The formation of ethnic identities is influenced at the same time by state discourses and local experiences. It is, however, hard to draw a line between ‘ideology’ and ‘daily life’, as Mark Bassin and Catriona Kelly (Reference Bassin, Kelly, Bassin and Kelly2012: 9) point out, because everyday practices are often shaped by relationships with political institutions. Melissa Chakars, the author of The socialist way of life in Siberia, focuses on this complex interplay of ideology and everyday life in Buryatia (south-central part of Siberia) pondering the following questions: Who are the Buryat people? How were their identities shaped by Soviet-time reforms? Answers to these questions are sought from a rich compilation of sources ranging from statistical and archival data and publications in Buryat newspapers to transcripts of Soviet TV-shows.
The theme of ideology and daily life in Buryatia was primarily developed by Caroline Humphrey in her famous anthropological study of the Karl Marx collective farm (Reference Humphrey1983) and its updated edition Marx went away – but Karl stayed behind (1998). In her Reference Humphrey1983 work Humphrey argues that the categories existing in Buryat society long before the Soviet time were applied to new relationships, but preserved their meaning. The updated edition reveals, conversely, that while the Marxist ideology behind the collective farming disappeared, the shadow of it still remains in people's daily practices (Humphrey, Reference Humphrey1998). While the fieldwork of Caroline Humphrey took place in the 1960s – mid-1990s, Melissa Chakars has the opportunity to study Soviet Buryatia in retrospect – analyzing it more than 20 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union. This temporal separation could provide additional insights to the discussion on Buryat Soviet identities.
The socialist way of life in Siberia starts with the story of a Buryat woman Darizhap Zham'ianova, a participant of the local radio program back in 1978, who describes how her life – the path of a highly educated successful scientist – is very different from the life of her mother, a rural woman who had to struggle every day to survive. The story of Zham'ianova may serve as an illustration of Soviet propaganda, but it is far more complex than that, as it reflects the real changes in the region and the opportunities which many Buryat people used in order to improve their lives. The book is devoted to people similar to Zham'ianova and their experiences during the second half of the twentieth century. Chakars convincingly argues that the Buryats were not simply passive victims of state ideology; they actively engaged in the building of their new life in the Soviet Union. The book highlights three main reasons for the appreciation many Buryats felt towards ‘the socialist way of life’: pre-Soviet history and the existence of an intellectual class long before the 1917 Revolution; the availability and attractiveness of educational and professional opportunities; and, finally, the emergence of institutions that encouraged Buryats to follow a prescribed notion of success.
The first two chapters are focused on Buryat experiences in tsarist Russia and the early years of the Soviet period. Chakars reflects on the increasing state involvement in the daily lives of Buryats; starting with tributary relations, then the growing influence on Buryat institutions and the design of legislation, and finally the Soviet consolidation and modernization plans. However, long before the 1917 Revolution, the Buryats had their educated intellectual class, mainly due to the large amount of Buddhist monasteries (datsans), which became educational centres of the area (page 17). In the beginning of the 20th century, Buryat intelligentsia offered various ideas for the modernization of the region, though many of these options were simply dismissed with the strengthening of Soviet rule.
The third chapter titled The new Buryats is primarily devoted to the opportunities offered to the Buryat people alongside the new Soviet rule. A large influx of Russian industrial migrants into the region after the 1930s diminished the percentage of Buryat population, but at the same time created opportunities for social mobility. As ethnic Russians dominated industry in the republic, the Buryats came to occupy a number of cultural, educational, political jobs. This shift was especially noticeable among Buryat women who were practically not present in many professions before the 1960s due to their low literacy rates and poor Russian language skills; however, by 1989 more Buryat women than men had higher education degrees (page 106). While the author points out rightly that Buryats were overrepresented in many professional and political positions, in 1939–1989 they comprised only slightly more than 20% of the total population (compared to around 70% of Russians), and this proportion may make the reader wonder to what extent the Buryats could truly influence the policies of the republic.
Chapters four, five and six concentrate on different forms of institutions and practices engaging Buryats in the Soviet ideology: standardized education, reforms in literature and new forms of media. Soviet-time ideological shifts influencing public opinion can be illustrated with the story of the Buryat folklore epic poem Geser (page 165−175); in this reviewer's opinion, this is one of the most vivid examples in the book. The research on Geser and its depictions in literary works were initially supported by the Soviet authorities as it went alongside the general discourse on the importance of the leader in history. The main character of Geser gained a new meaning during the war, serving as a model of brave patriotic fighter. However, in 1946 the newly appointed first secretary of Buryatia criticized Geser for having nationalist implications; following the changing course, many politicians, scholars, writers who had praised Geser in previous years started criticizing it harshly. The poem was officially censored until its ‘rehabilitation’ in 1951, when the research on Geser continued. The story of Geser is just one example of the interrelations between the Soviet system and educational and cultural institutions. While the ideology shaped literature, education and media, they supported, grounded and promoted the ideology. Again, Chakars points out that the Buryats were not simple receivers of this information; they took part in shaping the curriculum, producing literary works, or refining the messages of newspapers, radio and television.
In the conclusion Melissa Chakars returns to the question which was posed in the opening paragraphs: how was the Buryat identity shaped by Soviet modernization? The author argues that although the Soviet period resulted in significant language loss, at the same time it created new identity markers through literature, media and institutions of cultural knowledge. The post-Soviet years marked significant changes in Buryat society, primarily a great resurgence of Buddhism and shamanism, as well as revitalization campaign for the Buryat language. However, the new influences could not simply erase the effects of Soviet modernization. While the Buryats could not escape engagement with modernization policies, they took part in the implementation of these policies and the construction of their identity under the new Soviet rule. They chose their paths and took advantage of the benefits the state offered. While these choices resulted from local experiences, they were at the same time strongly influenced by dominant discourses. This conclusion illustrates the complex intertwining of ideology and daily life of Soviet citizens.
The book is recommended to everybody interested in the history of Buryatia and Siberia; it provides a strong example of Soviet national policies and their effects on ethnic minorities. The study analyses extremely rich data and pictures a vivid image of Soviet Buryatia in all its controversy. However, as similar experiences were shared by many other ethnicities in the Soviet Union, sometimes the book lacks comparative perspective. At the same time, the author states that ‘Soviet modernization produced identity confusion and transformation for people across the Soviet Union throughout its history’ (page 262) − the case of Buryatia was definitely not unique. Following that, it would probably be useful to draw more parallels, not only with other regions in Siberia, but also with the areas in other parts of the country such as, for example, The Republic of Karelia. Still, this in-depth study of ‘the new Buryats’ will for sure provide valuable insights for those researchers who are engaged with other national minorities in the Soviet Union.
