Culture, the Soviet Union, and the Cold War
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SPECIAL ISSUE: Culture, the Soviet Union, and the Cold War General Introduction C Musya Glants and Pamela Kachurin Overthe last quarter-century “ culture”has become asignicant topic of scholarly inquiry. 1 Theabundance ofrecent scholarship within the category of“ culturalstudies” attests to the increasing salience ofculture in investiga- tions ofhistorical and political epochs. 2 Cultural studies tracethe complex matrixof factors that contribute toa particularhistorical moment, allowing us todiscern events and inuences thatoften go unnoticed. Therelationship between theSoviet Union and theWest during theCold Waris anexcellent example ofhow culture— both mass cultureand highculture— was employed as a mode of communication and manipulation. Thegoal of this special issue ofthe Journal ofColdW ar Studies is to illu- minate lesser-known facetsof the role played by highculture during theCold War.The articlesthat follow touchupon several importantthemes: theextent towhich the U.S. and Soviet governments relied on culturalproducts as polit- 1.In its broadest de nition, culture is asystem of meaningsthat enables human beings to translate theirinstincts, urges, needs,and other propensities into representational and communicative struc- tures. This system includeslanguage, visual symbols, gestures, codes, art,and texts that a socialgroup createsand uses tocarry out its daily life and routines. See Marcel Danesi, Analyzing Cultures:An In- troductionand Handbook (Bloomington:Indiana University Press, 1999).The articlesincluded in this issue employthe term culture toconnote products of“highculture” — specically the nearts and lit- eraryexpression, which are produced byindividuals for theconsumption of andinterpretation by au- diences(viewers andreaders). These products areconsidered valuable based on their perceived quality andthe relatively high status of theircreators (artists) intheir own social contexts. This isa distinct category, usually separate—although not mutually exclusive—from “mass” or “popular” culture. 2.Recentexamples of theexpanding literature on culturalstudies asadisciplineand methodology in- clude:Ben Agger, CulturalStudies as CriticalTheory (London:Falmer Press, 1992);Simon During, The CulturalStudies Reader (New York:Routledge, 1999); and Catriona Kelly and David Shepherd, Russian Cultural Studies: An Introduction (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998). Journal of Cold War Studies Vol. 4, No. 1, Winter 2002, pp. 3–5 © 2002 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology 3 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/152039702753344799 by guest on 02 October 2021 Glants and Kachurin icaltools; theauthority invested by thepopulace in culturalproducts and phenomena asrepositoriesof sociopolitical paradigms;and theprominence of individuals operatingin thecultural sphere as representatives and creatorsof societal attitudes. Theimpact of W estern culturalproducts on theSoviet Union during the Cold Warhas rarely been studied in any depth by Western scholars, in part because ofthe paucity of evidence and in partbecause oflimited interest. Yet itis widely acknowledged thatthe Soviet Union soughtto use both Western and Soviet culturaloutput to shape popular opinion. Western lms, music, and literaturewere seized on by theSoviet authoritiesto demonstratethe al- leged decadence and shortcomings of Western societies. The ideological sym- pathiesof select representativesof W estern highculture, including Paul Robeson, Rockwell Kent, Pablo Picasso, and Jean-Paul Sartrewere exploited tolegitimize Communism. Cultural guressuch as Louis Aragonand Bertold Brechtwere enlisted by theSoviet regimeas spokesmen forthe global “peace movement,”itself a vehicle forpropaganda. This is not tosuggest, however, thatthe implementation ofthese policies wasmonolithic oruniformly suc- cessful. Thearbitrary ,shifting,and occasionally ineffectivenature of these ac- tivities depended greatlyon theSoviet leadershipand on thestatus of rela- tions between the Soviet Union and the West. Even whiledenigrating some aspectsof Western culture, the Soviet gov- ernment actively promoted the“ classics”of W estern cultureto the Soviet public. At thesame time, theSoviet authoritiesinvoked Russian and Soviet music, ballet, theater,and literatureto fostera mood ofcultural superiority both abroadand athome, whichwould facilitateof cial efforts to fostera So- viet brand ofpatriotism,founded in parton fearand chauvinism. Soviet lead- ersalso hoped tosuggest that Soviet citizens, unlike theirW estern counter- parts,valued highculture and literaryendeavors over materialconcerns. Almost inevitably,however,these policies could—and arguablydid— have the opposite effect:They cultivated an intense curiosityabout and admirationof Western life. Thecraving for anything Westernand thedecreasing ability to keep Westerncultural production outof the Soviet Union undoubtedly helped spur the social reforms under Michail Gorbachev. 3 TheU.S. government’srelianceon culturalproduction— both highcul- tureand mass culture—as apsychological weaponin theCold Warhasbeen thesubject ofnumerous recentstudies. 4 TheUnited Statesexported itsown 3.For aninteresting argument to thiseffect, see StephenKotkin, Armageddon Averted:The SovietCol- lapse, 1970–2000 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001). 4.Recentmonographs andanthologies include Peter Kuznick and James Gilbert, Rethinking ColdWar Culture (Washington:Smithsonian Institution Press, 2001.);Frances Stonor Saunders, The Cultural ColdW ar:The CIAand theW orldof Arts and Letters. (New York:New Press, 1999);Elaine Marie 4 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/152039702753344799 by guest on 02 October 2021 Culture,the Soviet Union,and the Cold War brand ofcultural values intheform of modern art,allegedly freefrom govern - mental proscription, technological innovation, and popular culture.The pol- icywas not alwaysfree of controversy athome, however,as Marilyn Kushner’s article makes clear. Theimplications ofCold Warideologies, in both Eastand West, reach into thecontemporary period and areripe for scholarly attention. The conicts and debates thatarose about culturalexports during theCold War areuseful, in retrospect,in showingthe multiple meanings ofcultural phe- nomena. Thepotential forcon icting or ambiguous interpretationsmade it difcult to use cultural products efcaciously as forms of propaganda. Wehope thatthis special issue will promote furtheranalysis ofCold War cultureby historiansand political scientists, especially asmore documents in theformer Communist worldbecome available. Despite the ne studies that haveappeared in recentyears, many aspectsof cultureduring theCold War remain unexplored. McClarnandand Steve Goodson, The Impactof theCold W ar on American PopularCulture (Carrollton,GA: StateUniversity of West Georgia,1999); W alterL. Hixson, Parting theCurtain: Propaganda, Culture,and theCold W ar,1945– 1961 (New York:St. Martin’s Press, 1997);and Wood Haut, Pulp Culture: Hardboiled Fiction and the Cold War (New York: Serpent’s Tail, 1995). 5 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/152039702753344799 by guest on 02 October 2021.