4 thoughts on “One more podcast”

  1. Whoever is responsible for the set up of the mic/audio system on Professor’s side of convo had failed. Miserably. It’s hard to get what Mr. Robinson says 1/3 of the time, and another 1/3 it appears he mumbling.

    Thankfully, unbelievably awful sound on Prof’s side does nothing to detract from what he says. Because he says nothing new in this yet another promotional interview of his newest book, regurgitating (it seems – by rote) all usual talking points and ignoring/failing to answer concrete questions from Sean Guillory. E.g. – the question about Russian conservatives attitude towards the formation of the European (important – modern!) nation-states throughout XIX c. The answer provided is so unsatisfactory, so it doesn’t even warrant the term “answer”. Nothing is said about the greater perception of what it means to live in the multi-national Empire (not only Russian, but also in Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman ones) coming in direct conflicts with the state interests, the class interests of the individual conservatives and “a little something” which existed on the intersection of these two, namely – pan-Slavism. Not a word.

    Next – I felt a numb and half-forgotten pang of hope, when the term “reaction” (somehow!) crept into the conversation, i.e. that the conservative movement was a reaction to the Great French Bourgeois Revolution. “Thankfully”, both the Host and Professor chose not to dwell upon the subject, like, at all, and failed to state out loud that by its very nature conservatism is the reactionary ideology. Another thing left unsaid, is that when various conservatives were talking about Russian “society” or “public”, they actually meant a tiny fringe of tiny fringe’s tiny sliver of the ruling class, which comprised their immediate surrounding. Namely, that they were a bunch of elitist with no regard to the Russian people at large.

    Finally, once again we’ve heard absolutely nothing about real, concrete, material contribution of these various conservatives to Russia. An admission that there is hardly anything to be found would be a nice start. But, so far, in no one of promotional interviews there’s even a mention of explanation, of Russia’s conservatism utter and pathetic failure. Why so? Could it be because the answers are so obvious to Professor and ain’t pretty?

    P.S. Hope that “Putin & Patriarch” cover will do wonders to boost the sales of your book, Professor. Creative team behind it obviously demonstrated, that providing them with the higher education was not a mistake [nod-nod].


    1. Whoever is responsible for the set up of the mic/audio system on Professor’s side of convo had failed. Miserably.

      I regretted this rash response a bit once again almost immediately, but the fact that you pick it up to weave it into your longterm narrative … well yes.

      Basically iit feels the “set up of mic/audio system” plus its rendering on the broadcast is not the responsibilty of the interviewee but the interviewer.

      Not that it matters, but I basically assume that somebody that interviews a person is also able to introduce him to the audience. No? Why would he interview him otherwise?


  2. Off-top, but for those tracking ever new borrowings of American words and phrases into Russian:
    Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I give you тимбилдинг (“team building”) !


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s