This is controversial. If you ain't open-minded, disregard this post.Some of my classmates from North Africa despise French because of colonial history. Should I feel the same way about Russian? I grew up speaking Russian, listening to Russian songs, reading Russian books—I spent the first 14 or 15 years of my life in a Russian-speaking environment.
Putting the war in Ukraine aside, I feel we should separate culture from politics when thinking about Russian culture. It sometimes frustrates me when Ukrainians get offended if a Russian song is played. I try to understand and relate to their perspective, but at the same time, language and culture are distinct from politics. Putin’s war machine is quite different from the general sentiment of Russians or from their artistic culture. Some Russians may not openly speak out against the war because they fear for their lives, social status, or the well-being of their families. For many Russians who struggle just to make a living, politics is a low priority. Yes, people are inherently political, but when your stomach is empty, and your home is cold, who has time for politics?
I am fully aware of the Russian Empire’s legacy in my country, but Uzbek conquerors also left legacies in other countries. Yes, the chronology differs, but the emirs who ruled before the Russian conquest in the 19th century committed their own share of atrocities and made life difficult for ordinary people.
I am not remotely Russian, yet Russian has become part of my identity, whether I like it or not. Listening to Russian songs makes me feel good; I enjoy reading Russian literature and consuming Russian content online. No matter how much I disagree with Russian politics or its history of imperialism, I still feel sympathy for Russian culture and language.
Even the Uzbek language today is written in Latin letters, which are far from our "traditional culture." In fact, it was Kemal Atatürk who first adopted the Latin script, replacing Arabic script in Turkey as part of his Westernization efforts. We can’t claim the Latin alphabet as ours either. The legacy of Navoi, which we take pride in, was written in Arabic script, not Latin. So, in this sense, using Cyrillic, Latin, or Arabic scripts doesn’t necessarily define authenticity—they are all, in a way, foreign. Arabic script also came through conquest, though perhaps differently than Russian influence.
What is identity anyway? Isn’t it just a collection of “lego pieces” that came together for various reasons to form what we call identity? What is an Uzbek identity? Which parts of it are truly “Uzbek,” and which are borrowed? How do we define what’s “ours” versus “foreign” when so much of “our” culture and identity consists of foreign influences or adaptations? Does it even make sense to focus so heavily on Uzbek culture when it has evolved as a mixture of influences from other cultures?
Cultural and national identities are fluid. Yes, ethnic groups in Central Asia had distinct linguistic and cultural identities before Soviet rule, though modern “national” identities were influenced by Soviet classification. A 19th-century resident of Kokand likely didn’t think of himself as “Uzbek” but rather as a subject of the Kokand Khanate. When did we start thinking that Uzbeks are so different from other people that we should be seen as a distinct nation from Turkmen or Tajiks? Uzbeks vary greatly across regions. There are Tajiks who look Uzbek, Turkmen who look Uzbek, and vice versa. Ethnicity might be a concept, but it’s still questionable. Physical features might be shaped more by geography and environment than by what labels people assign. I am in no means saying not to identify oneself as a particular nation, but rather don't think of nations as very different, irreconcilable.
@javohirakramov
