poles in a culture is harmful, the excessive expansion of the "middle base" can also be harmful (p. 12). An example of this is Western Europe, where since the 19th century the " neutral base "has been expanding, absorbing everything and destroying the boundaries between the poles and the" middle zone " itself (p. 33-35): the abnormal is equated with the normal, and the elite - with the mass. Following J. Lotman, M. Epstein notes the importance of preserving the boundaries between the fields of the "ternary model" of culture, because the development of culture occurs due to events at these borders (p. 35-37). Thus, in the" trinity model "of culture, not only the" middle ground " is important, but also the preservation of borders, the rejection of the dominance of not only any of the opposite poles, but also the middle neutrality.

At the end of the book, the author asks the question: what place will Orthodoxy occupy in the emerging "trinity" structure, which opposes itself to the world and sometimes sets the polarities of the" binary model " of Russian culture? (p. 105-107) In solidarity with N. Berdyaev, the author notes that Orthodoxy takes a nihilistic position in relation to everything that is created by man, and therefore in relation to culture; the Church made its contribution to Russian art culture, the author writes, "not through blessing or cursing, but through non-participation, 'outerness '" (p. 119). How true is this generalization? If we talk about the most recent time, it is worth noting that this conclusion may need some clarification. The materials included in the book date back to the 1990s. In the 2000s and 2010s, it is no longer possible to talk about the "detachment" of the Orthodox Church: At the very least, we are seeing a more active participation of the Church in discussions around objects and events of secular culture, which is connected both with the expansion of the" neutral zone " and, probably, with the new course of the hierarchy, in particular, Patriarch Kirill. Orthodoxy is no longer a catacomb, insecure culture (as the author notes on p. 109), but a phenomenon that crosses the boundaries between fields, provokes reactions from other participants and, thus, to use the author's terminology, participates in the process of forming the "trinity model" of culture. The question is how far the Russian Orthodox Church will go in its activity-

page 526
and how this activity will affect the border between the religious and the secular - whether it will lead to a strengthening of this border or, as the author suggests (p. 128), an increasing blurring of this border will still be the most likely scenario. In this sense, we can say that the problems of the transition from the "binary" structure of culture to the "trinity" structure, which are important for the further development of Russia, and the place of the Russian Orthodox Church in this process lose some of their relevance in the final sections of the book. Nevertheless, M. Epstein's arguments, as always, retain their originality and encourage reflection.

page 527

Permanent link to this publication: