Heh… Speaking of Culture. Let’s hope ForumAdmin doesn’t understand Russian.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkQtEo3Vm2Q&feature=related

Andrejs

P.S.
Just to clarify. When Andrejs insists that identity should be primarily linguistic he is refering to Latvia’s National Identity and not Latvia’s Latvian Identity. I’ll stipulate that there’s more to Latvian identity than just language. There has to be room for shlageri in there somewhere.

Andrejs

Same group - Leningrad - take on elections.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CLBANCVHTw

I was making fun with the Stewardess (it’s just that for about two years, a man couldn’t get a beer without her).

Better Russkie music -- here.

Certain Latgallians tried to convince Bobčiks that “burlaks” was actually a Latgallian word…

/P

Peteris Cedrins - 16 March 2008 11:56 PM

I don’t see what the above has to do with it,

I disagree with him “ka 2. pasaules kara laikā Latvija cīnījās Hitlera pusē”—Latvia did not fight… not on either side, and not for itself. Latvians fought on both sides. It was a tragedy, and this is not a day of celebration.

Vysu lobu,
/P

Peteri,

Thanks a lot for your links,

I am not agree that “Latvia did not fight”.

Latvia did as 13 ships under Latvian flag fought against Nazi in Atlantic. ( 8 - in U.S. Navy also 5 - in structure of Royal Navy forces).

Due to this circumstance Latvia all the same has taken part in the WWII as these ships were under jurisdiction of the Latvian government in exile.

Typically that these ships were declared “enemy” in the USSR. It turns out, they were both against Hitler and Stalin.

Regards,

Juris

When I was last in Latvia and my cousin and I were discussing music, I mentioned Boris Grebenshikov and he said , “Oh, yes, he really IS something!  But you have to understand Russian in order to really appreciate him.” Regretfully, I don’t of course, but as I said once to Juri (Augusta Dels) about a Russian poet, I feel the pulse--soul!

I was trying to find the Radio Silence video clip, which I did, but not the interview he had with David Letterman, which went something like this:  Letterman to Boris:  “Here in America rock stars can make a fortune, did you know that? “ Grebenshikov looking glum for a minute and then responding, “That may explain why American music is so UNINTERESTING!”

And then, this, (my thanks to you, Peteris for the introduction) still remains one of my favorites: the ‘Lilith” and a cornucopia of other songs.

http://www.aquariumband.com/multimedia.html

Irena

Irena - 01 April 2008 12:04 PM

When I was last in Latvia and my cousin and I were discussing music, I mentioned Boris Grebenshikov and he said , “Oh, yes, he really IS something!  But you have to understand Russian in order to really appreciate him.” Regretfully, I don’t of course, but as I said once to Juri (Augusta Dels) about a Russian poet, I feel the pulse--soul!

I was trying to find the Radio Silence video clip, which I did, but not the interview he had with David Letterman, which went something like this:  Letterman to Boris:  “Here in America rock stars can make a fortune, did you know that? “ Grebenshikov looking glum for a minute and then responding, “That may explain why American music is so UNINTERESTING!”

And then, this, (my thanks to you, Peteris for the introduction) still remains one of my favorites: the ‘Lilith” and a cornucopia of other songs.

http://www.aquariumband.com/multimedia.html

Irena

Iren, it is very interesting and something new for me as i listen BG long ago.

First, why did he record this disc in America, under the shadow of the glory of legendary Bob Dylan, if american rock culture is not interesting to him?

Second, i think it is not true Grebenshicov said, as he started in Piter’ underground clubs ( the legends stalking around were connected with KGB control upon these) and all drive was in rock counter- culture taken from the Western examples - Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Uria Heep, Nazareth as well as Pink Floyd, Jim Morrison and Doors, Janis Joplin - these are were idols of BG’ generation - 70th.

Weren’t they interesting for him? Sure, they were.

Now, many texsts and music compositions of Aquarium and personally BG - of others authors, sometimes well-known, such as Alexander Vertinskiy. And even BG heat “Under the Blue Sky’ - “Pod nebom golubim” is the only version of wellknown Russian rocker, artist and poet Aleksey Khvostenko ( he was absolutely forbidden in the USSR, had lived in Paris, recently died in Moscow ) But the original text is “above the blue sky” and everything is changed. But Grebenshikov called this song as his own creature.

Also such BG “using” was concerning another ex-soveit poet and composer Anri Volhonskiy.

And recent concert of him ( Grebenshikov) in Cremlin seems makes him out of the real Rock.

“4D” - is it princess Diana?

By the way, as Grebenshkovs is very popular in Riga, as Prata Vetra - “Brainstorm” ( and Reinaars Kaupers) - in Moscow. Moscow girls are crazy from.

Regards,

Juris

Sveiki Juri!

As much as you know about BG, the little I know of him, about him and what you’ve told, I find interesting.  I hear what you say about his remark on the Letterman show(American music being uninteresting) ringing untrue because of his undoubted influence by the western, counter-culture, especially, Bob Dylan.  I found the remark funny, tinged with a kind of unexpected sarcasm which made me laugh.  Doing a little googling at Wiki, I came across some info about Russian music, songs which traditionally emphasize “lyrical complexity over hooks and drives”, as opposed to American music, which could provide some insight, hints about his remark; and/or, ..."his relentless promotion of Tibetan buddhism in the 1990’s and his tendency to use buddhist-derived logic with touches of absurdism to avoid answering questions in interviews"… in other words, his “off kilter wit”.  But at any rate, I think people have a tendency to make something bigger out of what a rock star, celebrity says, ascribing meanings, interpretations which are/were never meant at all; something along the lines of what happened with Bob Dylan.  People making his songs fit in with their own version of political statements and comments about the war, ills of society, when in fact in some cases this was not what he (Bob Dylan) was saying, meant at all.  And then I remember that statement made by John Lennon (was it?) about the Beatles being more famous than Jesus Christ, which caused such a mighy fervor, my friend, not being allowed to play Beatles music in the house for ever and ever oh,soooo long ago!!  But, these are just examples of why I don’t tend to take these things very seriously—with a grain of salt.

So the Muscovite girls love Kaupers,"Brainstorm".  I suppose I’m not surprised.  Though I have to say that other than his being a Latvian, I don’t find him/his music all that special, unique and I’m sure all the sweet, young things(daughter’s) of my Latvian friends would give me a loud boo and a hiss!! And I say this, even though I do confess to getting weepy over that video--’This is my country’ and facing the reality of my now being an old lady, an old baby boomeress with a heavy dose of nostalgia for the past, whose thoughts hardly matter to most, especially in the realms about what’s hip and/or not and are definitely out of time as far as ‘where it’s at’ now.  But, to me, Kaupers is “cute” “sweet” in a bubble gum, teenie bopper kind of way, whereas Boris has so much more dimension, depth, taking you along on myriad journeys of explorations into the deepest recesses of the soul and when words alone fall short, there’s the music to carry it through, working it’s magic.  But, alas, it seems like BG has now arrived at that point in his life, where he’s probably not quite the idol he was once at least for the ‘girls’, considered, I imagine, to be an old chap at least in terms of the current music scene.

Irena

Labu Nakti, Iren.

People making his songs fit in with their own version of political statements and comments about the war, ills of society, when in fact in some cases this was not what he (Bob Dylan) was saying, meant at all.

Absolutely. Exactly.

About John Lenon who said about the Beatles that it is more popular than Christ indeed, i think, there is very great distance to Boris Grebenshikov. By the way, if i am not mistaken, Lenon was one who called Bob Dylan “Mr. Zimmerman” in the Beatles texts.

What about BG, he always was (doubtless) the part of Russian rock-culture (and not the most bright star of it, by the way) which was directly oriented Westward in the Soviet period - to American and some British groups and singers.

After the time of Freedom came, the most of these musicians began look for some “origin”, maybe “more Eastern” style. For example, as B.Grebenshikov in St.Petersburg as Andrey Makarevich ( “Time machine” group) in Moscow, who always said in all his old interviews that ‘there is the Beatles
and Led Zeppelin only for him” today he says that he came to Red Square “to pay attention for Putin and Medvedev as a respect”.

What about Prata Vetra i have listened to them a little. Once i had translated texts of their album ‘Four Shores’ wanted by some Moscow Brainstorm’ fans ( from Latvian into Russian as there was no English version yet) I think, it is the brand in Russia first of all, it is selling a lot and very well.

But i like some their texts indeed. In Latvian.

Ar Cienu,

Juris

Peča, Peča, Peča,

Is it me, or is it you?

Peteris Cedrins - 01 April 2008 09:12 AM

Certain Latgallians tried to convince Bobčiks that “burlaks” was actually a Latgallian word…

At least one of us was seriously inebriated at the time.  I’m quite sure that it was you.  Anyway, the crux of the “burlaks” thing was that it supposedly had different shades of meaning in Latgallian.  Namely, that the concept of “īt burlakos” didn’t have such a negative connotation way back when as it has now, in more modern times.

Thanks for the shout-out,
/R

Sveiki!

Pēteris wrote: “The movement that led to the restoration of the Republic had this as an anthem.  Perhaps it should be revised to Latvijas tauta? “

In the 20 or so years since the anthem by Akurāture was initially sung, the Latvian Republic has been re-established and almost solely held in the hands and governed by ethnic Latvians.  Don’t you think that we should actually be taking a look at the Constitution, which talks about the republic being formed by, and hence answerable to, the people of Latvia? 

How many more years (or decades??) is it appropriate to blame Russians and/or Soviets for the policies of ethnic Latvian politicians?  I’m well aware that there are any number of LOL participants who would happily do that.  But at what point can the electorate hold its representatives accountable for political decisions that have been made?  Is this year too soon? If so, then in which year does responsibility kick in for the politicos?

Visu labu,

Elizabete

How many more years (or decades??) is it appropriate to blame Russians and/or Soviets for the policies of ethnic Latvian politicians?

I haven’t done that—in fact, I joined Aleks in pointing out to Ambersun that we’re talking about the deeds and ethics of ethnic Latvian politicians. Of course we should be talking about the Constitution and the accountability of politicos. To talk about one thing doesn’t mean not talking about another thing. We’ve segued into this from what was initially a discussion of 16 March, after all.

Seventeen years since independence and sixteen years since the first language law came into force—but taking the bus from Rīga to Daugavpils and a taxi home, Friday, still meant a journey conducted by bus drivers and taxi drivers who can’t, don’t and/or won’t speak even rudimentary Latvian. We can talk about the roads, the buses, Šlesers, the failure of the taksists to turn on the meter, the junkies and urlas at the autoosta, etc.—but I am still going to talk about language and like issues, and that doesn’t mean I don’t care about the other topics.

Yes, the Constitution talks about Latvijas tauta, and I’ve probably brought that up here more often than anyone (may my vārdabrālis Briedis be my witness, heh). That doesn’t turn latviešu tauta into a meaningless term, nor does it automatically graduate everybody into the political nation. I still think it is backasswards to claim that a Latvian focus on genocide is an obstacle to the Russian press marking the deportations—I’ve given the reasons why I think so.

In essence, I don’t think an ersatz political nation can or should replace the Latvian nation. I do not buy the idea that nationalism is merely a distraction from the condition of the roads. One can have good roads and enforce the language laws. SC might pose as a defender of the rule of law for years—it is still a “Russian party,” inimical to the Latvian nation.

Vysu lobu,
/P

Sveiki!

“In essence, I don’t think an ersatz political nation can or should replace the Latvian nation. I do not buy the idea that nationalism is merely a distraction from the condition of the roads. One can have good roads and enforce the language laws.”

And yet it isn’t the ethnic Latvian nation but rather the political nation that has to address the issues that you’re mentioning, regardless of whether you’re talking about LV having the most expensive roads in the Baltics (and perhaps the EU), or the fact that among the many laws that aren’t enforced are also the language laws.

Despite the risk of sounding like a broken record - unless the electorate demands that the rule of law exist, it simply won’t happen by itself.  I personally scent danger when instead, I hear talk about the ethnic Latvian nation superceding the political nation and that some citizens are considered ‘guests.’ That sounds too much like looking for a convenient scapegoat.  Well, at least to me, it does.

Visu labu,

Elizabete

PS - Andrej K: are you around?  Eons ago (was it in 2002?) you posted a great “Diena” article by Jānis Peniķis about there being no reason for democracy to have failed in 1934.  Though you were good enough to send me the article privately, I can’t find it on my hard drive.  Do you still have it?

And yet it isn’t the ethnic Latvian nation but rather the political nation that has to address the issues that you’re mentioning, regardless of whether you’re talking about LV having the most expensive roads in the Baltics (and perhaps the EU), or the fact that among the many laws that aren’t enforced are also the language laws.

Language has to be addressed not only by laws and in education but by the speakers of the languages. It’s a matter of psychology. The laws are enforced quite frequently—see “Kurš valsts valodas pacients nomirs ātrāk?” and “Autobusa šoferis saņems brīdinājumu par nerunāšanu latviski.” Repeatedly assessing fines can even have a counterproductive effect—the “language police” “rīko sodu ekspedīcijas,” etc.

The Lithuanian resident in the second article:

Mans jautājums ir retorisks – kas īsti notiek Latvijā? Kāpēc mēs neesam spējuši iemācīt cittautiešiem cienīt valsti, kurā viņi izlēmuši dzīvot, cienīt tās himnu? Vai man savā dzimtenē tiešām vairs nav tiesību runāt un sagaidīt atbildi valsts valodā? Mēs taču nevienam cittautietim neliedzam sava starpā sarunāties viņu dzimtajā valodā. Gribu tikai, lai viņi cienītu to valsti, kurā dzīvo, iegūst izglītību un strādā. Vai tiešām tas ir daudz prasīts?

Her focus is on respect for this nation-state, and that’s where the dog is buried.

Despite the risk of sounding like a broken record - unless the electorate demands that the rule of law exist, it simply won’t happen by itself.

Certainly, I think we should demand the rule of law. I think that’s what our little Umbrella Revolution was about.

Attitude is a big part of whether the law is effective—one can fine people for spitting on the sidewalk, but this isn’t a police state.

At a national level, complaints about language have risen by 70% in the first quarter.

“Kārlis Šadurskis, Sandra Kalniete un Ina Druviete, turpmāk ar Latvijas žurnālistiem sarunāsies tikai latviešu valodā...”

I’d love to learn of the reaction to these things in Latvia’s Russian press. From what I’ve seen, its attitude towards language is the opposite—Segodņa offered free advertising to businesses that use Cyrillic on their signs, for instance.

By saying that I don’t see the political nation as a replacement for the Latvian nation, I mean that the political nation, while encompassing all citizens, is also an extension and/or outgrowth of the Latvian nation; the national language is Latvian, according to the Satversme, for example. “Viens likums visiem” applies to citizens, not communities—it’s not “one law for the Latvian and Russian languages,” for instance.

It’s not really a matter of the “ethnic nation” superseding the political nation—it’s a matter of defining the nation. To that part of the American Heritage definition I quoted before, this time in full:

3. A people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language; a nationality: “Historically the Ukrainians are an ancient nation which has persisted and survived through terrible calamity” (Robert Conquest).

With a state, we share a political nation—but we hardly share any of the above; in fact, we often have opposing views of history, for example. The latvju meitas and latvju dēli in the anthem don’t include the blossoming Russian or Polish girls—latvji is an ethnic designation. The flag is based on reports of the flag of a Cēsis tribe in the 1200s, reintroduced by ethnic Latvian students at Tartu.

The state is the result of the strivings for self-determination by the Latvian nation. Some from other ethnicities joined in, and minorities were invited to help build the Republic as soon as it was proclaimed. But the leader of Latvia’s Baltic Germans, for example, said then that this state was our thing, not theirs. In developing a democracy, minorities participated in the political nation, of course—but even in the parliamentary period there was considerable pressure from ethnic Latvians to make Latvia more latviska. That’s at least as natural as the determination of minorities, none of which had identified closely with the Latvian cause before, to defend their position.

Can the political nation be multinational (as opposed to multicultural)? I don’t think so. There will naturally be resistance to change, because we are indeed marginalizing the Russian language in the sense that this country will not be officially bilingual or bicommunal, though it was so de facto and to a degree—still is. Even if we develop rule of law as smooth and transparent as Scandinavia’s—the divide won’t disappear. Some will bridge the divide.

Regards,
/P

Sveiks, Pēteri!

Varu tikai pateikt, ka skats no malas ir savādāks.

The country has been entirely dysfunctional since Jūrmalgeits came to light in the late winter of 2006, when none of the oligarchs who were involved were brought to justice, though the populace, on the basis of the published tapes, fleetingly thought that this finally was inevitable.  What followed was an election where the oligarchs triumphed, and the electorate, which cast ballots in favor of the oligarchs - lost.  I can’t bear to list the ‘highlights’ of the last 18 months since then. 

For the sake of our friendship, we’ll have to ‘agree to disagree.’ Though, as you pointed out in your links, the latest round of new political entities is happy to ‘play the ethnic card,’ it’s impossible for me to believe that this is anything other than an attempt to divert attention from an economy that’s tanking and politicians’ overall failure to effect even minimal governance - much less furthering a rule of law.

Lai veicās!

Elizabete

Yes, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree—I do value your views and insights, Elizabete. I am definitely not trying to say that there isn’t a bardak above, and I do realize that the ethnic card gets played for purposes of distraction quite often. But I shan’t surrender the national (which is in some ways an expansion of the ethnic) card anyway, and there’s another side to that spiel—often, it can be reduced to “give up on that silly, distracting nationalism and fix the roads, which are asfaltēti in no language.” One of the things I am trying to say is that it is not an either/or—of course I am against corruption (who isn’t?), but I am not faced with a choice of voting for SC to weed it out, say. To put it bluntly, I won’t buy a “the latviešu lieta isn’t important, ja nu ___-ovs ir labs saimnieks” argument—it is just as weak as the “___ varbūt ir blēdis, bet vismaz atbalsta latviešus” argument.

And on a very real level, for me here, this is a problem—Eigims indeed had an impressive side to his administration, for example (and I voted for him the first time), but when it came to hiring a press secretary who couldn’t speak Latvian (!) or saying that his level of Latvian (almost zilch) was sufficient for Daugavpils… well, no can do. Bad, bad, bad on every level, and bad for Dvinsk. This isn’t trivial to me—it’s my linguistic environment. I find it perverse that I have had to learn more Russian than many of the people I encounter in the course of my day-to-day existence have learned Latvian. The taxi driver I invoked for an example, for instance, got lost—so here I was explaining in bad Russian how to get around the detour and such. We’re the minority down here—it’s not the Russkies who’re oppressed; it’s the Latvians, even now. The Latgales Laiks articles make that perfectly clear—as long as I can’t walk into a clinic and expect treatment in Latvian, there is a serious problem.

Dysfunctional, sure—but everybody’s not dead yet, so something must be functioning? There are a lot of things about Latvia that I love, and I wouldn’t trade them for the world. All the whirling coins have other sides—the cynical nihilism not rarely includes a healthy skepticism, for example. Not a few of my American friends are actually more down on the American system than many of my Latvian friends are on ours—and frankly I far prefer Latvia, personally. The rule of law has facets. How does what glimmer in the woods?

I can agree that the Kalniete moment I linked to is undoubtedly a political stunt—that’s part of why I posted it, actually. But look at its substance. Very often, LTV (or other channels) will show some honcho with subtitles. I am perfectly willing to understand that a man loves to speak in his native language. The trouble is that seventeen years after the language laws were first adopted (and they were adopted by a parliament elected when even the occupying army could vote), not a few of these business (and sometimes even cultural) leaders cannot f-ing speak Latvian. It is a sad joke, in every way. How do their employees speak to them? Well, there’s that study that shows that only maybe 12% of Russian managers use Latvian in the workplace. It is delightful to see Dubya trying his Spanish on the Texas electorate, perhaps—but the situation in Latvia is that Russian is still required, and a person claiming to be a community leader can still pretend to be part of this nation with no knowledge of the national language. Well, such people aren’t part of this nation as far as I am concerned.

I see all of this all of the time in the tangible world. Ingūna’s exhibit, for example—these gentlemen mumble a few words and then switch to Russian. I can hear the loudspeakers in the train yards from here—it’s all in Russian. Community meetings on Daugavpils TV are almost entirely in Russian. I know perfectly well that most Latvians are fluent in Russian. I have no resentment towards Russian on that level—it is no skin off my teeth to ask for a yaitso instead of an ola, and I have said that many a time. There’s such a thing as savstarpējā cieņa, though, and it is lacking, and it is mostly lacking on the Russian side, even now. The fundamentals are crystal clear, even when complex—you enter a room, you enter into dialogue, you find a vehicle. It will never be Soros-sponsored dialogi.lv mumbo-jumbo. That is not how language works. If we sit down at a table, we can speak in this or that, and we can communicate through gestures, etc, and we can call for čikens and mix metaphors and slang. But this is our country, and it is the only place on earth where Latvian is and must be the lingua franca. Most Russians cannot accept this, as far as I can tell. The invocation of the “our” brings about the anti-Fascist shivers? Thats just ludicrous, and at the risk of sounding like a broken record—this must be the home of the Latvian people (latviešu tauta). No Latvijas tauta can ever erase that need.

Vysu lobu,
/P