Book: Boris Akunin “The Destruction and Resurrection of the Empire”

Originally, when planning his series on the history of the Russian state, Boris Akunin intended to stop at 1917, with the fall of the Romanov dynasty, as he believed that beyond this point, it was no longer the history of the Russian state but of an entirely different country.

However, some time after completing the series, he unexpectedly announced the release of the 10th volume covering the Lenin-Stalin era. Moreover, this volume became the first that was not published in Russia, as when the book was almost ready for print, Boris Akunin was declared a terrorist in Russia, closing off access to publishing in his homeland. So the book was printed abroad.

While the revolution and the last tsar always felt distant to me, despite having lived during the Soviet Union, the events of the Soviet state itself were always closer. I studied this history in school and believed that I lived in the best country in the world. Therefore, I was very eager to see how Boris Akunin would recount this period.

It turned out to be quite interesting. While Boris Akunin does not hide his personal views on the key figures of this historical period, he tries to remain as objective as possible. In his description of the revolution and the Civil War, there is no sense that he sympathizes with either side. Instead, he shows that neither side was exemplary, while also pointing out the positive aspects of each.

Yes, he cannot be entirely detached when discussing the hundreds of thousands of victims and the repressed, but it doesn’t feel like he’s trying to push a particular agenda on the reader.

In this volume, Akunin again applies his theory of the “Ordin” system of governance, which he has discussed throughout the entire series. Some readers accuse him of “forcing a round peg into a square hole,” meaning he adjusts the facts to fit his theory. However, I wouldn’t say it’s that obvious. Akunin’s “Ordin” theory is as valid as many other theories, and in some cases, it even overlaps with other concepts, such as the theory of the “Russian idea.”

Of course, in one book, the author couldn’t detail every decade. The entire volume is more focused on the state’s internal and external politics, leaving out science, culture, and much more. But it seems that this was Akunin’s goal—not to describe how the country lived in every detail, but to concentrate on the governance decisions that drove the state in a particular direction, occasionally pointing out what could have gone differently.

At the same time, almost all secondary figures are largely left out. While in his earlier books, Akunin spent considerable time on the key characters of each era, here, during the Lenin period, he barely touches on the leaders of the White movement during the Civil War. Moving on to the Stalin era, only one main character remains—Stalin himself. Perhaps Akunin will later fill in these gaps with a separate volume, as he began to do with the subcycle “Bright People of Ancient Rus’.”

Moreover, in describing the politics of both Lenin and especially Stalin, Akunin tries to show why their actions were a logical extension of their ideas. Yes, they both initiated terror, but Akunin illustrates the purpose behind it. He does not justify the terror, but he attempts to explain the mindset of its creators and how Stalin later rejected or exaggerated many of Lenin’s ideas to the extreme.

I found this volume much more engaging than the previous two, which may have been more fact-laden but felt more tedious. However, of course, you can’t form a complete opinion about the history of the era from just this one book. Too much is glossed over, and even more is left out (especially noticeable if you are particularly interested in the history of this period). One could read other works, but I would recommend watching Leonid Parfyonov’s series “Namedni” (in Russian, but you can use English subtitles) which is dedicated to these same decades. Parfyonov doesn’t provide such an evaluation of politics but rather focuses on the most important facts of each year. It turns out that Akunin and Parfyonov complement each other very well:

My rating: 4.5/5

Leave a Reply