World War I and pre-Revolutionary Russian cinema
Pre-Revolutionary Russian cinema has traditionally been divided into two periods: pre-1914 and after. The first period has been perceived as one of inception and learning, while the second as an era of maturity and genuine establishment of early Russian cinema. World War I, which abruptly restricted the import of foreign films into Russia, has usually been treated as a positive factor in the history of Russian cinema and the most important reason for its blossoming in 1914–18. Yet it may also be argued that the war created turmoil in the Russian film industry. The new, forced production rates negatively impacted on the quality of films and did not help the natural development of a national cinema tradition. Masterpieces made during the war were evidently created not because of, but despite the war. The influence of World War I on Russian cinema thus must be considered sharply negative.
The chapter examines the origins of Jewish pogroms during the Civil War in Russia (1918-1921), shows the genetic connection between the "military pogroms" of the World War I and pogroms of the Civil War. Among other issues, the article analyzes the motive of a "shot in the back" as a pretext for pogroms.
The collection of papers written by Slavic philologists, (cultural and art) historians, philosophers is devoted to the 100th anniversary of WWI and traces its reflections and references in European culture of the XX-XXI c.
What is the theatre of the Soviet state? This is the theatre, forced to live on the State rules. Theatre, clamped in a vise of the censorship machine. Why prohibited performances? Not because that found in them something seditious... The state feared theatre. Afraid of the art of the original, unexpected, beyond, such as in the Theatre on Taganka. Reading censorship documents, one cannot understand how the theatre lived and put the new performances. Helped support of the audience.
Protocols discussions performances officials and unique Artistic Council of the theater , the letters to the head of state and senior officials, article theater, notes spectators and other documents tell about the bright fate of the Taganka. A significant part of the documents is published for the first time.
The idea of this paper appeared after the workshop on ‘Human Rights on the Internet: Legal Frames and Technological Implications’, organized by the Higher School of Economics on 7th Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum in Baku (Azerbaijan) on November 2012. This paper shows importance of the trilateral Internet Governance model in context of the example of governmental insufficiency to control the Internet.
Internet technologists contribute to the practical realization of human rights. First of all, they can improve effectiveness of existing institutions. Unfortunately in the same time Internet technologies give rise to new mechanisms of human rights violations. So we need to create new means, new technologies for human rights protection. We need new technological means, identification and classification of violations, based on predictive analytics. But to improve the situation, we should improve the existing means, and build new models of communication. Perhaps such models could be based on the concept of Web 2.0 and Web 3.0.