Circus

In this film by Grigory Alexandov, a young woman named Marion Dixon (perhaps a play on the Mason Dixon line) joins a Russian circus after being forced to flee her American hometown after the townspeople discover that her son is black. She performs a daring routine called “The Flight to the Moon” which the manager of the circus, Ludvig, wishes to imitate with his own daughter, Raya. One night when Mary is performing, Ludvig shows her act to Ivan Martinov, a performance director. He feels immediately attracted to her and they fall in love. When she has to return to America, she protests, wanting to stay with him. Due to a mixup with the letter she writes for him, he believes she is in love with another man and refuses to say goodbye to her. She tells him the truth and they do the “new” act, “The Flight to the Stratosphere”. She accepts a deal with the manager to be paid in rubles and as he tells her that “in our country, we love all kids”, the audience understands that she is going to stay in the Soviet Union with her family.

One cinematic scene in the film which is meant to show the divide between the young and old in Russia is when Ivan and Mary first meet and her corrupt agent, Kneishitz, spies on them through the window. The camera cuts between Kneishitz and Ivan so the audience notes the stark differences in their faces. Ivan is young, blonde, and strong-jawed while Kneishitz is unshaven, dark, and sinister. Through this portrayal of the young and old in the performance business, Alexandrov is making the point that we should look to the young people of Russia, as the next generation is our future and hope.

Why were people so much more accepting in the USSR, given our nationalist and ethnicity readings? What would have become of Marion and her child had she chosen to return to America?

Neo-Traditionalism from Modernization

In the 1930’s, the Soviet Union’s intentions were to create a more strongly collected, unified nation. While nations were an inevitable product of modernization through the massive uprooting and relocation of the working classes, there was a shift from a nation being modern in it’s fundamentals to focusing on the primordial roots of the citizen. What spawned from creating a national identity through the conduit of modernization was Neo-traditionalism. Neo-traditionalism in essence is the simultaneous cooperation of both modern and traditional aspects, and was the Soviet Union’s unexpected outcome. A pre-industrial state could not be considered a modern nation, because modernity cannot exist without the technology. However, industrialization exterminates old folk culture and is a catalyst for new culture. As the sense of nationalism developed, the game began to change with shifting ideologies with the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks saw nationalism as something which was on a different plane than class, and socialism would be the unifying principle. However, Soviet affirmative action made class and ethnicity an issue because of discriminatory institutions, a product generated by over zealous statism. The Neo-traditional outcome of modernization is what shaped Soviet nationalities.

This article made me think of how we view the ethnicity of each other in America. When people ask me what I am in regards to ethnic background, I say I am South African and Irish. Most people would answer this way I believe, even though all who were born in America are Americans. What is the line between immigration and a true, newfound sense of nationality? Why do many of us feel a sense of pride to our ethnic backgrounds despite the fact that we have never experienced the culture?

Narod and Narodnost: A Transformation of Russia

The piece for class on Monday is on the subject of modernity, nationality, and ethnicity. The etymology of words such as narod and narodnost are used as a basis for discussion throughout the piece. The piece explores the transformation of Russian society and nationalism throughout centuries through the use of narod and narodnost to illustrate this societal transformation.

The piece begins by an explanation of the word narod in different contexts. The piece states that narod was a term to denote ethnicity. The piece insinuates that the term is much deeper than just ethnicity-it also refers to culture. The piece then talks about narod is different aspects of culture such as political and cultural. The piece explores how narod evolves into the term of narodnost. Narodnost is illustrated through examples of literary figures in Russia and philosophers. The effects of Narod and narodnost are explained through cultural and political movements in Russia, leading to a new definition of nationalism.

Annotated Bibliography

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.

 

 

Russia and Religion

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.

LGBT Rights Activists Protest Metropolitan Opera Opening Night

On September 23rd, The Metropolitan Opera held its Russian-themed opening gala. The opening was for a piece by Tchaikovsky entitled, “Eugene Onegin”. The activists who protested the opening night gala deplored the recent antigay laws in Russia signed by President Vladimir Putin. The protest against the Met begin when a openly gay composer, Andrew Rudin started an online petition for the Met to dedicate it’s Russian-themed performance to gay rights and the LGBT community in Russia. The petition has been signed by over 9,000 people and spoke of the irony that the work of Tchaikovsky, who was also a gay composer, was being performed by artists who supported a government that had passed anti- LGBT laws.

More interviews with the principal artists and the general manager of the Met can be found in this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/24/nyregion/gay-rights-protest-greets-opening-night-at-the-met.html?_r=0

Does the Metropolitan have the right to perform a Russian piece without any political undertones? Is it ethical to perform the works of a gay Russian composer without acknowledging the suffering of the Russian LGBT community? Russia is not only denying the evidence that one of its greatest artists was a homosexual but also denying human rights to Russian citizens who identify as homosexual or transgender. Should the Met use its cultural significance to denounce antigay legislation? Can culture and politics be truly separate when human rights are at stake?

Kemerovo region bans foreign adoption

The regional legislature of Kemerovo Oblast, a region in Central Russia, passed a law on Wednesday, September 25th that banned all adoption of Russian children by foreign persons. They cited as their reasoning several cases of Russian children being placed with abusive families abroad, particularly in the United States. Last September the State Duma, or parliament, passed a law making it illegal for Russian children to be adopted by American families; now they are expanding that ban globally. Another reason for the ban, says Galina Solovyova, deputy chairman of the regional education committee, is legalized gay marriage in other countries. Russia sees that type of exposure to its young citizens has dangerous.

Follow the link below to see the original article in The Moscow Times:

Kemerovo Authorities Ban Foreign Adoption

What does this mean for future generations of Russia? What is next, a ban on international travel for youths under age 25? Or, perhaps, just a ban on travel to countries where gay marriage is legalized? Clearly the issue of gay marriage is of concern to Russian authorities and they have been working hard to undermine the movement and quash the public’s notions of reform. But when in history has isolating one’s country ever proved to be successful in the long run? By refusing to grant rights of marriage to same-sex couples, and now this ban on foreign adoption, Russia is setting itself in clear opposition to the other great, liberal powers of the world. Only time will tell if that move is a wise one.

Changes in inter war society

In both Koenker’s article on Soviet tourism and Reagin’s article on German housewives we see a similarity in the attempts made by both governments to sway their citizenry to a specific ideology. In Russia the communist party decided to control all forms of tourism. They were determined to change the view of tourism from the “bourgeoise” experience of knowing “only one street in a new city, the street from the train station to the hotel.” To the Soviet of idea of a tourist on a bicycle who “could observe al parts of a city, from its outskirts to its bridges…” This proletarian shift dominated all aspects of Soviet tourism in the interwar period. In Germany we see another cultural shift in regard to the way housewives conducted their household responsibilities. Although the cultural change was no wear near as dramatic as the one happening in Russia their was still an attempt made by middle and upper class German ladies to make the life of the everyday “frau” a little easier. This attempt was focused mainly on home economics, the German government still regarded kitchen as the females “workplace”. The changes attempted by the Germans although less dramatic then in Russia were still steps taken by the government to influence social life.

Koeneker’s article really struck me, mainly cause it was a topic I had never given though to. Although it is obvious through studying the Soviet Union that the communist party were involved in all aspects of life, its very interesting to see the amount of importance they put on such a “minor” issue in the scheme of things. When thinking of the Soviet worker tourism is one of the last things you would think of. The Soviet’s used tourism as another way to indoctrinate their citizenry, and keep the workers happy, and content. This show’s the depth that the Soviet state went to control their citizens.

Several points came to me when reading these two articles. Why did the Soviet’s focus so much on changing a clearly “upper class” pursuit? Why not just eliminate tourism all together. In Germany why was their such a focus on the improvement of house hold economics when the country was clearly lagging behind other western countries in regard to their infrastructure?

Bibliography Interwar.doc 24.0 KB

My research project will focus mainly on the repressive political system run by Stalin in the Soviet Union from 1930 to 1950. During this era, Stalin used an oppressive political machine in order to gain control over the political sphere. Two ways which Stalin executed this tactic was through mass purges and The Gulag. The Gulag was a Soviet Union government agency which spearheaded the labor camp movements. Stalin’s purges of The Party was also a form of political control. Millions of Party members which he deemed as unfit were killed. I will be explaining the political and social strains and affects that this had on the Soviet Union during this time period.