?
Приватизация бунта: “вторая жизнь” раннесоветского монтажа
Sign Systems Studies. 2013.
Kukulin I.
This paper deals with montage in the broad sense of the term: it is discussed not as a principle of film editing, but as aesthetical method based on the contrasting combination of elements; in the case of literature narrative montage can be defined as a contrasting parataxis. Being understood in that sense, montage became an international “grand style” of the post-WWI epoch. In the Soviet Union this new method had many ideological connotations. It represented history (historical process as such) as a creative and cruel violence. Otherwise, art montage was a method of designing the utopian vision. The following development of montage in Russian culture could be defined as a change of its semantic. It has been forsed out the socialist realism mainstream (excluding a poster graphics) but survived in unofficial art of 1940s and became postutopian. During the “Thaw” period (late 1950s—early 1960s) montage methods could indicate the connection of an author with the Soviet or Western European avant-guard of 20s. The reconsideration of those methods followed two different ways: the imitation of the “resurrection of revolutionary impulses” or deconstruction of Soviet historical and social imagination – also with the tools of montage. This very intensive dialogue with the aesthetic tradition of 20s came to end in the beginning of 70s. The authors of uncensored art and literature in that period polemisized not with 20s, but with 60s. The “living” translation of the early Soviet montage aethetics has been settled.