20.12.2000, Kolosov A.
|
In general, Russians are aware of developments on the national anthem issue: 66% of respondents know that the State Duma adopted Alexandrov's music as the national anthem, and 23% have heard something about it. 35 to 50 year olds, respondents with a higher education, and big city dwellers are best informed, while country and small-town residents more often said they don't know about the current state of affairs. This is probably due to the regional mass media barely covering the discussion about the new national symbols. Some two-thirds of the regional experts surveyed said politicians, artists, scholars, and journalists in their respective regions did not discuss the anthem issue in public. Thus, their opinion was not made known to a considerable portion of the population. For the same reason, perhaps, approximately one-third of the expert communicators found it hard to describe the stance of the regional elite on the adoption of the old USSR anthem by Alexandrov as the melody for the new national anthem of Russia.
66% of those surveyed in the nationwide poll said they felt positive about the new anthem. Among supporters of Gennady Zyuganov, advocates are most numerous (86%). 79% of people over 50 like the "new" anthem, as do three-fourths of respondents without secondary education (against 63% of those with higher education).
The poll shows that only 10% of the population is resolutely against the adopted national anthem. They mostly include respondents with a higher education (20%), big city dwellers (15%), 18 to 35 year olds (15%), and residents of the North-West and Far East federal districts (18% and 17%, respectively).
Those who say they are indifferent to the issue are represented in above-average numbers among 18 to 35 year old respondents (26%), and residents of the Urals and North-West federal districts (27% and 23%, respectively, against 13% – 17% in other districts).
The opinions of regional experts are divided into three nearly equal parts. Most of them don't think the adoption of Alexandrov's music is going to split society. Focus group participants didn't tend to regard it as a seriously divisive issue, either:
- "A split isn't likely to happen: the topic is not significant enough"
(DFG, Voronezh).
So, as demonstrated by the proportion of supporters to opponents, the adoption of the old Soviet anthem by the State Duma didn't split society. Still, many 'public persons' continue talking about the disunity generated by the State Duma's decision. This suggests that according to their vision, there are many more people who feel negatively about the new-old anthem.
Here the question arises about how the people en masse evaluate public opinion in the context of the anthem issue. Are the alarmist "expert" opinions frequently to be heard in the media correct? Respondents were asked to assess in percentages the composition of supporters and opponents to the new anthem.
According to the mean assessment of those surveyed, 60% of the Russian population feels positive about Alexandrov's anthem, which is a little less than in reality, but still a majority. This means that people, when expressing their support for the anthem, believe there are many who share their opinion.
Things look somewhat different when it comes to assessments of the anthem's opponents. According to the respondents' mean estimation, some 32% of their fellow citizens are dissatisfied with the adopted tune, which is three times the actual number. So, supporters of the old new anthem believe they are taking a stand against a considerable number of adversaries. In other words, in their imagination, society is split along the anthem issue. In reality, as shown above, there is no such split, only a 'virtual' one induced by media polemics.
Focus group participants expressed the following notions of what the national anthem should be like:
- "The whole nation is supposed to know the anthem. The youth don't care about politics nowadays, but the anthem is supposed to be something everyone knows, everyone sings"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
- "You are supposed to recognize the anthem at any instance, it's natural, you are supposed to show respect, you are supposed to stand up to the sounds of the anthem"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
In line with these points, the reasoning of the supporters of the Soviet anthem's melody goes as follows.
- "[It is] much more expressive and familiar"
(DFG, Moscow).
- "Because this anthem is really recognizable, and the other one is very ponderous"
(DFG, Moscow).
- "In the past, people used to get tears in their eyes when they heard this anthem... it used to make everyone tremble"
(DFG, Moscow).
- "He [Putin] satisfied everyone, the reds and the democrats, so to speak; he gave everyone a little bit, so all are satisfied and happy"
(DFG, Moscow).
- "This anthem is undoubtedly the best, I haven't heard a better one, ever. So we'd better not refuse it"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
- "I can't say this music makes me tremble, but it does touch a string inside of me"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
- "This music is associated with the Great Patriotic War"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
- "No one knew how the last anthem went"
(DFG, Voronezh).
Of course, the opposite point of view was also articulated:
- "[It's an] agony...This is the anthem of the late USSR. To my mind, the young Russia needs a new anthem, not an old one. I know it's incorrect to say such things, but anyway, the older generation that remembers this anthem will vanish, and for the new Russia, a new anthem is needed!"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
- "This is the anthem of a different state"
(DFG, Voronezh).
- "This anthem is a relic of communism, nobody in today's society needs it. I also think we don't need it; for a new state, a new anthem with new words should be created. The old music with new words [set to it] is hocus-pocus"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
- "Its only association is with communist rule"
(DFG, Moscow).
Many of those who object to Alexandrov's melody are dissatisfied with the procedure behind its adoption: they criticize the fact that it was adopted by parliament, instead of by a referendum, in absence of alternative text versions to choose from.
- "Why didn't they suggest that different musicians write their versions and submit them. Only once did they broadcast on the "Voice of the People" program a fragment of the anthem with Reznik's words set to Pugacheva's music. Different variants should have been discussed for the whole year. Why were only two variants presented?"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
- "It's the people who should make the choice. The people were denied the choice, it was again those parties, the political elite, as they call them nowadays, who monopolized the discussion" (DFG, St. Petersburg).
- "There was no broad discussion, but there should have been"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
The focus group participants often reproached the president for the way he managed the issue. To their mind, the responsible way to do it would have been the following:
- "To hear us out, to say thank you, and then make the decision prudently. This decision was not made prudently. He should have urged a discussion and let us speak out, and then made the decision"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
Some of the focus group participants detected a deal behind the adoption of the anthem. The president, they supposed, was forced to go along with this deal to somehow balance the demands of the communists and the reformers, while implementing his own political and economic plans at the same time:
- "I have the impression that they had some deal to pull off, and so they decided to forget about all [the controversies] and adopt the anthem"
(DFG, Moscow).
- "Perhaps the budget bill wouldn't have been passed without it..."
(DFG, Moscow).
- "I think they had a Duma majority against some bill. For this bill to be passed, they decided to push the anthem issue forward. It might have been the budget bill"
(DFG, Moscow).
- "Some bargaining took place there, sure. I don't know what it was exactly that Putin bargained for. If he only won the double-headed eagle and the tricolor, I think he lost. It's too little. But if it's something really serious, like the passing of Gref's reform plan, or support for some serious and very unpopular, urgent steps, then he was right, perhaps..."
(DFG, Moscow).
The discussion on the anthem allowed the respondents to express their evaluations of Vladimir Putin's activities, and their ideas about his intentions:
- "The president has been doing his job"
(DFG, Moscow).
- "He just wants to consolidate society, more or less"
(DFG, Moscow).
- "It seems to me, he himself likes this music"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
- "It's a proud achievement for him. Whether he is right or wrong is another matter. True, he said that he and the people might be wrong..."
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
Despite the media's prophecies, the adoption of the anthem by the State Duma hasn't so far given rise to much controversy in Russian society. Perhaps this issue is not crucial for Russians. Indeed, most citizens have no fear that the old regime will come back. In general, people's attitudes haven't really changed in connection with this episode:
- "Well now, there's no way back anymore, it's out of the question "
(DFG, Moscow).
- "Nobody has hard feelings"
(DFG, Voronezh).
- "The issue has been overblown, while I think there's nothing to it at all. The state must have an anthem; state symbols must be there"
(DFG, St. Petersburg).
|
|
