Апология сталинизма в постсоветских учебниках литературы
The article is devoted to the apology of Joseph Stalin and Stalinism in a number of post-Soviet literature textbooks. Their authors had a generally positive assessment of Stalin’s role, not only as the head of the Soviet state, but also as the “modera- tor” of the literary process in the Soviet Union. Stalin’s personal evaluation of con- crete writers and their literary efforts - as well as, to some degree, the attitudes of these authors towards this Father of Nations - became an important factor in theirinclusion into the classroom canon of textbooks or, on the contrary, discredited and excluded them from it. The authors of these books carefully selected and reinter- preted the facts to emphasize Stalin’s exceptional importance for the development of 20th century Russian literature. Thus, Stalin appeared as the most important fig-ure of the literary process of the Soviet period, and the single method of Soviet liter- ature which was being approved during his reign - “socialist realism” - as a natural extension and embodiment of humanistic traditions of Russian literary classics.In Soviet school textbooks, there is an attempt to create a concept of the history of the 20th century Russian literature on the ideological basis of the late Soviet “soil- bound” conservatism, and to conceptualize Stalinism as the natural continuation of pre-revolutionary political-ideological conservatism. Thus, the school subject “lit- erature” is used as an ideological tool to indoctrinate the younger generation witha “national-patriotic” spirit. Moreover, this ideological line persisted in textbooks throughout the 1990s and 2000s with almost no adjustment, while their distribution was preferentially maintained by government agencies.
The first scientific biography of Venedikt Erofeev
Biography of the poet Nikolai Oleinikov
Тhe article is devoted to a special ideological posid of the playwright and publicist Vsevolod Vishnevsky, who even tried in the 1930s and mid-1940s, trying to focus on the achievements of the European avant-garde (J. Joyce, partly surrealists, etc.).
The chapter traces the history and reconstructs the logic of ownership debates in Soviet economic thought. Despite crucial role that ownership received in the Soviet economic literature, this concept predominantly was conceived legally thus making economic discourse inconsistent and dogmatic. Attempts to overcome this inconsistency by the leading schools of Soviet economic thought are considered and related to the broder contexts of ideological, political and economic discourses.
This chapter is based on an examination of the writings of the leading fellow-travelers of the 1930s and archival study of their Soviet visits. At its center is the web of concrete ties binding them to Soviet intel- lectual mediators and cultural institutions. It will make several inter- locking arguments that address longstanding debates about Western intellectuals and communism.
This article explores the process of the seizure of peasants’ property during the campaign to “liquidate the kulaks as a class” at the beginning of the 1930s. It describes in detail the manifestation of arbitrary rule in Perm region, analyzes directives emanating from regional party bodies, and reveals the links between arbitrary rule in the localities during the course of “dekulakization” and Stalin’s policy aimed at changing the social structure of Soviet society. The author examines numerous local cases and argues that the seizure of peasants’ property led directly to the destruction of an entire social group: peasant-owners. Official promotion of “kulak liquidation,” unrestrained by any legal regulations and accurate instructions, in fact stimulated local leaders to take radical action. This campaign to “liquidate the kulaks as a class” constituted the main element of Stalin’s social-engineering policies in the early 1930s: large-scale “dekulakization,” with its attendant massive intrusion into the institution of private ownership, played a very serious role in the social transformation of Soviet society in 1930s. A study of these processes at the regional level allows for an in-depth analysis of the Soviet state’s repressive policy toward the peasantry.
Socialist Realism in Central and Eastern European Literatures' is the first published work to offer a variety of alternative perspectives on the literary and cultural Sovietization of Central and Eastern Europe after World War II and emphasize the dialogic relationship between the ‘centre’ and the ‘satellites’ instead of the traditional top-down approach. The introduction of the Soviet cultural model was not quite the smooth endeavour that it was made to look in retrospect; rather, it was always a work in progress, often born out of a give-and take with the local authorities, intellectuals and interest groups. Relying on archival resources, the authors examine one of the most controversial attempts at a cultural unification in Europe by providing an overview with a focus on specific case-studies, an analysis of distinct particularities with attention to the patterns of negotiation and adaptation that were being developed in the process.
The present article continues the investigation of the Soqotri verbal system undertaken by the Russian-Soqotri fieldwork team. The article focuses on the so-called “weak” and “geminated” roots in the basic stem. The investigation is based on the analysis of full paradigms (perfect, imperfect and jussive) of more than 170 “weak” and “geminated” Soqotri verbs.