Pussy Riot: “martyrs” or “unripes”?

About a month ago three women from the Russian punk band Pussy Riot were convicted of “premeditated hooliganism … motivated by religious hatred” and sentenced to two years in prison. Suddenly, international media outlets were not only taking interest in a radical feminist art collective, but also the current state of Russian politics.

Despite the justifiable outpouring of support for these women, there has been little discussion of their impact on the larger opposition movement, which has grown steadily from social media sites to massive street protests in recent months. While many Russians were outraged by the Soviet-era trial and its harsh verdict, Pussy Riot’s provocative action still remains a point of contention.

It all began on February 21, when a nun at the Orthodox Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow saw Maria Alyokhina, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Ekaterina Samoutsevitch cross themselves, bow and approach the altar. They then started singing and praying for the Virgin Mary to “drive Putin away,” while also indicting the head of Russia’s Orthodox Church for worshiping Putin instead of God. It took guards less than a minute to appear and remove them from the building, but their performance, which is being called a “punk prayer,” was recorded and has been widely distributed on YouTube. 

The group was destined to face not only the swift and brutal hand of the Russian law, but also intense scrutiny from the general public. The notorious trio crossed the line of morality and ethics when they walked onto the holy altar. As one archpriest argued, “They could have expressed themselves in the streets, municipalities and even the Kremlin, but not in the House of God. Obviously, they have demonstrated a complete lack of respect for hundreds of Orthodox Christians and believers.”

Opposition leaders have not overlooked this fact either. As Alexey Navalny recently explained, “I seem to have missed the initial goal of the whole protest action. Some prefer calling it a piece of art. I’d rather characterize their performance as a misstep.” Another leading oppositionist, Oleg Kozlovsky, said “It’s very dangerous when one fails to see the limits.”

It should be noted, however, that the women claim to be religious and had no intention of inciting religious discord. They saw their act as a politically and socially-motivated protest. As such, they have found many supporters within the country, particularly in educated circles. For instance, Russian historian and human rights activist Lyudmila Alexeyeva — who is one of the few still active veterans of the Soviet dissident movement — criticized the trial for being politically motivated, biased and based on pure emotion. “The Russian court,” she said, “was not in line with the law, common sense or mercy.” While attracting publicity to Pussy Riot’s cause, the action may have also given the opposition movement new energy by drawing a considerable number of new people to get involved in Russian and world politics.

Whether or not the fallout from the Pussy Riot trial will help these efforts remains to be seen. As the eminent sociologist Olga Kryshtanovskaya recently said, “We need some more fuel to light the fire, but Pussy Riot may have harmed the opposition by taking away some of its moral high ground.”