Village Values presents a detailed examination of the three life-cycle rituals (childbirth, wedding, and funeral) in Soviet (1950–1990s) and post-Soviet urban Russia. The author suggests that all three are unique blends of folk/religious, Soviet, and Western (in the Soviet interpretation) elements which meld into what Rouhier-Willoughby calls the Soviet ritual complex. In addition to describing the common practices in all three rituals as they perpetuated and at the same time undermined the accepted official norms, the study discusses the role of the ritual in establishing participants’ familial and social identities.
The introductory part of the volume lays out the theoretical framework for a discussion of life-cycle rituals in the Soviet/Russian context, providing a short overview of the nature and functions of the rituals in question, Soviet theorists’ interpretation of ritual forms and meanings, and gender roles in Soviet Russia. The subsequent parts describe the three rituals in detail, examining their constituent elements (from Russian folk tradition, Soviet socialist ideology, and Western consumerism); their role in creating new realities and negotiating identities for their participants and non-participants; and the ways in which they served to uphold certain socialist values and standards while rejecting others. The last two chapters discuss the changes these rituals underwent in post-Soviet Russia and conclude with a summary of the Soviet ritual complex.
According to the author, Soviet and Western values influenced childbirth and wedding practices to a degree, while funeral rites remained largely unchanged during the Soviet period. In their Soviet incarnation, both childbirth and wedding ceremonies were analogous to a manufacturing process, with an official insistence on science and rationality as the underlying rationale. However, the state’s attempts to create a funeral rite that highlighted reason and science over nature, emotion, and spirituality failed. That is, while the appeal to reason and science as well as the construction of uniform places like roddom and wedding palaces (with their rigid rules and schedules) helped to institutionalize the family and parenthood (allowing a degree of domination of the state over the individual), overcoming religious beliefs about death through the institution of cremation proved difficult. This enabled the funeral rite to remain largely within the unofficial domain and thus retain traditional folk and religious elements. Despite the differences, however, all three rituals can be characterized by many of the same features. These include the predominant role of women; the importance of community involvement; conflicting values of the state and the family in creating meaningful experiences for those involved in the ritual; and a mixture of folk and religious traditions, Soviet ideology, and Western values.
Overall, Rouhier-Willoughby’s volume is a well-researched and well-organized study that gives a close analysis of life-cycle rituals in twentieth-century urban Russia and provides “evidence of different attitudes in the society toward what it means to be a member and what values are most important at a given juncture in history” (4).
A few critical comments must be offered, though. The theoretical and contextual background for the study in the introductory section of the book is dominated by the views of Western scholarship on ritual and gender roles. Only one quote comes from a Russian source in this section and, although there are many references to Russian sources in general, they are often refuted by the contrasting opinions of Western specialists. The rest of the volume is well-balanced in this respect, but this comment should make the readership aware of a potential Western bias in the interpreting perspective.
Furthermore, more Russian glosses for some key words in the informants’ data could enrich the study. For instance, in a footnote (115), the gloss for “workers” in “Oh, what workers we are, we are workers” could provide an additional layer of meaning for the reader who speaks both languages. Whether the original is rabotniki (which is what it most likely was) or rabochie may lead to slightly different interpretations or conclusions.
Finally, it seemed unnecessary to include some of the comparisons between Soviet Russian wedding practices and Western ones, as in the statement about the wedding vows (154) or about contrasts in scheduling weddings in footnote 31 (158). These comparisons did not add anything of substance beyond what had already been mentioned, while they suggested an unnecessary value judgment on the ritual as it was practiced in Soviet Russia (implying that Western ways are superior).
These comments should not undermine the scholarly quality and importance of the volume. It makes a considerable contribution to the discipline and provides a rich recourse for any student of Soviet/Russian culture and society.
--------
[Review length: 751 words • Review posted on May 26, 2009]