Category Archives: Uncategorized

Orwell on Britain

Posted on by

In both Road to Wigan Pier and Down and Out in Paris and London the writer Orwell focuses on a portion of society that has been unfairly treated by both the government and the upper classes. In the excerpt we read from Road to Wigan Pier, Orwell paints a rather bleak picture of the culture and society of the English industrial towns at the time. These cities over crowded and unsanitary are prime examples of the squalid living conditions members of the working classes were required to live in. Orwell’s narrative seems more Dickensian then what we would expect of a civilized western country like Britain during the 1930’s. The other piece written by Orwell is an examination of the tramps who populated Britain at the time. These men were constant nomads traveling where ever they could find a hot meal. There lives were of no substance, they could not plant there roots anywhere and they were unused as labor in any capacity.

The aspect of Orwell’s two pieces that struck me were his descriptions of two government laws in particular. The first was the means test, which was a draconian dictate enforced on Britain’s that regulated there ability to receive any sort of meaning full welfare and governmental aid. Men who would assist neighbors where reported and stripped of there aid for this act, and the elderly were disregarded because of the money they took away from the family. The second law was the government decision to not allow tramps to stay at any one casual ward for more then one night. Repeated stays would result in pseudo-imprisonment. This law was hurtful to both the tramps and Britain. Instead of men having one place where they could stay a while and become a helpful part of the community these men had to move from place to place wasting there lives away in pointless travel. Both of these laws were in no way advantageous to British society and if anything they breed discontent.

Do the laws in place in Britain at the time this piece was written, the 1930’s seem out of date and behind the times for the way societies in all countries were growing?

 

 

Orwell’s The Road to Wigan Pier

Posted on by

Chapter IV of George Orwell’s The Road to Wigan Pier made many interesting points about poverty and housing conditions in Interwar England. Orwell developed a very in depth study of the living conditions and how this may have affected the psyche of the inhabitants.

The Interwar Period was very concerned with behavior and order, especially in the wake of the Great War’s chaos. Psychology was one way in which many scholars began to try to understand the actions of both society and the individual. This type of study also began to influence other academic areas, like History, Anthropology and Literature. Orwell demonstrates, in questioning the behavior of this group, how various areas of study had become more interwoven.

Orwell at one point in Chapter IV discusses how some impoverished families portrayed themselves as more economically comfortable. Many Corporation houses seem to have been filled with well-maintained furniture; these items seemed to belong in a more financially stable house—a family that is not living at or below the poverty line. Orwell argues “it is in the rooms upstairs that the gauntness of poverty really discloses itself.” (60) He believes that it is a matter of pride to protect the nicer, more valuable pieces of furniture so that the family can appear to be less impoverished. These had most likely been passed down within the family throughout generations. It is the items that need to be bought every few years or months that were more difficult for these families to afford (i.e. bedclothes), and therefore, fewer families in more desperate financial situations had access to many basic items, like bedclothes.

This excerpt shares some similarities with Leora Auslanders’s article “’National Taste?’ Citizenship Law, State Form, and Everyday Aesthetics in Modern France and Germany, 1920-1940.” Both pieces referred to the tendency to “keep up with the Joneses.” How did this idea, needing to present a better image to the public or society, reflect larger themes from this period? Was this a reaction to the chaos of the war? Or a reaction to the uncertainty of the period? Or would this type of behavior have occurred regardless of wars, death and economic troubles?

Annotated Bibliography

Posted on by

This my initial annotated bibliography for a blog on the tuberculosis epidemic in Russian prisons.

Connor, Walter D.,  ed., Anthony Jones, and David E. Powell. Soviet Social     Problems. Colorado: Westview Press, 1991.

This book is a compilation of articles focused on the denial of social problems in the USSR. Esteemed professors of Russian history and politics wrote all the articles.

Filtzer, Donald. The Hazards of Urban Life in Late Stalinist Russia: Health, Hygiene,        and Living Standards, 1943-1953. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press,        2010. URLhttp://www.amazon.com/Hazards-Urban-Life-Stalinist- Russia/dp/0521113733

This book examines the health care and hygiene conditions in Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia. This book will help in my discussion of how tuberculosis spreads. The author is an authority of the subject of Russian history and teaches at the University of East London.

Micheals, Paula A. Curative Powers: Medicine and Empire In Stalin’s Central             Asia. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2003.

Soviet officials attempted to improve hygienic practices in Kazakhstan. Dr. Michaels is a European history of medicine professor at Monash University.

Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert, et al. “Screening And Rapid Molecular Diagnosis Of      Tuberculosis In Prisons In Russia And Eastern Europe: A Cost-Effective    Analysis. (Report).” Plos Medicine 11 (2012).

This article develops a cost-effective method of treatment for tuberculosis and multidrug resistant tuberculosis in Russian prisons. All of the contributors work for various health care institutions in the U.S. and Europe.

Lobacheva, T, T Asikainen, and J Giesecke. “Risk Factors for developing         tuberculosis in remand prisons in St. Petersburg, Russia- a case-control study.”      European Journal Of Epidemiology 22, no. 2 (n.d.): 121-127.         

This study attempts to find all risk factors for developing tuberculosis in remand prisons and spreading of the disease upon release. This article will help in my explanation of what can be done to prevent the spread of tuberculosis in prisons. This study was done by professors at Stockholm University in Sweden.

M McKee, et al. “Prison Health In Russia: The Larger Picture.” Journal Of Public       Health Policy 26.1 (2005): 30-59.

This article focuses on the health issues in Russian prisons and how they can be cured. This will explain what prisons can do to help their inmates stop spreading diseases such as tuberculosis and HIV.

 

 

The USSR as a Communal Apartment

Posted on by

Author Yuri Slezkine poses an interesting view of the USSR in the late 1920’s and early 30’s in his chapter “The USSR as a Communal Apartment, or How a Socialist State Promoted Ethnic Particularism” in the book Stalinism: New Directions. The chapter details the “Great Transformation” of 1928-1932, during which ethnic diversity was highlighted and celebrated; it then explains the “Great Retreat” during the 1930’s, when nationalism as a whole was discouraged except those select nationalities that reinforced socialist ideas and contributed to the overall success of the USSR.

The promotion of ethnic distinctions seemed strange to me at first, considering the Communist goal of eliminating classes and the inequalities that came with them. I assumed that defining and strengthening different ethnic identities would only lead to more inequality and struggle. It seems that at first, ethnic particularism was a way to accept the inevitable differences that arise between people but in a manner that avoids classes. Towards the end of the chapter, however, the author alludes to the fact that certain nationalities were seen as more worthy, therefore superior to others. It may not be along class lines, but the people of the Soviet Union were still divided. This promotion of nationalism most likely created more problems for the Soviet government in the long-term as nationalism grew stronger and threatened the Soviet’s unity and control. These struggles would also plague the Russian government after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Russia and Religion

Posted on by

Today in class, we had a very interesting discussion about Russia and religion.  Basically, throughout its entire history, Russia’s relationship to religion has been extreme, almost bipolar.  In tsarist Russia, the Russian Orthodox Church was the only acceptable religion, due to its strong link with the tsar. During this time, Jewish people were heavily persecuted in the pogroms.

After the Russian Revolution of 1917, the Communist Party made atheism the official belief system of the Soviet Union.  This was based off Marxism, which taught that religion was “the opiate of the masses.”  At this time, the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) was forced to go underground.  Churches could only be open if a KGB officer was present at Mass. People of all faiths were persecuted during the USSR.

Then, in the early 1990s, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian Orthodox Church made a comeback, this time in an even more conservative form.  Only religions with official historical significance to Russia were considered legitimate:  Russian Orthodoxy, Judaism, and Islam.  Protestant Christianity has one of the worst receptions in Russia, as the ROC believes Protestants are seeking to convert their parishioners.  It is common for Protestant churches to be shut down.  According to the Forum 18 News Service, a Norwegian organization that reports nation’s violations of religion freedoms, Jehovah’s Witnesses are frequently targeted in Russia.  Jehovah’s Witnesses are often denied freedom of worship, and there is a movement to ban their texts.   Another symptom of Russia’s religious extremism is the rights of LBGT Russians being taken away.

Basically, Russia has existed in a pattern of a religion dominating and then persecuting the other religions. This can be seen as a symptom of the religious trauma Russia has faced.  To suddenly turn from a Russian Orthodox, to an atheist, back to an Orthodox state again in less than 100 years must be traumatic for Russian citizens.  The government needs to realize religious freedom should be extended to all.  Once religious freedom is given, gay rights will hopefully follow. Sadly, ideas such as tolerance and equality cannot be taught.

Surrealism and the movie Un Chein Andalou

Posted on by

Written in 1925 by André Breton, the first Surrealist manifesto consists of 9 points which tells us that the purpose of surrealism is to repudiate all existing norms of thinking and of perceiving the world; to “make a Revolution”. And clearly the purpose of the whole movement is to promote the idea that the subconscious mind is more important than the rational, conscious mind.

Created by the Spanish director Luis Bunuel and the artist Salvador Dali, the movie Un Chein Andalou embodies the ideas of the Surrealist movement, and clearly is something revolutionary. The movie is product of the unconscious mind of Bunuel and Dali, and the world depicted in it is abstract, illogical, and confusing. It makes a revolution, as the Surrealist manifesto mentions, by refuting everything rational and logical, everything that we are used to perceive as important for our world. For example, what struck me were the disrupted time and the illogically changing space in the movie. The presence of images such as the dead donkeys without eyes or the half bodies on the beach makes the movie disturbing and confusing. They are products of the unconscious mind, and cannot be perceived by the rational mind.

The movie Un Chien Andalou, follows the ideas of the manifesto and rejects the rational thinking in our world. It presents a reality dictated by the unconscious mind. By watching it I ask myself: How was this movie accepted by people back in the 1930’s? How did surrealists influence people of their time?

Differences of Futurism and Surrealism?

Posted on by

The Futurist Manifesto of 1909 and the Surrealist Manifesto of 1925 both demonstrated a radical turn from the desired 19th century social standing of workers and intelligentsia. Written first in Bologna Italy prior to World War I, the Futurist Manifesto promoted the new speed of machinery, activism of people in revolts and revolutions, and overall economic and social modernism taken place in the early part of the century. The short Surrealist’s piece was backing many of the personal rights that surrealists were previously not allowed to have. They advocate for a significantly more open society in return for much safer and close knit family units.

The Futurist Manifesto is full of similar ideas to the Surrealist Manifesto but goes beyond the threshold of understandable, and into a poorly thought out and self contradictory state of affairs. Whereas the Futurist Manifesto promulgates an intense individual response close to anarchism of the socially literate elite, it also promotes an extreme labor approach. Embracing poetry, violence including war, and a demolition of state institutions, the Futurists also embrace mass politics and mass consumption. They dislike capitalism as the Surrealists dislike moral authority above them. Interestingly this work authored in Bologna, long famed as the most communist based city in all of Italy (as well as one of the most prominent and largest universities), is key to understanding where the basis of this work is derived from. The pro worker and intelligentsia aspects of the Futurist Manifesto are beautifully representative of the pre war social discontent that followed so quickly into the new Europe. In comparison the Surrealists’ documents greatly avoid the workers and the illiterate. Overall the Surrealists agree with many of the social issues distributed by the socialists on individualism, arts, and they are less in revolt but similarly prompt the citizens with revolution neither being a poor idea.

While these documents have somewhat different ideas about present man and mans’ future the most important question must be why? Why in 1909 does a revolutionary thesis of this magnitude come from? Also, after the thirteen years and a world war between the two pieces how do they follow from one another? How does the war affect the Surrealist movement that never affected the pre war Futurists movement?

A Futurist and a Surrealist

Posted on by

The “Futurist Manifesto,” written by F. T. Marinetti, and the “Surrealist Manifesto” written by Andre Brenton, are both interesting writings that contain radical ideas for the early 20th century. The Futuristic Manifesto focuses more on the rejection of the past, or in other words Futurism. It promotes sexism, war, and destruction of museums. The Surrealist manifesto focuses on revolution slightly more than the Futurist Manifesto does, but in a less violent way. It is written that they are “determined” on creating a revolution, yet refrains from mentioning violence in wars.

Two things about the Futurist Manifesto really intrigued me. Out of curiosity and to better understand the history surrounding this manifesto, I looked up the date it was published. I found out it was published at 1904, which I found interesting in regards to the manifesto’s discussion about violence and revolution. This manifesto was written before the Russian revolution and World War I, and at this point in time the world had not truly experienced the kind of war and revolution this writing was describing. This made me think, did this manifesto have any influence on the Russian Revolution? And second, why would Marinetti want to glorify war in the first place?

The main thing about the Surrealism manifesto that fascinated me was Article 2. Here it is written that Surrealism is not a means of expression but a freeing of the mind. Previous to reading this manifesto, I had always thought of Surrealism in the sense that it was an art style. To me, art has always been a way of expressing ones’ self, while concurrently freeing ones’ mind. I took my original view of Surrealism and applied it to the reading. I still think that one is expressing themselves while also freeing their minds, because free thoughts lead to great ideas. So to me, Article 2 was slightly contradictory. However, I could just be interpreting Breton’s ideas incorrectly.

Overall, I found both these manifestos very interesting in the ways they express their desire  and capability of revolution.

Marinetti and History as a Waste of Time

Posted on by

Marinetti’s Futurist Manifesto expresses a very curious ideology. While it advocates revolution and the destruction of all moral systems, it anticipates and applauds a brave new world in which man resembles a machine. While this man does not transform himself into a cyborg in Marinetti’s fantasies, he acts on the basis of intuition, stripping him of rationality and superficial manners. Yet, I think responding to one’s base desires rather than to the inquiries of a higher intellect implies a more profound slavery, in which one can easily fall prey to leaders promising new and improved opportunities for the satisfaction of our desires. Today, we refer to such a system as consumerism, and to its Brahmins as marketing consultants. Marinetti’s calls for violence bring to mind the sort of impotent thrashing-about one might expect from the sort security-obsessed consumerist society described in the work of Aldous Huxley.

What can the contemporary student salvage from the Futurist Manifesto? After all, dubious projects occasionally have their merits. Its most interesting feature is its conflation of politics and experience. I think this sort of thinking stems from the early 19th century, with the development of conscription and centralized states. As states acquired more power, their subjects came into contact with history in ways inconceivable to the inhabitants of previous centuries. The Napoleonic Wars for instance, pushed millions of conscripts across the plains of Europe to foreign lands. There, they found themselves in a position to decide the fate of their homeland in small ways that became significant on a wide scale. Marinetti goes further, asking people to take history into their own hands and stop wasting time in museums and group tours of archaeological sites. To live fulfilling lives, they must act to build a new world. Though I disapprove of the type of world Marinetti would have us hope for, I think he does make an interesting point when he implores people to stop venerating the idols of the past and strive to remake the world according to their own values. On the other hand, I am not sure the great revolutionaries of the twentieth century ignored history and historical figures.  Does anyone else think this might be the case? Do revolutions depend on an ability to free oneself from the past, or does every revolution depend on a tradition?

Futurist Manifesto and Surrealist Manifesto

Posted on by

The futurist and surrealist manifesto came about in the early 20th century and took place in Italy. The futurist manifesto was written in 1909 by F.T. Marinetti and was based on the philosophy of rejecting the past and moving on to violence, hatred, and speed. It rejects all forms of knowledge and declares that we must use violence and aggression. It states that the only cure for the world is to glorify war. The surrealist manifesto was written in 1925 and was a declaration of the importance of thoughts and dreams. It is a total liberation of the mind by letting out one’s expressions in the unconscious state. He focuses on the importance of dreams since they are suppressed human emotions.

Both the futurist and surrealist manifestos are designed to create a revolution. Does the futurist manifesto believe that violence is the only answer? Is there not another cure for the world? Is surrealism the only total liberation of the mind?

The movie “Le Chien Andalou” was produced in 1929 and is a silent surrealist short film. The film was created off of the two director’s dreams of the moon being cut in half by a blade and the other of ants coming out of a human hand. Did this movie create a movement in Italy? Did people become more in touch with their suppressed emotions?