‘Performing Censorship’: Theatre and expression in Russia today

On December 9, the Warwick Theatre and Performance Studies department hosted a research seminar entitled ‘Performing Censorship,’ led by Yana Meerzon and Mikhail Kaluzhsky, following the pair’s publication of their book Performing Censorship: The Russian Case in August of this year.

The seminar allowed attendees to develop an informed perspective on the topical issue of the persistence of soft power, historically utilised by communist nations to influence foreign policy and international perception. They have leveraged soft power to render their regimes more palatable to both the masses and those disillusioned by the capitalist norms and ‘Western’ values of society.

A specific means through which the Russian government exerts dominance over the theatrical sphere is their employment of legislation to demonstrate control. This concept is acutely presented when Kaluzhsky, in the seminar, explained,  “if a production contains scenes with …profane language, revealing costumes, or provocative elements, for example such as religious or cultural values, they may make real complaints and [demonstrate] usage of various articles of administrative courts and Article 148.” Article 148 refers to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, concerning the “obstruction of the Exercise of the Right of Liberty of Conscience and Religious Liberty,” relating to the protection of religious beliefs and feelings.

The Kremlin and Putin now use theatre as a form of propaganda against Ukraine and Zelensky, forming divisions between Ukrainian and Russian theatre that make collaboration virtually impossible

While Russia has influenced and supervised the theatrical industry for decades, the seminar considered the current political climate regarding the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine. It was explained that the Kremlin and Putin now use theatre as a form of propaganda against Ukraine and Zelensky, forming divisions between Ukrainian and Russian theatre that make collaboration both dangerous and virtually impossible, representing the persistent nature of soft power by the communist nation. Given the stringent manner in which the Kremlin oversees theatre, involvement from foreign playwrights, directors, and set designers has been dwindling, resulting in a lack of cultural diversity in theatrical performances and plays due to the extreme nature of Russian censorship.

Evidence of the persistence of Russian soft power is further indicated by the existence of underground theatre groups, along with those arrested for creating and participating in productions that do not fit within the framework within which modern Russian theatre is expected to operate.

The seminar further explained that freedom of expression has been controlled since the late ‘90s and early 2000s, and the aforementioned framework was particularly stringent regarding LGBTQIA+ topics, along with gender identity and expression. This represents a clear deviation from the pivotal Article 29 of the 1993 Russian Constitution, supporting freedom of expression.
A particular case study representing the harsh reality of censorship in Russian theatre involves Yevgeniya Berkovich and Svetlana Petriychuk, a director and playwright who were imprisoned for six years by a Russian military court. A July 2024 Guardian article, reporting on this case, explained that the play had resulted in the court ruling that it had “justif[ied] terrorism”. In fact, it was actually a frank look at how individuals – in this instance, women – could be lured into extremism. The article reported that Berkovich herself had said she “staged the play to prevent terrorism.”

“Berkovich, 39, has written poems criticising Russia’s military offensive in Ukraine, and her supporters said they believed the court case could be linked to this.” The example was discussed in the seminar, relating to the writers’ explanation of the rise of self-censorship within Russian theatre. Self-censorship was employed in order to avoid punishment and being made a poor example of (as many supporters of Berkovich and Petriychuk believe was the case with their trial).

Soft power exerted by Russian officials over the theatrical sphere has damaged the very core of Russian theatre, in addition to halting its progression and integration alongside the modern era

A further instance referenced in ‘Performing Censorship’ is the trial of Serebrennikov, a Russian director. A 2018 BBC News article relating to his trial explained that he went “on trial for fraud – in a case which his supporters say is manufactured to crack down on artistic expression … his ballet production about … Rudolph Nureyev, who defected during the Cold War, was cancelled last year.” The trials of Serebrennikov and Berkovich indicate the high-risk climate within which those in the Russian theatre industry navigate and operate. The prosecution of artists and those working in the theatre industry has become the norm, creating uncertainty in discerning who will be punished, given the drastic shift in ideology towards conservatism under Putin in the early 2000s.

Subsequently, soft power exerted by Russian officials over the theatrical sphere has damaged the very core of Russian theatre, in addition to halting its progression and integration alongside the modern era. As a result, there are significant limitations to research conducted into Russian theatre studies. Due to the risk of endangering playwrights and any individuals involved in the wake of ethical concerns, a plethora of plays written ‘underground’ are unable to be studied and placed within the context of the wider, overt theatrical sphere

The seminar demonstrated that soft power not only persists in the actions of governments such as China and North Korea, but is intricately interwoven into Russia’s cultural fabric. The seminar shone a particular spotlight onto the shadow censorship that has cast over the nation’s theatre industry, discussing what it means to produce theatre in Russia today: a country at war with Ukraine, exercising a system that echoes a cultural environment indicative of the time of the KGB.

Shaped by turbulent contextual factors, Yana Meerzon and Mikhail Kaluzhsky’s book and seminar are incredibly topical, allowing for greater appreciation of the context within which Russian works are produced and experienced. Restricted from messaging that operates outside the government’s stringent and conservative cultural norms, theatre becomes heavily reliant upon the convincing effects of soft power. In this culture, a dangerous precedent is set, and those who disobey or deviate cause a “violation of public morality,” as put by Kaluzhsky in the seminar.