DOCSLIB.ORG

Download Article

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Download Article Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 341 5th International Conference on Arts, Design and Contemporary Education (ICADCE 2019) The Art of Revolution and Revolution in Art: Historiographical Aspect Natalia Sipovskaya State Institute of Art Studies Moscow, Russia E-mail: [email protected] Abstract—The article focuses on the analysis of the 1917, lived through five years of triumph and faded away relationship between radical political movements and “artistic before the late 1920s. riots” in Russia in the 1910s, that changed the world history and new art. The Proletkult activities and other cultural The events' outline also includes numerous reasons for initiatives of the Soviet government are set as an example to comparison: many artists of the radical wing were “tempted trace the mechanics of using the latest artistic achievements to by revolution” and took part in the revolutionary events create a mythologized image of the Great Revolution. On the devoting their art to implementing the revolutionary ideas. contrary, the history of studying the Russian formalistic The inspired radical artists ready to serve the revolution were movements of the 1920s, which began in the late 1950s, is supported by the new power, which framed a brief post- considered a mirror image of this process. From the myth of revolutionary alliance of the young Soviet Republic and the the avant-garde as a single impulse, stopped on the run, the formalist art representatives. The main consolidating figure researchers refer to documentary and intent study of the was A. V. Lunacharsky (1875-1973), the first People's certain events and trends. Demythologization goes in two ways: Commissar of education and an active revolutionary. Later through clarifying the facts and reconstruction of the semantic he was frequently criticized for his sympathy with “leftist” context of art of the 1910-1920s. It is noteworthy that in recent art movements. Though in fact, his patronizing the left wing years these tendencies merge to an increasing extent, artists did not reflect his sympathy with their art (it is known demonstrating the creation of new methodological approaches that the People's Commissar mostly supported classical to the study of the subject. forms) or did not stem from misperceiving the avant-gardists' Keywords—revolution; avant-garde; Proletkult; People's revolutionary ideas to be close to the ideas of class struggle. Commissariat for Education; First Russian art exhibition; Following the leader of the Soviet state, Lunacharsky was Anatoly Lunacharsky; David Shterenberg; Sergei Eisenshtein; powered with the idea of expressing and imprinting the Vyacheslav Zavalishin; Camilla Gray; Larissa Shadowa; Dmitri significance of the accomplished unprecedented historic Sarabjanow; Evgeni Kovtun; J.E. Bowlt event in the minds of people's masses and their descendants. In other words, the great event demanded a myth being created, and the radical art, laconic, eye-catching and I. INTRODUCTION categorical in its intonation, seemed to be the most efficient The interrelation of radical social and political instrument for that. movements, which have considerably changed the course of both Russian and world history, and the “artistic riots”, II. NEW POWER AND NEW ART which have transformed the stylistic and formalistic structure alongside with the course of the whole art process, has been The scope and consistency of efforts made by the young the matter of focused attention. Indeed, these two Republic for accumulating the art forces to commemorate phenomena reveal quite a few common features tempting a the Great Revolution, its devotees and ideas, are worthy of specialist: emphasized and openly declared radicalism, amazement. The first step was Proletkult organization (1917- outspoken futuristic principles, common style recorded with 1932) [Russ. Proletarskaya kultura, proletarian culture], almost literal coincidence of their slogans and declarations, which united the proletarian cultural and educational and finally, an incredible accomplishment — both had organizations that appeared after the February Revolution. In seemed to be utopian projects of a limited circle of September 1917, Lunacharsky initiated their first conference, enthusiastic dreamers. A rare timing of that accomplishment which laid the foundation of the organization's all-Russia is remarkable: both social and art radicalism started in 1905 status. By the summer of 1919 Proletkult counted more than with the First Russian revolution and “Scarlet Rose” 100 local organizations with over 80 thousand members; it exhibition, which preceded the advent of symbolism, and had three theatres (in Moscow, Petrograd and Penza), and with debuts of Vs. Meyerhold and A. Tairov (who had been published 20 periodicals. twice arrested for organizing 1905 strikes of theatre actors in Kiev). They had reached their peak simultaneously by 1915- Copyright © 2019, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). 7 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 341 The determinant initiative was the decree “On Republic's artists representing different styles. However, famous old Monuments”1 issued by the Council of People's Commissars school painters refused to take part without purchasing their and signed on April 12, 1918, a month and a half after the works; besides, they had highly estimated their pictures. The decree on forming the Workers and Peasants' Red Army, Narkompros section of visual arts had to complete the almost literally accompanied with cannons that would seem exhibition with enthusiasts' works [1]. to make Muses keep silence. Besides the campaign historically known as “Lenin's Plan of Monumental III. THE MYTH CREATION Propaganda” aimed at removing the old monuments and erecting the new ones which could reflect “the ideas and One of the most remarkable results of cooperation feelings of the revolutionary working Russia”, the document between the new state and the innovative art was designing declared the status of celebrating May 1, Day of International, and organizing the festivities of the first post-revolutionary as a public holiday, and thus established a precedent for decade. The numerous collection of sources that has recently creating the institution of nationwide celebrations (by the been enriched with a range of editions published to autumn the revolution anniversaries were added to the First commemorate the centenary of the Great Russian revolution, of May festivities). Also, the necessity of decorating the gives us the opportunity not to dwell upon the subject. We capitals was highlighted. In accordance with the decree, the will just note that the most outstanding artistic design was section of visual arts of Narkompros (People's Commissariat that of the first anniversary of the revolution, while the best of Education) was organized later, on May 22, 1918. Its head theatrical celebrations were 1919 May Day festivities, when was David Petrovich Shterenberg (1881-1948), a graduate of all the theatres showed their open-air performances on the the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris, a member of Comfut orders of Narkompros TEO (People's Commissariat for [Communists-futurists] association, the future founder of Education theatre section). It is remarkable that half a year OST [the Society of Easel Painters]. Until the mid-1920s, the separating the events demonstrates a clear tendency of the Narkompros section of visual arts was in fact an association leading role moving from artists to stage directors. The of formalist artists rejected by former official art. N. I. matter is that great and expressive decorative panels changed Altman, N. N. Punin, V. V. Mayakovsky was among them. the images of Petrograd and Moscow in October 1918 but Earlier than that, in January 1918, the theatre section (TEO) most people hardly perceived them; besides, unlike draft was organized in Narkompros, headed by Vs. E. Meyerhold designs still worth admiring, the huge flapping panels made (1874-1940). of cheap materials looked very shabbily sometimes. But the main reason of preference was an apparent circumstance: a Representatives of different radical art styles were spectacle, especially a mass one, is much more efficient for actively involved in all the art initiatives of the young myth making, which was the main objective of those republic: from Proletkult to the ROSTA Windows (ROSTA, magnificent festivities. The logical end to the process was the Russian Telegraph Agency) (they are to thank for transition of the leading role from stage management to “the propaganda porcelain made by the State Porcelain Factory, most important” of all arts. The film by S. M. Eisenstein which was export revenue in the 1920s). (1898-1948), “October”, made in 1927 to commemorate the Another significant thing played an important role in 10th anniversary of the revolution became both an establishing contacts of the young republic and the young art: outstanding art phenomenon and a brilliant finale of the ten- the artists representing the old academic school were “the year myth making process, while for the following old-fashioned intelligentsia” in terms of the time, and they generations it was a vivid and convincing implementation of were not eager to give their support to the new power or the revolutionary events. enthusiastic about the revolution. An illustrative example is Nevertheless, visual arts
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hollis Frampton. Untitled [Frank Stella]. 1960
    Hollis Frampton. Untitled [Frank Stella]. 1960. Research Library, The Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles, California (930100). Courtesy Barbara Rose. © Estate of Hollis Frampton. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/octo.2007.119.1.94 by guest on 30 September 2021 “Frank Stella is a Constructivist”* MARIA GOUGH No matter what we say, we are always talking about ourselves. —Carl Andre (2005) I begin with a photograph taken in 1960 by the photographer and soon-to- be filmmaker Hollis Frampton in the West Broadway studio of his friend Frank Stella.1 The painter’s upturned head rests against the window sill, almost decapi- tated. Defamiliarizing his physiognomy, the camera relocates his ears below his chin, trunking his neck with its foreshortening. Arrested, his eyes appear nervous, jumpy. On the sill sits a sculpture by Frampton and Stella’s mutual friend Carl Andre, Timber Spool Exercise (1959), a weathered stump of painted lumber, its midriff cut away on all four sides. This giant spool was one of dozens of such exer- cises that Andre produced in summer 1959 with the help of a radial-arm saw in his father’s toolshed in Quincy, Massachusetts, a few examples of which he brought back to New York. Propped atop it is a small mirror, angled to reflect the jog of Union Pacific (1960), a twelve-foot-long aluminum oil painting that leans against the opposite wall of the studio, its two lower corners and upper middle cut away, itself a mirror-image duplication of the square-format Kingsbury Run (1960) of the same series.
    [Show full text]
  • Sculptor Nina Slobodinskaya (1898-1984)
    1 de 2 SCULPTOR NINA SLOBODINSKAYA (1898-1984). LIFE AND SEARCH OF CREATIVE BOUNDARIES IN THE SOVIET EPOCH Anastasia GNEZDILOVA Dipòsit legal: Gi. 2081-2016 http://hdl.handle.net/10803/334701 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.ca Aquesta obra està subjecta a una llicència Creative Commons Reconeixement Esta obra está bajo una licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution licence TESI DOCTORAL Sculptor Nina Slobodinskaya (1898 -1984) Life and Search of Creative Boundaries in the Soviet Epoch Anastasia Gnezdilova 2015 TESI DOCTORAL Sculptor Nina Slobodinskaya (1898-1984) Life and Search of Creative Boundaries in the Soviet Epoch Anastasia Gnezdilova 2015 Programa de doctorat: Ciències humanes I de la cultura Dirigida per: Dra. Maria-Josep Balsach i Peig Memòria presentada per optar al títol de doctora per la Universitat de Girona 1 2 Acknowledgments First of all I would like to thank my scientific tutor Maria-Josep Balsach I Peig, who inspired and encouraged me to work on subject which truly interested me, but I did not dare considering to work on it, although it was most actual, despite all seeming difficulties. Her invaluable support and wise and unfailing guiadance throughthout all work periods were crucial as returned hope and belief in proper forces in moments of despair and finally to bring my study to a conclusion. My research would not be realized without constant sacrifices, enormous patience, encouragement and understanding, moral support, good advices, and faith in me of all my family: my husband Daniel, my parents Andrey and Tamara, my ount Liubov, my children Iaroslav and Maria, my parents-in-law Francesc and Maria –Antonia, and my sister-in-law Silvia.
    [Show full text]
  • "The Architecture of the Book": El Lissitzky's Works on Paper, 1919-1937
    "The Architecture of the Book": El Lissitzky's Works on Paper, 1919-1937 The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Johnson, Samuel. 2015. "The Architecture of the Book": El Lissitzky's Works on Paper, 1919-1937. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Graduate School of Arts & Sciences. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:17463124 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA “The Architecture of the Book”: El Lissitzky’s Works on Paper, 1919-1937 A dissertation presented by Samuel Johnson to The Department of History of Art and Architecture in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of History of Art and Architecture Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts May 2015 © 2015 Samuel Johnson All rights reserved. Dissertation Advisor: Professor Maria Gough Samuel Johnson “The Architecture of the Book”: El Lissitzky’s Works on Paper, 1919-1937 Abstract Although widely respected as an abstract painter, the Russian Jewish artist and architect El Lissitzky produced more works on paper than in any other medium during his twenty year career. Both a highly competent lithographer and a pioneer in the application of modernist principles to letterpress typography, Lissitzky advocated for works of art issued in “thousands of identical originals” even before the avant-garde embraced photography and film.
    [Show full text]
  • On El Lissitzky's Representations of Space
    Online Journal of Art and Design volume 3, issue 3, 2015 Scissors versus T-square: on El Lissitzky’s Representations of Space Acalya Allmer Dokuz Eylül University, Turkey [email protected] ABSTRACT The first exhibition of Russian art since the Revolution was held in Berlin at the Van Diemen Gallery in the spring of 1922. In Camilla Gray’s terms it was ‘the most important and the only comprehensive exhibition of Russian abstract art to be seen in the West’ (Gray, 1962:315). The exhibition was organized and arranged by Russian architect El Lissitzky who acted as a link between the Russian avant-garde and that of the west. He played a seminal role especially in Germany, where he had lived before the war and where he was a constant visitor between 1922 and 1928. The diversity of El Lissitzky’s talents in many fields of art including graphic design, painting, and photography made him known as ‘travelling salesman for the avant-garde.’ However, what makes the theoretical and visual works of Lissitzky discontinuous and divergent is that they include apparently contradictory domains. Through his short life by shifting different modes of representations - perspective, axonometry, photomontage - Lissitzky sometimes presented us a number of problems in his irrational way of using the techniques. This article concentrates on his contradictory arguments on representation of space especially between 1920 and 1924, by re-reading his theoretical texts published in the avant-garde magazines of the period and looking through his well-preserved visual works. Keywords: El Lissitzky, representation, space, axonometry, photography, avant-garde 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Louis Aragon and Pierre Drieu La Rochelle: Servility and Subversion Oana Carmina Cimpean Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2008 Louis Aragon and Pierre Drieu La Rochelle: Servility and Subversion Oana Carmina Cimpean Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the French and Francophone Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Cimpean, Oana Carmina, "Louis Aragon and Pierre Drieu La Rochelle: Servility and Subversion" (2008). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 2283. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/2283 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. LOUIS ARAGON AND PIERRE DRIEU LA ROCHELLE: SERVILITYAND SUBVERSION A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of French Studies by Oana Carmina Cîmpean B.A., University of Bucharest, 2000 M.A., University of Alabama, 2002 M.A., Louisiana State University, 2004 August, 2008 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my dissertation advisor Professor Alexandre Leupin. Over the past six years, Dr. Leupin has always been there offering me either professional advice or helping me through personal matters. Above all, I want to thank him for constantly expecting more from me. Professor Ellis Sandoz has been the best Dean‘s Representative that any graduate student might wish for. I want to thank him for introducing me to Eric Voegelin‘s work and for all his valuable suggestions.
    [Show full text]
  • Natalia Goncharova's Canonization in Europe After 1945
    Natalia Goncharova’s canonization in Europe after 1945 Elena Korowin Introduction The Russian avant-garde artist Natalia Sergeevna Goncharova (1881-1962) is considered to be one of the major female artists of the early twentieth century. Of all female artists internationally, her works are now among the most expensive; however, the canonization process of her work was quite sluggish. The aim of this paper is to trace the way Goncharova entered the canon of modern art in Europe. In doing so, it will show how differently the canonization processes of male and female as well as exile and non-exile artists from Russia developed in the twentieth century. Therefore, it is important to mark the milestones in Goncharova’s case of canonization: 1. The first acquisitions of her works by Musée National d’Art Moderne in 1950 and by the Tate in 1952. 2. Her recognition within the feminist context in the 1970s, which started with the exhibition Woman Artists 1550-1950. 3. Goncharova’s rising prices on the art market in the 2000s. To understand these three turns it is necessary to observe the cultural-political situation after 1945 in order to contextualize the reception of Russian avant-garde in the West and to answer the following questions: Why was Goncharova ‘discovered’ so late compared to other artists, particularly male artists of the Russian avant-garde; in other words, how does Goncharova’s canonization relate to the canonization of Malevich, Tatlin and especially of Mikhail Larionov? Who were the main actors in promoting her work? This analysis will provide a detailed understanding of the way early Russian art was promoted in Germany, France and England in the post-war period and how it became a part of the modernist canon in art history.
    [Show full text]
  • Intellectual Culture: the End of Russian Intelligentsia
    Russian Culture Center for Democratic Culture 2012 Intellectual Culture: The End of Russian Intelligentsia Dmitri N. Shalin University of Nevada, Las Vegas, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/russian_culture Part of the Asian History Commons, Cultural History Commons, European History Commons, Intellectual History Commons, Other Languages, Societies, and Cultures Commons, Political History Commons, Slavic Languages and Societies Commons, and the Social History Commons Repository Citation Shalin, D. N. (2012). Intellectual Culture: The End of Russian Intelligentsia. In Dmitri N. Shalin, 1-68. Available at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/russian_culture/6 This Article is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Article in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Article has been accepted for inclusion in Russian Culture by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Intellectual Culture: The End of Russian Intelligentsia Dmitri Shalin No group cheered louder for Soviet reform, had a bigger stake in perestroika, and suffered more in its aftermath than did the Russian intelligentsia. Today, nearly a decade after Mikhail Gorbachev unveiled his plan to reform Soviet society, the mood among Russian intellectuals is decidedly gloomy.
    [Show full text]
  • The State Policy in the Field of School Education in the Soviet Russia in 1917–1923
    Stanislav Slobodian DOI: 10.14746/bhw.2017.36.4 Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University Chernivtsi, Ukraine The state policy in the field of school education in the Soviet Russia in 1917–1923 This article reviews Bolshevik policy in the field of school education in the early years of Soviet power. The author draws attention to the ideological and political differences between the party and most of the teachers, which intensified after the Bolsheviks seized power. The atmosphere of mutual distrust negatively affected the social policies concerning teachers at the local level. The terrible financial situation of the teachers led to a critical shortage of staff, a decrease in the overall competence of school employees, lack of motivation and capacity to effectively implement school reform. At the same time, the authorities significantly increased the requirements for teachers. Therefore, the Bolsheviks’ concept of the “labour school” was implemented with considerable distortions, causing a general decline in the quality of school education. Summing up the experience of school policy in the first years of the Soviet power, the Bolsheviks understood the need to review their attitude to people’s teachers and in particular to the remuneration of their labour. Keywords: soviet power, Bolsheviks, teachers, professional organisations, school, school reform, labour school. Introduction The period from 1917 to 1923 can undoubtedly be called the most difficult in the history of Russian education. Civil war, famine and devastation were major, but not the only causes of the crisis in the field of public education. The party’s attitude to education- al content, to methods of teaching and the educational process, as well as their social policy concerning teachers had a decisive influence on the situation in this field.
    [Show full text]
  • The Futurist Files: Avant-Garde, Politics, and Ideology in Russia, 1905–1930
    Bryn Mawr College Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College Russian Faculty Research and Scholarship Russian 2019 Book Review: The Futurist Files: Avant-Garde, Politics, and Ideology in Russia, 1905–1930 Tim Harte Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.brynmawr.edu/russian_pubs Part of the Slavic Languages and Societies Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y This paper is posted at Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College. https://repository.brynmawr.edu/russian_pubs/6 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Iva Glisic, The Futurist Files: Avant-Garde, Politics, and Ideology in Russia, 1905-1930. Dekalb, IL: Northern Illinois Press, 2018. x, 218 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index. Paper. Iva Glisic gets right down to business in The Futurist Files: Avant-Garde, Politics, and Ideology in Russia, 1905-1930, challenging the dominant view that Russian and early Soviet avant-garde art was strictly utopian at its core. The so-called Russian Futurists were not “blinded idealists” (5), Glisic argues, but rather pragmatic artists and theorists who rejected bourgeois culture, embraced the Revolution, and participated in the Bolshevik project in hands-on ways. Applying the broad label of Futurism to Russian and early Soviet avant-garde art that spanned the pre-Revolutionary period through the 1920s, Glisic makes an important distinction between absolute utopia and a more relative utopia that entailed working toward a future ideal, which became, she proposes, the modus operandi for the Russian Futurists in the 1920s. Futurist Files tracks the evolution of this work, concluding with brief commentary on 1930s aesthetics that underscores Glisic’s broad contention that Futurism anticipated Socialist Realism.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey Course on Russian/Soviet Art and Architecture, Part II (From the Time of Peter the Great to the Present)
    1 Survey Course on Russian/Soviet Art and Architecture, Part II (From the time of Peter the Great to the Present) Spring 2017 01:082:251 Prof. Alla Rosenfeld, Ph.D. MW5—2:50-4:10pm Zimmerli Art Museum’s education room Email:[email protected] 646-552-2426 cell phone Office hours MW, 4:30-5:30 pm or by appointment Prerequisites: There are no prerequisites with regard to previous courses pertaining to Russia. No knowledge of Russian is required Course requirements and evaluation (all must be fulfilled to receive course credit): Your grades will be based on your attendance, your participation in class discussion, and on the midterm exam and final exam or paper. You are expected to read all the required readings by the date assigned. Readings provide historical information not always covered in class; the texts do not duplicate lectures. Students will be expected to explore the Riabov Collection of Russian art and the Norton and Nancy Dodge Collection of Nonconformist Art from the Soviet Union; some classes may be taught in the galleries of the Zimmerli Art Museum. Midterm exam: This exam tests knowledge of facts, vocabulary and works of art as well as understanding of cultural and artistic issues. The exam covers material from lectures and readings in the period prior to exam; it includes identification of works of art (10 slides), important terms and concepts. 2 Final take-home exam or research paper: You will be required to choose between a take-home final exam (3 questions, essay format) or a final term paper (15 pages, typed and double- spaced).
    [Show full text]
  • Soviet”: from Bolshevik Utopia to Soviet Modernity
    Introduction Countercultures Ideologies and Practices Alternative Visions A HISTORY OF THE “SOVIET”: FROM BOLSHEVIK UTOPIA TO SOVIET MODERNITY Anna Krylova Introduction: Crossing out “Proletarian,” Writing “Soviet”1 In early 1936,Aleksandr Kosarev, the thirty-three-year-old leader of the All-Union Young Communist League (Komsomol), and his Central Committee worked away on a draft of the organiza- tion’s new membership rules. The draft was forwarded directly to Joseph Stalin, who must have spent hours hand-editing the lengthy document. The resulting document was cleansed of what most scholars today would associate with the signature Bolshevik lingua franca of the socialist project undertaken in the Soviet Union. Stalin consistently crossed out the familiar Bolshevik terms, categories, and metaphors that Kosarev had copied from the old rules. Stalin wrote “nonaffi liated” in place of “proletarian” and “laboring” in place of “class conscious.”2 Two months later, at the Komsomol Congress that gathered to adopt the new mem- bership rules, Stalin began to use the term “Soviet” to refer to these “party-less” and “laboring” young people. The toast with which he ended the Congress, “Long live the Soviet youth,” sounded like a definitive corrective to Kosarev and other weath- ered Komsomol leaders, who still preferred to refer to their 1 I am grateful to Social organization as the “young generation of the proletarian revolu- History for allowing me to draw on materials 3 tionaries.” published in Anna Krylova, “Imagining Socialism in the Soviet Century,” Social The odd but explicit opposition between the Bolshevik political History 42, no. 3 (2017): lingua franca and Stalin’s discursive intervention carried out under 315–41, in this essay, DOI: 10.1080/03071022 the rubric of the “Soviet” cannot help but give a scholar of modern .2017.1327640, reprinted Russia pause.
    [Show full text]
  • „Lef“ and the Left Front of the Arts
    Slavistische Beiträge ∙ Band 142 (eBook - Digi20-Retro) Halina Stephan „Lef“ and the Left Front of the Arts Verlag Otto Sagner München ∙ Berlin ∙ Washington D.C. Digitalisiert im Rahmen der Kooperation mit dem DFG-Projekt „Digi20“ der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek, München. OCR-Bearbeitung und Erstellung des eBooks durch den Verlag Otto Sagner: http://verlag.kubon-sagner.de © bei Verlag Otto Sagner. Eine Verwertung oder Weitergabe der Texte und Abbildungen, insbesondere durch Vervielfältigung, ist ohne vorherige schriftliche Genehmigung des Verlages unzulässig. «Verlag Otto Sagner» ist ein Imprint der Kubon & Sagner GmbH. Halina Stephan - 9783954792801 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 05:25:44AM via free access S la v istich e B eiträge BEGRÜNDET VON ALOIS SCHMAUS HERAUSGEGEBEN VON JOHANNES HOLTHUSEN • HEINRICH KUNSTMANN PETER REHDER JOSEF SCHRENK REDAKTION PETER REHDER Band 142 VERLAG OTTO SAGNER MÜNCHEN Halina Stephan - 9783954792801 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 05:25:44AM via free access 00060802 HALINA STEPHAN LEF” AND THE LEFT FRONT OF THE ARTS״ « VERLAG OTTO SAGNER ■ MÜNCHEN 1981 Halina Stephan - 9783954792801 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 05:25:44AM via free access Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München ISBN 3-87690-186-3 Copyright by Verlag Otto Sagner, München 1981 Abteilung der Firma Kubon & Sagner, München Druck: Alexander Grossmann Fäustlestr. 1, D -8000 München 2 Halina Stephan - 9783954792801 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 05:25:44AM via free access 00060802 To Axel Halina Stephan - 9783954792801 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 05:25:44AM via free access Halina Stephan - 9783954792801 Downloaded from PubFactory at 01/10/2019 05:25:44AM via free access 00060802 CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]