An American scholar with a deep interest in Russian culture, particularly as it relates to the country’s Christian heritage as expressed through Russian Orthodoxy, James Billington was perhaps the foremost chronicler of Russia and its history for over 40 years. Billington first appeared on my radar in the mid-1970s while I was studying Russian Language and Literature at The Pennsylvania State University. It was at that time that I procured a copy of his The Icon and the Axe: An Interpretive History of Russian Culture – an intimidating tome even in paperback form. Thus having become aware of his vast knowledge of Russia, which he presented in intricate detail, not only in the main text of the book but also through an array of elaborative notes that in themselves could constitute a volume, upon noticing that the present book was referenced by another author, I decided to read it. Although a much smaller proportioned book than The Icon and the Axe, the basic format is similar, with the appendix containing notes clarifying the text and making up approximately one-third of the total 234 pages.

As can be said concerning the previous volume, erudition is the resounding qualitative characteristic of Russia in Search of Itself. Though a daunting task it may be to attempt a review of a Billington work, what I hope to accomplish from such an undertaking is to bring to the awareness of the casual Russia observer an author without parallel in matters pertaining to Russian culture. As the Librarian of Congress since 1987, Billington had access to a plethora of Russian-language media on which to draw for this project.

This book was published in 2004, which means that the conclusions the author made were based on information that is already 20+ years behind us. Adding to this, current history seems to have accelerated at Mach speed in the succeeding three post-Cold War decades with little, if anything, remaining constant in the interim that would give Billington a solid foundation on which to base his conclusions. However, I would suggest that this does not invalidate the results of Billington’s research per se.

What I found intriguing about the writer’s approach was the application of historical philosophical movements and their outcomes to, and their juxtaposition with, the emerging Russian realities at the close of the 20th century/beginning of the 21st century and of what their similarities/dissimilarities might be a harbinger for the immediate future. At the exact mid-way point of the book is what I would suggest is the core of Billington’s view, at the time of its publication, regarding Russia’s chances of success going forward:

“The popular appeal of xenophobic nationalism has probably not yet crested. Nor has authoritarian Eurasianism yet found either its most sophisticated spokesmen or its most appealing political demagogue. There are many potential disaster scenarios inherent in any return to autocracy in a country with Russia’s geopolitical location and so many weapons of mass destruction. However, if Russia were to succumb to negative nationalism and take a sharp autocratic turn, it would probably not last for long. Repression would be difficult to sustain in a vast country that has been so dramatically opened up to political freedoms and to the outside world in the information age. Nor does Russia have a large enough population or the military resources to sustain the kind of aggressive foreign policy that hypernationalistic states generally need to maintain their legitimacy.

“Eurasianism has spread autocratic seeds onto harrowed soil. But they have not yet taken deep root, and they look more like the autumnal scatterings of a withered plant than fresh growth with the promise of harvest. Eurasianism may well be the last gasp of a depleted intelligentsia seeking to cobble together an ideology that could revive Russian power and give themselves a central role in its exercise. It expresses a vague longing to see Russia as an empire rather than just a nation and to re-cement its inhabitants together with an Orthodoxy largely emptied of Christian content.” (p. 88, paragraphs 2-3).

For the uninitiated, yet who aspire to attain an all-encompassing view of the Russian cultural and philosophical landscape, past and present (as of 2004), I highly recommend this volume. Of course, a prerequisite read would absolutely be The Icon and the Axe.