CC BY
8Victor Nemchinov*
Lev Reisner: Intellectual Portrait of an Orientalist
Abstract: The 200th anniversary of the Institute of Oriental Studies in 2018, which also coincides with Lev Reisner's 90th anniversary, provides a suitable opportunity to look back and re-evaluate the results of scholarly infatuation with the East. Against the broad background of Russian Oriental studies in the second half of the 20th century, the paper reflects upon the catalytic role of individual cases of intellectual integrity in overthrowing the doctrinaire one-sided views of the world related to the theory of socio-economic formations and traces the roots of independent thought under an authoritarian ideology. One such factor is the strong impact of family tradition which, in the case of the Reisner family, involves at least five generations. This can be called the "lasting in-family dialogue". Another key factor deals with the affection for the East in general and for India in particular. Furthermore, it discusses the generation of researchers that evolved under the very special hothouse conditions within the Institute of Oriental studies. Provided the researcher has the courage and stamina to follow his or her own way in Oriental studies, a hermeneutic approach can enable one to go much further in understanding the requisite human variety than colleagues would do in other humanitarian disciplines with "monocular optics".
Keywords: Institute of Oriental Studies, humanitarian research, Lev Reisner, family, intellectual dialogue, developing world, growth theories.
The recent conference (March 19-21, 2018) initiated by the Department of General Issues, IOS RAS and dedicated to the 90th anniversary of Lev Reisner opens up a series of timely discussions on the role of national Oriental studies in the global quest for humane knowledge formation. Sketched against the academic background and intellectual portrait of this fine scholar this paper will briefly outline the triad of "work-creativity-family". These three main features predefine a viable human self that involves imperatives to cater to one's family, professional work and talent(s). This paper will begin by offering the author's personal impressions of intangible academic capital that had generously imbued the atmosphere inside the Institute of Oriental Studies (IOS), Russian Academy of Sciences in the second half of the 20th century. That was a fruitful research period that evolved due to an unusual combination of objective developments and subjective circumstances. A sweeping wave of national liberation in the former colonial and dependent countries opened up new democratic opportunities for social, political, cultural, economic and military cooperation with the socialist world. But it also revealed our quite inadequate knowledge of the East1. A very experienced member of the top
* Victor Mikhailovich Nemchinov - Ph.D. Economics, Senior research fellow, Institute of Oriental Studies, RAS viators@mail.ru
1 P. Shastitko, How Moscow Institute of Oriental Studies was Closed // The East. Afro-Asian Societies: History and Modernity. No 6. 2002, p. 90-91.
leadership who had alerted the party to this dire situation and who himself was of Eastern origin had been given very broad prerogatives to remedy the situation. The trust of the Politburo that B. Gafurov possessed lifted the suffocating ideological censorship over social sciences from the domain of Oriental studies. The post-Stalinist thaw gave wings of enthusiasm to intellectuals and young researchers who were encouraged by the IOS's benevolent director to bridge the gap between traditional and contemporary studies.
An Atmosphere of Intensive Academic Dialogue
The gorgeous empire style building of the Institute in the old city center was, in itself, a visible embodiment of a century long history of the study of the languages and cultures of the East. When the author joined the Institute in 1976 the noble scent of academic tradition was still in the air of the former Lazarev Front Asian institute, and it was not by chance that the director, the academician Gafurov, stubbornly resisted to his final breath any envisaged relocation. Himself a former party head of a union republic, he abhorred the very idea of giving up this gem of scholarship, with an inbuilt library and own print house to just another republican administrative mission although the obsolete transfer claim had been endorsed by V. Lenin's "sacred" signature.
The very walls kept the old feeling of dignified living, and people who came to work there acquired a posture quite detached from the habitual mundane rat race of office workers. On the topic of the representative function, it should be noted that today one can enter Lazarev's mansion only through an inconspicuous side door, whereas previously one was privileged to mount the columned front entrance steps after passing around the Lazarev obelisk surrounded by carefully groomed exquisite rose bushes.
Contrary to the present bureaucratic federal logic stating that scientists cannot properly operate and should not manage their own real estate, the Institute's then management - the invariable party, trade union and administrative leadership "triangle" - was efficient in taking good care of both tangible assets and intangible human capital. The administration frequently safeguarded and in fact defended the researchers who sometimes fell under the vigilant eyes of the state security services. (A few of these memorable cases will be mentioned elsewhere). It should be noted that even during the most stagnant years, the research activity boldly enjoyed freedom and was not constrained by the current formalistic indices of creativity measurements. As an example of this, in an academic discussion that took place long before the "thaw" when Vadim Solntsev remarked to Vladimir Toporov that the views expressed were not Marxist, the latter retorted, "And I am not a Marxist". To the reply, "Then, what is your outlook?" Toporov's answer was, "You know, it is similar to that of the very first Christians"2. Such freedom of cognition was objectively granted by the trans-disciplinary nature
2 Personal interview with Tamara M. Sudnik.
of the Orient that had stretched across the history and variety of disciplines, ranging from ancient civilizations to contemporary "third world" realities. This had stirred up natural curiosity and stimulated informal exchanges of opinions. Moreover, the public thirst for novel attitudes and bold expression of views was not limited to the professional framework alone.
Academic skits "kapustniki" brought in a friendly funny streak of topical criticism. Among those who conceived the performance, composed the narrative, frequently in poetic form, and enacted it on the stage were Leonid Alaiev, Mikhail Drobishev, and Lev Riesner. Why was regular involvement in this entertainment that went on for years, always with a novel script, so important to Lev Reisner? For one thing this was an officially permitted concession to humor imbued corporate criticism. But such performative behavior enacted on the local stage was full of life, had a lasting impact on the keen audience and, with its bitingly bold arrogance, was long remembered as a type of designer business card of its authors/participants. Orientalists brought up on Mikhail Bakhtin's theory of laughter culture and familiar with Victor and Edith Turner's pilgrimage concept3 felt that they were part of a ritual that made skit actors look very charismatic. Moreover, the audience with its actors and protagonists could cross the border of self-censorship and dogmatic obfuscation. Outside of the traditional borderline of preset, established social roles, "kapustnik" was a place, a special domain of joined creativity. It initiated the Orientalists into an informal micro-community "communatas" strongly devoted to fostering an open live dialogue of unbiased understanding. Later this charisma of creativity allowed Lev Reisner to attract and engage bright participants in very serious innovative and highly professional collective research work.
Such "communatas" would sporadically reemerge each time one could get out of the publicly ascribed stereotypical formal roles within the habitual social structure of society. Get where? Get by means of creativity into another, not yet settled ground of advanced understanding, to where the previously attained conventional statuses petered out, were leveled and new focus points of common interests became vital for its participants. Lev Karsavin called this human condition "our third identity". That was not an easy endeavor. Similar points of assembly would aesthetically and emotionally sprout beyond the academic walls of IOS, disseminating the spirit of selfless dialogical collectivity out into a much broader public domain. For instance, many a time the artistic council of the dashingly popular Taganka Theatre in which Lev Delyusin, head of the China department, played an authoritative role was able to defend the acceptance of Lubimov's sharp performances by the conservative Ministry of Culture. The Institute's researchers launched innovative courses of Oriental studies in several pedagogical colleges, and conducted then still unfamiliar master classes for history students and high school graduates. Widely acclaimed were public lectures presented by the Institute's scholars to various audiences across the country.
3 Turner V., Turner E. Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Culture. N.Y. 1978, Columbia University Press.
Profound academic and public manifestations of this nature could be implemented over the years under the benevolent unorthodox administration of the Institute's directorate. It is the author's opinion that this lively interest in people's ingenuity was vital for the spiritually rich atmosphere that has made possible dialogues both within and between research generations. It was also a well formally structured, businesslike working atmosphere. Apart from two "library days" set aside for individual research work outside of one's working place in the Institute, there were three scheduled days a week that researches had to spend in the Institute's premises. On those days all employees would mix together and actively interact in a working atmosphere. That was the time for frequent academic presentations and open lectures, and discussions were held at least once a month. There were also regular working meetings in the research departments, sectors and vertical groups. Analytical presentations and special reports were made, new ideas were presented, and individual as well as group projects were scrutinized. Local and external specialists who had just come back from abroad were welcomed to share their observations, comments and projects. Topical presentations by well-known colleagues such as L.N. Gumilev, V.V. Krylov, A.I. Medovoi, B.F. Porshnev, V.L. Sheinis, M. A Tcheshkov and several others from a wide range of research institutions were extremely popular among scholars and humanitarian specialists.
The period from the mid-1950s to mid-1970s was particularly fruitful for research on a very broad scope of paramount fundamental problems of the East. Yet most popular at that time was the twin idea of linear progress and of the modernist future for humanity, naturally de facto presented not in a globalist perspective but as social justice concepts with an emphasis on overcoming neocolonialism in the East. (The author calls this drive of thought the "red shift" and incidentally it also predefined Lev Reisner's vector of academic interests). Key issues and important milestones of the "third world" theories were then set up in heated debates and fierce academic battles. G.A. Dadashev, V.L. Sheinis, G.N. Veitz, and N.Z. Volotchek belonged to the "Leningrad school" of developing world economic research that was established under the leadership of Sergei Tul-panov4. The "Moscow school", informally headed by Alexei Levkovsky, focused more on traditional, pre-capitalist and multi-sector specifics of post-colonial Asian societies, and Lev Reisner's economic study of India was a contribution to this theory5.
In subsequent years the range of fundamental Oriental studies has continued to remain unconstrained, but research priorities were shifting. With the arrival of Eugene Primakov as IOS's director, politically acute and pressing problems were brought to the forefront of Oriental studies. Primakov managed to boost the interest of decision-taking authorities in considering analytical recommendations of
4 S.I. Tulpanov, Essays on Political Economy (Developing Countries). M. 1969; S.I. Tulpanov, V.L. Sheinis Topical Political Economy Issues of Contemporary Capitalism. L. 1973.
5 L. Reisner, Is Transition from Economic Cluster to Capitalist Mode of Production Possible? (On Limits of Capitalist Transformation in Developing Countries) // Asia and Africa Today. M. 1978, No 11.
the Institute's scholars and he was able to set up a workable feedback mechanism with the top echelons of political power in the country. That proved to be very beneficial for the governmental support of Oriental studies, ranging from assistance to archaeological excavations in Egypt, Yemen and Tajikistan to acquiring the top level computer complex for economic forecasting in the Institute. Analytics made just on time, on the heels of the events or even in anticipation of the pending events in the East, was largely effective due to the previously accumulated solid stock of fundamental trends that became useful for the needs of political research. The whole constellation of bright scholars contributed to the success of this dual focus of research. Among them, to mention just a few, are Leonid Alayev, Grigory Kim, Eduard Kulpin, Alexei Levkovsky, Alexander Pet-rov, Eugene Rashkovsky, Glery Shirokov, Nodari Simonia, Anis Vafa, Leonid Vasiliev, and Vladimir Yashkin. This list should have included dozens if not hundreds of other notable names. Among these first-class Orientalists, the figure of Lev Reisner - a brilliant Indologist, connoisseur of language, history, economy and culture - had attracted particular attention by his special kindness, affability, insatiable attention and openness to people around him. The combination of these rare human traits placed around him a soft aura that was vividly felt in his attitude towards people, in the format of his academic studies and in the very style in which he presented his research.
The Red Shift
Today, with several political, ideological and analytical epochs having already gone into oblivion, attempts to reconstruct the Russian academic atmosphere of the last third of the 20th century might require several clarifications. On the bicentenary of Karl Marx's birthday it is appropriate to make some relevant remarks. Academic studies of Lev Reisner were terminated prior to an abrupt political turn in the country that had ousted Marxist theory from scholarly usus. The loyalty screen, as we have found out, is easily reversible. In Reisner's time no social study could be approved for print without opening bibliographic references that had to be placed ahead of the general alphabetic order and were to be accompanied by several suitable, pious quotations. For inquisitive researchers of global social evolution it was much harder to pour the new "wine" of bold thought into the overly reused quotation format. Under the guidance of Lev Reisner authors of the "White Book", as an exception, managed to succeed6. Most mediocre yet welcomed papers did pay habitual lip service to such censored regulations, yet in fact they were "serious as a stroke" in blocking free thought, and this compulsory conformity in form as well as in substance was just what the Soviet leadership expected from mainstream social sciences. The author would call such suffocating almost cosmic scholastics "bureaucratic background radiation".
6 See: L. Reisner, N. Simonia Evolution of Oriental Societies: Synthesis of Traditional and Modernist. M. 1984.
Opposed to this was the intense desire for a truly innovative cleansing of academic thought from the vestiges of dogmatic reductionist interpretations of Marxism. The drive boosted by the destalinization of the 1950s inspired the "thaw" generation to which Lev Reisner belonged. The author calls the specific perception of global historical process by this small group of bright intellectuals the "red shift". They considered Marxist social analysis to be a defining scientific system applicable to justifying the linear progressive development of mankind, to explaining modern capitalist reproduction systems, to understanding the dynamics of economic crises and to conceptualization of major social formations historical succession. "Marx himself represents the most consistent effort of the nineteenth century to transform historical study into a science. Moreover, his was the most consistent effort to analyze the relationship between historical consciousness on the one hand and the actual forms of historical existence on the other. In his work, the theory and practice of historical reflection are intimately linked to the theory and practice of the society in which they arose. More than any other thinker, Marx was sensitive to the ideological implication of any conception of history which claimed the status of a «realistic» vision of the world"7. As Orientalists, Lev Reisner and his fellow economists were more interested in the multi-sectored household specifics of Eastern societies. In dealing with economic basis they studied simple linear change of production modes, paying special attention to long delays primarily caused by external pressures. At the level of social superstructure they were interested in ways human self-alienation had been preserved for centuries in multi-sectored structures of "hydraulic societies" and how their sustained backwardness might get a chance for a major change of social order. Mass destitution, disease and escaping hunger were high on the "third world" research list of priorities. Hence the choice of the social path of independent national development came to the forefront of research that implied an emphasis on tackling the issues of neocolonialism and decolonization, of catching-up development, of the role of state planning and of production.
Why did such sharply posed vision of dramatic interaction between all the three worlds become imperative for socially progressive description of the long-term global dynamics? Hayden White suggested the following modality of explanation. He paid attention to the fact that Marx's relegation of history contained both synchronic analysis of the basis that remains constant in structural preservation of human interrelations and diachronic analysis of the movement that overthrows that basis, thereby giving rise to a new type of relations. According to Marx this envisaged the construction of the plot of human history simultaneously as a tragedy and as a comedy although man lives tragically with his endless failures in setting up a viable human society due to laws and agencies that govern history and perpetuate his social standing. Man at the same time lives comically because the interaction of man and society ascends to a future point when society
7 White H. Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in the 19th century Europe. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973, p.60 see (part III on Marx).
would be dissolved and a true commonwealth would be set up, a communist way of existence as a genuine historical fate of man8.
Family Story
Returning to the initial personality triad "family-home-work" that the author tends to slightly modify in sketching the intellectual portrait of Lev Reisner, the focus is now shifting on to the role of his family. There are families where love and consent reign. Such families give the world dignified worthy citizens capable of respecting themselves and appreciating otherness. Otherwise, unhappy families leave their members exposed to various external pressures. The unprotected individual is forced to change his or her civil priorities, and the person deprived of his or her natural roots is turned into an easily mobilized unit for any public need or for any state construction priorities. The revolutionary overturn and spiritual breakup of a person was accompanied by a forgetful renunciation of one's own moral affiliation with the family as well as by physical destruction of one's homestead. Prince Sergei Volkonsky noted in his memoirs about revolution, "Violence can knock through every door, but it also destroys the home that it enters. Theories of these people regarding art I could never understand. 'Proletarian art' is as incomprehensible to me as 'proletarian science' and as 'proletarian culture' in general. What is meant by 'proletarian music' or 'proletarian geometry' is dark for me"9. The goal of eliminating the "old man" was also served, as M. Bulgakov had put it, by the notorious "housing issue" of the early socialist era, which had substituted "one's own corner" in a communal living flat for the viable concept of one's home. Only very few households managed to escape the sad fate of home deprivation.
The Reisner family was lucky. The famous name of Igor Reisner's sister - Larissa Reisner, commissar protagonist of the "Optimistic Tragedy" preserved their home from expropriation, and their homestead strengthened in them very precious and rare feeling of unblemished intelligent dignity. We all know that families can be happy and unhappy. The latter families, from a transpersonal point of view, are formed when the image of the world of one of its members dramatically collides with the mismatched picture of the world, originally inherent in this family. Compulsory unraveling of family social origin and nationality, when applying for work or study in our country, had firmly predetermined the status in a social hierarchy of all citizens on the basis of the notorious class-national principle that mercilessly divided society into "right" and "wrong" people. Lev Reisner had the bad luck of being born into a family of Orientalists with a well-known name, and he had consciously built his whole life so as not to cause even a drop of dishonor on his family, but to uphold the family chronotope in his academic work and in dealing with other people. There were, perhaps, two important traits
8 Ibid. P. 331.
9 S. Volkonsky, My Recollections. Vol. 2. My native land. Everyday Life. Being and Existence. M.: 2004. p. 319.
in his behavior. One of them was felt to be due to the fact that people who had lived abroad for some time (not on business trips, but due to twists of fate) carried a specific aura that was distinctly felt in most insignificant details. Scholars like Yuri Nikolayevich Roerich and Yuri Nikolayevich Zavadovsky who worked in the Institute possessed this trait. Behind the elitism of such scholars was not arrogance, but openness, natural benevolence, incorruptible human sincerity and uncalculated friendliness. Allowing himself audacity in his own work, Lev Reisner showed subtlety, approving the work of colleagues, ironically sparing in his criticism and constantly encouraging his colleagues to go further in their research. Many of them can proudly call themselves his spiritual disciples, even though he had very few direct students. However, when it came to assessing professionalism, he would harshly state that the work was substandard, and he was not afraid to tell the truth openly, even to his own disadvantage, as was, for example, the case with M. Kapitsa, when Reisner publicly expressed his firm resentment at the general meeting of the Institute the proposal of the Directorate to elect the Scientific Council by the list.
Another characteristic feature of his was an intelligent tenderness in relations with people and excessive modesty in what in current parlance would be called "positioning oneself." He absolutely did not aspire to come to the fore, and he often characterized himself as, "I am a shady plant". Disagreeing with the position of his opponents, leaving all straightforwardness, he added at the end of his criticism, "But however you might be right about some points". Painfully aware of the cruelty of his time, Lev Reisner, like many others, could not neglect its pressure. But where people with strong nerves could be taken away from the quasi-reality of the surrounding world by the saving grace of alcohol, he had to pay with periods of painful silence and nervous stress. "I am a grim man," he used to say about himself in such cases.
According to his daughter, orientalist Marina Reisner, he himself spoke very little about his family roots and even about his own father, whom she did have a chance to know. For him it was more important to have a casual, everyday creative dialog with her, with his classmate wife, also an orientalist, and much later with his grandson Andrei Kudelin, who has also become an orientalist. The founder and the first head of the largest national search engine Yandex expressed very well the way the family spirit forms a free, honest and talented personality. "I grew up in a family of excellent students. My mother was a gold medalist, my father was gold medalist, my sister is a gold medalist, and I am a gold medalist" says Ilya Segalovich. - "We had such a family oriented family. The apartment is always clean, the food is cooked, the lessons are checked, everyone is busy with their own business, and everyone knew what they wanted. ... But on the whole it was such a very well built-up life, with a clear understanding of what is right. The main regulation was to not lie. And it was not only the principle of an intelligent person. My grandmother on my mother's line was of a priestly family. Her ancestors until the beginning of the nineteenth century all served in the church.
And from there ran the delicate threads of this righteous life. I knew what was good and what was not. I always knew what was right"10.
The mechanism of the proper home education is built upon a regular and well-timed personal choice and accessible two-way communication with one's own Other. About this nexus Lev Reisner wrote to his daughter Marina the following, "Every person lives, relying both on his own experience and on the experience of others. One's own experience is better in all respects, except for one thing; it is gained, as a rule, at the most expensive price, whereas the experience of other people, in a certain sense, comes to you just for free. In a way, I'm, in our particular case, such a different person, even though I am your father, who would like to transfer to you something, while the brains are still working clearly. The most important thing in life is relationships with other people"11. An essential increase in the perceived and appropriated meanings occurs in this close to the heart, open home environment. That is why such mutually beneficial conversation with an interesting interlocutor is so necessary. That is where the self-growth of an individual takes place. Such was the case Lev experienced with his father, Igor Mikhailovich, professor of Oriental history, and he in his turn had such conversations with his father, professor of law, Mikhail Alexandrovich Reisner. The areas of professional specialization of each member of this large family were different, but the main thing remained common, namely the living curiosity and genuine interest in the East, which had imbued the gliding family role scale "son-father-grandfather" with the enormous spiritual work across generations that underlies any viable family dynasty.
10 D. Sokolov-Mitrich, Yandex. The Book. M.: Mann, Ivanov and Ferber, 2014. P. 10.
11 L. Reisner, Instead of a Will. M.: 1974, manuscript.
