On his 87th birthday, prof. Venclova attended an author's evening promoting his fresh book, published in Polish, entitled “Lithuania, my homeland”. The gathering took place at the office of the Kraków book publisher, at the global Cultural Centre, where the prof. besides agreed to answer any of my questions.
Nicodemus Szczygłowski: Professor, Lithuania and Poland have been creating a common state for centuries.This Union can be compared in Europe to, say, the union between England and Scotland.However, no 1 would think of calling Scotland ‘England’, as well as defining their common state.As far as the Republic of both Nations is concerned, it is inactive frequently called “Polish”.Why, in your opinion?Is it a question of deficiency of terminology?
Tomas Venclova: Yes, yes, it is simply a question of deficiency of terminology. England and Scotland have a common word – large Britain. Lithuanians and Poles besides have a common word for their common state, but it is simply a long and not very convenient word in usage – the Republic of Both Nations – which, however, emphasizes that there were 2 nations in this country, as in England and Scotland. There are besides differences between English and Scottish on the 1 hand and Poles and Lithuanians on the other. The Scots almost did not keep their language – unlike the Lithuanians who retained it – and it should be noted that Lithuanian is very different from Polish, and this is what clearly distinguishes Lithuanians from Poles. What connects Lithuania and Poland is Catholic religion. While the Scots have their own spiritual tradition, the English have theirs. Incidentally, not only are comparisons with Scots, but besides Irish.
There was a violent conflict between the English and the Irish, I would say, more bloody and worse in effect than the Polish-Lithuanian conflict in the 20th century. The Irish have besides not retained their language and talk English, the old Gaelic language barely exists. The Lithuanian language is different. In Lithuania, 3 million people talk Lithuanian. And that's how we're different from the Irish. I always repeat, we must remember that the Republic of Both Nations was something completely different from Poland, it was a common state made up of 2 different entities.
Can Lithuania and Poland present be treated as equal heirs to this common state? And how should Belarus and the Ukrainians be viewed and their function in this common state?
This state consisted of the Polish Crown and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which in turn was ruled from Vilnius, that is, the territory of present Lithuania, but which besides included Belarus and, to the Lublin Union, besides Ukraine. Lithuania now recognises the Constitution of 3 May, like Poland, and believes that the Constitution of 3 May, if it had not been destroyed by the Tsar occupation, would have opened up any space for the improvement of Lithuanian culture, as well as of Belarusian and Ukrainian languages and cultures. due to the fact that it failed, things began to make in a somewhat different way.
Czesław Miłosz erstwhile said about Vilnius that it is “a unusual city”. I quote: “It was a bizarre city of confused, overlapping zones like Trieste or Chernivtsi”. Of course, Miłosz meant the city of his childhood and youth, which in fact no longer exists in this form. In his speech at the book premiere, you mentioned that Vilnius is simply a city of all nations for which it is important. Among them are Poles and Belarusians. What do you think of the fresh discussion in Lithuanian society on the alleged "Litwinism" – understood fundamentally as the claim that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was primarily Belarusian.
I spoke to a Belarusian activist, an independency activist, an “anti-lukshenk” and I asked him to what degree the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in his opinion was a state of the Belarusians, and he replied: 1 100 percent. I was amazed and asked how much he thought it was a Lithuanian state. He thought of a minute and replied that he was besides 100 percent. Well, if that's what "Litvinism" means, then I don't mind. surely the Belarusian component was very noticeable in Lithuania. A large part of the nobility was of Belarusian origin, Orthodox religion, but not only. While Radziwiłłów were Catholic and Lithuanian, although they spoke Polish, the Chodkiewiczs were already of Belarusian descent, their ancestors spoke Russian or Old Belarusian, and they spoke Polish themselves – and in this sense they were not very different from Radziwiłłów. But they are inactive 2 different branches of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The problem is somewhat artificially blown away, I think that for provocative purposes, and I think Lukashenko besides has a business in it to blow it up to show, look, this full Lithuanian statehood was nothing but Belarusian statehood. It's not. It was a common state. Which both Lithuanians and Belarusians created. All these national differences of present cannot be referred to at that time, for at that time it was different. The concept of Lithuanian then meant both Lithuanian and Belarusian. Mikalojus Daukša was Lithuanian, spoke Lithuanian, wrote Lithuanian books. Francis Skoryn was Belarusian. He spoke Russian or Old Belarusian and published Slavic books. They both published these books in Vilnius. So this old Lithuania was double. It was characterized by both the Baltic and Slavic elements. I think that's just to be recognised. These “lithinists” who do not accept this are wrong, but I do not think they are very influential and I do not think they are very numerous. The wisers admit the duality of the Grand Duchy.
Imagine that Belarus is simply a free and democratic country in the close future.How should this country and Lithuania regulate their relations in order to avoid disputes about who is the Hunt?At least in specified a way that this does not lead to discussions akin to those on the "(non-)existence" of Macedonia (North) and disputes between Macedonians and Greeks?
While I am in contact with current Belarusian immigrants, refugees, as well as scientists and independency activists, I think that our disputes will not go as far as those mentioned between Macedonians and Greeks. I think it will be explained that the current borders are not disputed. In Europe, the only 1 who questions and violates borders is Putin. Vilnius was mostly the capital of Belarusian culture in the 20th century – but it was besides the capital of Lithuanian culture, besides 1 of the capitals of Polish culture, and in a sense even 1 of the most crucial ones, due to the fact that it was the city of Mickiewicz, Slovak, Kraszewski, Syrokomla, Moniuszko. It was besides the capital of judaic culture and the place where Russian culture was besides expressed, and not always in a bad way, by people of theatre, painters and so on. Well, Vilnius is... good of you to say he's got any Trieste in him, and a small Chernivtsi. I'd say he even has a small fresh York City in him, which is the center of many cultures. But Vilnius is even more advanced in this context than fresh York, due to the fact that in fresh York City the culture of English is clearly dominant, while in Vilnius, if we consider its full history, no culture or language has always explicitly dominated in history. In any periods it was 1 culture, in any others, but present even respective national cultures have the right to Vilnius and this right cannot be questioned. But cultural law is 1 thing, state law is another. However, Lithuania has an undeniable state right to Vilnius.
You mentioned Putin's regime, which is the only 1 breaking borders in modern Europe.How do Putin's government and its imperialism disagree present from older manifestations of Russian – or another – imperialism?
First of all, it's anachronistic. erstwhile imperialism was a thing more or little natural, even universally accepted. Imperialism is now anachronistic, the planet is no longer divided into spheres of influence of individual empires, becoming increasingly homogenous, increasingly globalized. Russia has taken a break from the general trend of the planet and is taking us back to the 19th, 18th and even earlier centuries. This has to change due to the fact that you can't swim against the current and successfully scope somewhere.
From a historical perspective, Lithuania has most likely never had as good a time in its past as in the past 20 years. Especially in terms of the political and economical opportunities offered by membership of the European Union and NATO. However, fresh years have brought any uncertainty. Russia's violent war is simply a real threat that cannot be underestimated. However, it is said that it is besides a war of values, a conflict between democracy and authoritarianism, which is based precisely on colonialism and imperialism. Britain was colonial and imperialist, but now it is no longer. The Germans were colonial and imperialist, now they are no longer. Well, it's not proven, it's surely said, but it's not proven that Russia is fundamentally different from Britain and Germany. In Russia, this process took longer. partially due to the fact that she inherited the Byzantine imperial tradition. But eventually, that can change. And erstwhile it's said that Russia was never a democracy, I say it's not true. Russia was democratic in 1917 – within 8 months, from the February Revolution to the October Revolution. Russia was besides democratic after the collapse of the russian Union – not for 8 months, but for at least 8 years. The next break could be eighty years. And then it could be 8 100 years. It's inactive possible. But it takes effort, especially the efforts of the Russians themselves. I always remember Sakharov, I remember Gorbaniewska, I always remember another dissidents who were Russians and who acted not only against communism, but besides against Russian imperialism. There were specified people even in the 19th century, specified as Herzen, who supported the 1863 uprising, and even organized and sent a ship with a weapon to support Lithuanian insurgents. Unfortunately, the storm threw this ship ashore in Neryngha, the weapons did not scope Lithuania and did not aid Sierakowski and Kalinowski.
Today's Russia is also, above all, an highly centralised country, despite the "federation" in its name.There is not a single state school in Russia where all subjects would be taught in a language another than Russian.The situation of alleged "little nations" cultures is peculiarly enviable.Rusification has reached unprecedented levels, not only through education, but besides through mass culture.Worse still, he inactive tries to exert influence outside Russia, wherever there are devotees of the Russian world.Let us say that Poles in Lithuania stay mostly in Russian orbit alternatively than Polish mass culture.Is the process of decolonizing Russia, whose future is at this minute highly vague and unpredictable, in your opinion, possible?And if so, how should it run?
Indeed, in terms of language and rusification, Putin's Russia present is even worse than the russian Union. At the time, however, there were schools in many another languages. But the Russian empire is falling apart, destroying. This began in 1917, erstwhile Poland, Finland and the Baltic countries broke distant from the empire. The same thing happened under Gorbachev's rule, erstwhile the empire fell apart again, the Caucasian republics broke apart, the Baltic republics regained independence, and the Central Asian republics gained independence. I believe that there will come a time erstwhile Buryats, Yakuts, Tatars, Bashkars and many another peoples will have far greater sovereignty than always before. This is surely the next phase that will come, and I am more than certain of it. As it happens, what means, it's hard to say, but it will.
As regards the fact that Poles in Lithuania are influenced by Russian culture, of course Putin tries very hard to do so. But possibly not always effective. However, I think that Poles in Lithuania are besides influenced by the current Poland, which is strictly anti-putinian and, so to speak, its impact on Poles in Vilnius is, I believe, at least as crucial as Putin. And it is our work as Lithuanians to make certain that Warsaw's influence is stronger than Putin's influence.
How can this be achieved?Does ending a beautiful stupid dispute about spelling names substance in this context?
In my opinion, the dispute over the spelling of names was indeed foolish and contained an component of malice, as it utilized Lithuanian prejudices and narrow horizons of any of the characters from our political stage, and was besides influenced by Putin's propaganda. But the dispute ended very well. I think that nothing terrible would happen if the names of these towns were in 2 languages in places where Polish people live. It is frequently said that there are no Poles there, but “polonized Lithuanians”. This is not the case, due to the fact that in Vilnius there are many Poles who are not Lithuanian, just as there are many Poles who are Lithuanian, whose great-grandparents spoke Lithuanian. But so what? Now they talk Polish, and forcing them to return to Lithuanian is simply a bad, I would say, an imperialist policy. It's a small, tiny imperialism, which is no little disgusting than imperialism of large powers. These people should be left alone, they will inevitably learn the state language, due to the fact that it is rather hard to operate in Lithuania without cognition of the state language. The Polish language in the public space, where Poles live, has the right to exist, so it is done in the vicinity of Sejn with Lithuanian language and nothing terrible is happening there. The concessions are sometimes more helpful than the introduction of a rigorous statehood.
Most of your life is in the Cold War.Would you agree with those who call what is now happening “a fresh cold war”?
Yeah, of course, and I'd say it's worse. Much worse. During the Cold War, there were inactive rules. The Soviets were more cautious, followed certain rules, and there was a kind of contact, at least at the end, between the Soviets and the West, which at least closed the door against major threats, especially the atomic war. Currently, this contact barely exists, and the situation is worse than in the Cold War. Putin is worse than Khrushchev and worse than Brezhnev. He may not be as bad as Stalin, due to the fact that he has not imprisoned many millions of people yet, but he is clearly heading in this direction – not Khrushchev, not Brezhnev, but Stalin. So yes, we have a real fresh cold war now, and it's much worse than the 1 I remember.
He translated Nicodemus Szczygłowski from Lithuanian
The conversation was besides published in English in NEE magazine
Tomas Venclova, renowned journalist, writer, translator, philosopher and poet, who spent much of his life on emigration, where he was friends with Czesław Miłosz and Wisława Szymborska.
Nicodemus Szczygłowski is simply a journalist, author and translator from Lithuanian and Slovenian. Regularly cooperates with New east Europe and another media.
