Author of Everyday Saints Featured in the Financial Times
On “Putin
and the Monk” by Charles Clover,
published in the Financial Times, January 26, 2013
As
uninspiring as it may be to anyone with more than
superficial knowledge of the book Everyday Saints
and Other Stories, Sretensky Monastery, Russian
Orthodoxy, or Russia in general, the article
published last Saturday, January 26 in the
Financial Times on Archimandrite Tikhon
(Shevkunov) does show us one thing: even this
strictly-business media leviathan finds the whole
phenomenon intriguing enough to dedicate a serious
amount of space to it.
With the usual “giant filter” straining out
any information that might put the developing harmony
between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian
government in a good light, the creative product of a man
reputedly close to President Putin is also necessarily
treated with caution lest some good impressions be
inadvertently conveyed. Nevertheless, even the erudite
author of this piece had to admit that the book was
“a rather well-written and compelling
narrative”.
Although the article is built upon Father Tikhon’s
rumored closeness to the president of the Russian
Federation, Clover writes, “the word
“Putin” is nowhere to be found in his
autobiography Everyday Saints and Other Stories,
which became a publishing sensation in Russia last
year—the top-selling book of 2012, beating even the
Russian translation of Fifty Shades of Grey.”
Yes, Everyday Saints was even placed against that
literary compass of the English-speaking world, and still
came out ahead.
Clover rounds out his reportage on the book by speaking
with Gleb Yakunin, a political activist and
liberally-minded former priest who was excommunicated by
the Russian Orthodox Church: “On the subject of the
uncanny success of Tikhon’s new book, Yakunin admits
he and his wife both liked Everyday Saints.”
He goes on to explain what he doesn’t like
about it, which is only fitting and proper for a life-long
dissident to do.
In the end, the article proves to be a mostly, but not
always balanced blend of nuance and contrast. The uniting,
underlying thread could be described like this: A
clergyman shouldn’t be influential in his own
country, but he is. The president of a superpower
shouldn’t be religious, but, looks as though
he is. Well, okay let’s say he’s religious but
he shouldn’t take measures to protect the
interests of the dominant religion, but again, he is.
Finally, a book that is straightforwardly Christian and
written by a clergyman, firmly set within the
country’s long-established religious tradition
shouldn’t be wildly popular all across the
board, but it is. How all of these amazing things were
allowed to happen—let the intelligent reader draw
his or her own conclusions.
|