Is it yet time to acknowledge that the World Cup is confounding the critics and proving that Russia was an astute choice to host the competition?
As yet, there have been no major problems with tournament organisation, tens of thousands of visitors are reportedly having a wonderful time and a spirit of festival and friendship is sweeping the nation, whose people are often portrayed by outsiders as gruff and surly. For the group stages of a major competition, which can be cagey and predictable, the action on the pitch has been entertaining too.
In its opening two matches, against Saudi Arabia and Egypt, a heavily maligned Russia team has scored eight goals, playing unexpectedly brisk, high-tempo football. The Spaniards and Portuguese drew 3-3 in a bona-fide World Cup classic, as the unstoppable force of Spain’s intricate passing game met the immovable object of Cristiano Ronaldo at his best. Mexico provided the biggest shock so far withstanding considerable pressure to beat the Germans. Even England got into the spirit of things, mustering a last-minute winning goal against Tunisia and celebrating with unrestrained joy.
Everything’s going surprisingly well. Except that it’s really not that surprising.
Many of the prophecies of disaster that we heard routinely in the lead-up to the tournament were inspired by the British media’s unremittingly negative portrayal of Russia and transparent political hostility to the country. When police and officials from the Foreign Office offered reassurance to World Cup travellers, for instance, they were accused of complacency by aggressively Russophobic MPs in the House of Commons’ foreign affairs committee, who wanted to hear only bleak and frightening predictions.
Nobody can deny that Russia has problems. Every country has issues and, thanks to its enormous size and complex history, Russia’s are more serious than most. There were legitimate concerns about hooliganism, gay rights and the rest, but they were magnified and twisted, until they became practically the only points of discussion ahead of the tournament.
Now, it turns out, though none of these difficulties was a fiction exactly, their scale was exaggerated and the Russian people’s capacity for hospitality and fun was ignored.
Some of the most striking reactions to Russia so far have come from England supporters who travelled to Volgograd for their team’s opening match. On Twitter, the Guardian journalist, Shaun Walker, quoted one fan who was ‘absolutely loving it’; “It’s the opposite of what we expected, everyone has been amazingly welcoming”. The Independent found a teenager from Cheshire who was “weirded out” by the warm welcome he received.
English travellers could scarcely fail to be astounded when they finally got to the country, so long as they weren’t met by the machete-wielding, racist, homophobic thugs that they were led to expect. Their impressions have been filtered through British media that routinely caricature Russian people and simplify Russian politics, beyond all serious recognition.
Whether it’s depicted as a cunning, Machiavellian superpower, manipulating geopolitics like a grandmaster playing chess, or a crumbling, chaotic basketcase, fearfully lashing out because it’s on the brink of disintegration, the Russia we know in the west is something between a cartoon and a movie character. If Russians aren’t our dastardly, sophisticated enemies, they’re violent, vodka-soaked oafs, proverbially hapless and stupid.
These stereotypes aren’t universal and much of the world does not share our grim perspective on Russia. That’s why the country is full of fans from Central and South America, Asia and Africa, while western European supporters have proved reluctant to travel and are consequently missing out. Though, arguably, for the purposes of mutual understanding, it’s better that a few thousand relatively intrepid and curious English travellers made the trip, rather than the usual beer-bellied crew who enjoy tossing around plastic chairs and urinating on monuments.
(You see, no nationality likes to be caricatured!)
Even The Guardian, which can be at its preachy, pious worst when it reports or commentates on Russia, reckons that “a lot of people will depart… with great memories and a changed view of the country”. That’s not to say that they will come home extolling Putin’s virtues or contemplating ‘managed democracy’ for the UK, but they’ll appreciate that they’ve visited a place that can be much like any other, with warm people whose culture and outlook may not be exactly like ours, but with whom we share many similarities.
If fans and journalists come back from Russia with a more nuanced view of the country, perhaps they’ll even start to reject the simplifications and distortions they see habitually in our media. They’ll start to demand coverage and commentary that provides greater depth and context. Or they’ll simply return from a rich and rewarding travel experience, ready to spread the word.
