Borders of Socialism This Page Intentionally Left Blank 1403969841Ts01.Qxd 25/2/06 10:09 PM Page Iii
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1403969841ts01.qxd 25/2/06 10:09 PM Page i Borders of Socialism This page intentionally left blank 1403969841ts01.qxd 25/2/06 10:09 PM Page iii Borders of Socialism Private Spheres of Soviet Russia Edited by Lewis H. Siegelbaum 1403969841ts01.qxd 25/2/06 10:09 PM Page iv BORDERS OF SOCIALISM © Lewis H. Siegelbaum, 2006. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles or reviews. First published in 2006 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN™ 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010 and Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, England RG21 6XS Companies and representatives throughout the world. PALGRAVE MACMILLAN is the global academic imprint of the Palgrave Macmillan division of St. Martin’s Press, LLC and of Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. Macmillan® is a registered trademark in the United States, United Kingdom and other countries. Palgrave is a registered trademark in the European Union and other countries. ISBN-13: 978–1–4039–6984–2 ISBN-10: 1–4039–6984–1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Borders of socialism : private spheres of Soviet Russia / edited by Lewis H. Siegelbaum. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1–4039–6984–1 1. Soviet Union—Social conditions. 2. Privacy—Soviet Union. I. Siegelbaum, Lewis H. HN523.B69 2006 306Ј.0947—dc22 2005051308 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Design by Newgen Imaging Systems (P) Ltd., Chennai, India. First edition: May 2006 10987654321 Printed in the United States of America. 1403969841ts01.qxd 25/2/06 10:09 PM Page v Contents List of Figures vii Preface and Acknowledgments ix Introduction: Mapping Private Spheres in the Soviet Context 1 Lewis H. Siegelbaum Part 1 Private Enterprise and Private Property 1 Claiming Property: The Soviet-Era Private Plots as “Women’s Turf” 25 Esther Kingston-Mann 2 The Art Market and the Construction of Soviet Russian Culture 47 Andrew Jenks 3 Separate Yet Governed: The Representation of Soviet Property Relations in Civil Law and Public Discourse 65 Charles Hachten 4 Cars, Cars, and More Cars: The Faustian Bargain of the Brezhnev Era 83 Lewis H. Siegelbaum Part 2 Domesticity and Domestic Space 5 Domestic Life and the Activist Wife in the 1930s Soviet Union 107 Rebecca Balmas Neary 6 A Hearth for a Dog: The Paradoxes of Soviet Pet Keeping 123 Amy Nelson 7 The Meaning of Home: “The Only Bit of the World You Can Have to Yourself” 145 Susan E. Reid 1403969841ts01.qxd 25/2/06 10:09 PM Page vi vi / contents 8 “I Know all the Secrets of My Neighbors”: The Quest for Privacy in the Era of the Separate Apartment 171 Steven E. Harris 9 Private Matters or Public Crimes: The Emergence of Domestic Hooliganism in the Soviet Union, 1939–1966 191 Brian LaPierre Part 3 Behavior and Private Life 10 A Symbiosis of Errors: The Personal, Professional, and Political in the Kirov Region, 1931–1941 211 Larry E. Holmes 11 Friends in Private, Friends in Public: The Phenomenon of the Kompaniia Among Soviet Youth in the 1950s and 1960s 229 Juliane Fürst 12 The 1959 Liriki-Fiziki Debate: Going Public With the Private? 251 Susan Costanzo Notes on Contributors 269 Selected Bibliography 271 Index 279 1403969841ts01.qxd 25/2/06 10:09 PM Page vii List of Figures 6.1 “Postal Dog.” Cover Illustration from Andrei Fedorovich Shenets, Dog and Its Service to Man 129 6.2 “Concert for Friends,” Sovetskaia zhenshchina, no. 5 (1953), p. 17 131 6.3 “Child and Dog—this Friendship is Centuries Old!” Okhota i Okhotnich’e Khoziaistvo, no. 6 (1970), p. 26 135 7.1 Khrushchev-era mass housing, Leningrad c. 1960. 146 7.2 Model interior in the “contemporary style.” O. Baiar and R. Blashkevich, Kvartira i ee ubranstvo 151 7.3 Interior of Khrushchev-era apartment built 1960 in South West of Leningrad 165 This page intentionally left blank 1403969841ts01.qxd 25/2/06 10:09 PM Page ix Preface and Acknowledgments This book originated during a car trip from Toronto to my home in East Lansing, Michigan in November 2003. I was returning from the annual convention of the Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies (AAASS), where I had been drawn to presentations on family apartments in the Khrushchev era, youth culture, semi-legal markets, and other seemingly disparate topics remote from my own research on the history of automo- biles in the Soviet Union. Suddenly, somewhere on that long stretch of road west of London, Ontario, I became aware of the common thread that con- nected our work. Barely articulated in our respective presentations, it was the everyday sites, practices, and forms of behavior that can be identified with the private sphere. The realm of the private, variously defined, has been receiving increasing attention from students of Soviet-type societies for some time. One of the reasons for this development may be that so many of the previously domi- nant narratives about that part of the world suddenly seemed stale and inap- propriate in the aftermath of the events of 1989–1991. These narratives, overwhelmingly about public affairs and the state, rarely addressed the private realm, and when they did so, tended to treat it as the beleaguered antithesis of state power. They thus occluded many of the “common places” and practices that gave specific meaning to, if not defined, life in Soviet- type societies. “Doing” private spheres thus adds a vital dimension to the history of such societies. The second reason has to do with disciplinary training specific to Soviet studies. Until not too long ago, 1945 (or at the latest 1953) was the year beyond which historians of the USSR feared to tread. This simply is no longer the case. The result is the challenging of long-held assumptions about what really mattered during the post-Stalin era, and a corresponding reexamination of some of the more reassuring con- trasts that used to be drawn between East and West. It was during that car trip, then, that my companion Leslie Page Moch suggested I try to put together a book of essays reflective of the exciting new scholarship to which I had been exposed at the conference. A few e-mail messages and an announcement in H-Russia elicited proposals; common 1403969841ts01.qxd 25/2/06 10:09 PM Page x x / preface and acknowledgments reading was suggested to help frame the essays; panels were put together for AAASS conventions in subsequent years; and, in the meantime, authors wrote and submitted drafts and revised versions. All this was facilitated by Palgrave Macmillan’s editor, David Pervin and his assistant, Heather van Dusen, both of whom responded promptly and helpfully to my queries. I also am happy to express my gratitude to all the contributors for their cooperativeness and good cheer which made our collaboration not only conflict-free but fun; to Yves Cohen, Alain Blum, and Patrick Fridenson for giving me the opportunity to present my ideas and critically engaging with them in their seminars at the Ecole des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales; to Yves Charbit and Gabor Rittersporn for taking time away from more impor- tant things to attend and offer criticism and advice in those seminars; to my good friends, Ronald Suny and Diane Koenker, for their encouragement and enthusiasm about the project; and, of course, to Leslie Page Moch. 1403969841ts02.qxd 25/2/06 1:54 PM Page 1 Introduction: Mapping Private Spheres in the Soviet Context Lewis H. Siegelbaum The Private as a Universal Category of Historical Analysis? The analytical distinction between the public and the private has been described as a “central preoccupation of Western thought since classical antiquity.” “Pervasive, durable, persistent, and deeply rooted,” this “great dichotomy” nevertheless has frustrated scholars by its “protean,” “inherently problematic, and often treacherous” nature, its “false clarity” and multi- plicity of meanings.1 In an influential attempt to untangle the web of contra- dictory associations, Jeff Weintraub identified two “fundamental, and analytically quite distinct, kinds of imagery” or axes according to which private and public have been contrasted: ● the hidden or withdrawn versus the open, revealed, or accessible; ● the individual or particularistic versus the collective or general.2 Of course, as Weintraub noted, “there are a number of ways in which each of these underlying criteria can be conceived, and...combined to produce the various concrete versions of the public/private distinction.” In fact, it turns out that, as the sociologist Joe Bailey puts it, “there is no essen- tial ‘private’ or intrinsic ‘public,’ no obvious psychological or anthropological constant underlying these concepts.” They are, rather, highly mutable cate- gories that construct each other. Sometimes one has occupied the “high” or favored ground while at other times it has been the residual category.3 If this is true of the modern Western world, could it also be, as Joan Landes recently asked, “a universal feature of human society, with endless variations? Or, conversely, is it a feature of a particular form of social organization associated with the rise of the family, private property, and the state?”4 Even if the latter were the case, the question remains whether the distinction has any utility for analyzing societies in which it did not figure in political 1403969841ts02.qxd 25/2/06 1:54 PM Page 2 2 / lewis h. siegelbaum theory or legal practice. Weintraub notes that because the web of personal dependencies in medieval times attenuated if not totally obscured the public-private distinction, “a significant element in the shaping of modernity has involved the gradual rediscovery of these notions and the attempt to realize and institutionalize them.”5 Does this mean that the distinction is meaningless or irrelevant to medievalists? Even a nodding acquaintance with recent scholarship suggests otherwise.6 Similarly in Middle Eastern studies it has been noted that “public/private dichotomies are difficult to discern in the historical record,” at least before the nineteenth century.