Understanding Larisa Dolina’s Behavior: The Soviet Psyche Explained

Understanding Larisa Dolina’s Behavior: The Soviet Psyche Explained

The recent controversy surrounding Larisa Dolina’s apartment in Khamovniki has significantly tarnished her reputation. Fans who once admired her work are now returning their concert tickets. Colleagues criticize her for the “Dolina scheme,” and online commentators condemn her every move, perceiving it as stubbornness and an attempt to spite Polina Lurie.

The Apartment Controversy

Multiple lawsuits, demonstrative silence, refusal to vacate the sold apartment voluntarily (only by court order, and now, it seems, with bailiffs), prolonged packing, and finally, the singer’s departure to the UAE for a vacation—all these actions seem like a protest from the star.

The buyer, Polina Lurie, never got to meet Dolina or sign the apartment transfer act. Instead, Larisa Alexandrovna went to Saadiyat Island with her daughter Angelina and granddaughter Sasha. She chose the five-star Rixos Premium Saadiyat Island, where the cost of stay ranges from several hundred thousand to a million rubles per night.

Users in the comments question, “Where does this confidence in her chosen status come from when everything is lost?! Can’t she resolve the situation with dignity, hand over the keys, and not try to harm others over trivial matters?!”. They identify the root cause of the star’s behavior as the “Soviet psyche.”

Psychological Insights

Psychologist Ksenia Kuklina explained to Woman.ru what lies behind Larisa Dolina’s demonstrative behavior. According to Kuklina, people are not so much offended by the apartment issue itself as by the singer’s behavior. From the outside, it looks like this: first, a complete refusal to acknowledge the sale, then lost lawsuits, followed by delaying the move-out, and finally, leaving for a vacation precisely when her presence is needed to finalize the documents. This creates the impression: “I can’t win, but at least I can make it hurt in the end.”

“From a psychological standpoint, several simple mechanisms are usually at work here. First, the inability to admit defeat. For a person with status, a name, and a long career, losing is not just a failure. It’s a blow to their self-image: ‘I am significant, strong, this doesn’t happen to me.’ Admitting defeat means agreeing that you made a mistake and lost control. For many, this is experienced as shame and humiliation, so there is a firm refusal: ‘I do not accept this,'” notes Ksenia Kuklina.

The second mechanism is the struggle for control when control has already been lost. When the situation cannot be changed, one can still influence the timing, nerves, and emotions of the other party. Delaying, disappearing, “they can’t do it without me”—this is a way to say: “Yes, I lost, but the last word is still mine.” This way, a person regains the illusion of power and slightly reduces anxiety.

Here, an age-related and life crisis of control is also involved. When you have been at the top for many years, used to solving issues “with a phone call,” being the center of attention, any limitation is experienced especially acutely. The world is changing: there are fewer levers, status no longer opens all doors. And then the conflict becomes not about the apartment, but about the internal feeling: “they no longer listen to me, they no longer consider me.” At such points, a childish form of protest often kicks in—stubbornness, demonstrative gestures, ignoring requests. This is an attempt to regain a sense of significance—even through negativity.

“The third factor is what is called the ‘Soviet psyche’ in the comments. This is not a diagnosis or an insult, but a colloquial name for a set of attitudes: status is more important than rules, ‘special people’ should have a special approach, others should adapt and accommodate, maintaining appearances is more important than admitting a mistake. For artists of the older generation, this was often reinforced by their profession. For decades, the stage created a sense of exceptionalism,” emphasizes the psychologist.

Top stars always demanded special service and treatment, confidence that the world would adapt. This confidence is not only in Larisa Dolina but in all the stars of that generation. How can we not recall Laima Vaikule’s words about her significance, that she “supported the entire Union.”

“A similar internal attitude may be present in Larisa Dolina: ‘I have given too much to be treated as an ordinary person now.’ In the end, the rigid refusal and demonstrativeness here are not so much about malice as about the fear of losing face, the habit of a special position, and the painful collision with reality, where the rules suddenly turn out to be the same for everyone,” the psychologist concluded.