2 The Hayes History Journal 2019 Editors: Rose Barrett, Lily Cosgrove, Ashley Green, Gavin O'Connor, Sophia Wooden, Nicholas Hughes The Hayes History Journal is a student publication of the Department of History, Saint Joseph’s University, Philadelphia. The Journal welcomes submissions from students at Saint Joseph’s University for its next issue. Please contact the Department of History for information regarding submissions or any editorial matters. 3 The Hayes History Journal staff thanks Victor Taylor for his long-standing support of the Journal and student publishing at Saint Joseph’s University Faculty Advisors: Dr. Melissa Chakars and Dr. Alison Lewin 4 Dear Reader, Researching history allows for us to gain a deeper understanding of events, people, or time periods of our past. It can also allow for new perspectives to be gained or corrections to be made on how we think of things from the past. Throughout 2019, countless Saint Joseph University students have taken it upon themselves to dive deeper into history and produce well thought out papers concerning important events, people and trends of our past. Some of them took the extra steps to share the knowledge they gained with you—the reader. These papers range from discussing literature in the Soviet Union to private hunting clubs in the United States. They have been carefully divided up into four sections. The first section is “Soviet Studies.” These papers all look at important features or events of the Soviet Union. “Literature, Control, and Dissidence in Stalinist Soviet Union” focus on the Union of Soviet Writers and Stalin's desire to control the messages in written work. “Soviet Operation Barbarossa” argues that Operation Barbarossa and the Soviet’s victory over the Nazis was a pivotal event for the Soviet Union and goes into detail the effects it had. “To Kabul and Collapse: The Soviet- Afghan War and the Dissolution of the USSR” explores how the Afghan war created a sense of disillusionment with the Soviet people and their government. The second section is “Historical Destinies of American Women.” This section looks at the different treatments of women in America in two very different situations. “The Realities of “Freedom”: Experience of Enslaved Women in the American South” explores the often ignored history of enslaved women and the struggles specific to them while “Press Attention and Public Admiration: The Historical Significance Of Celebrity First Ladies” looks at how the media has interacted with First Ladies and the important role they have played in American history. Both bring up women who often are ignored throughout history but with two very different life situations or “destinies” if you will. Our third category is “Regulations and Legal Systems in American History.” This section looks at different ways that laws have played a role in American History. Again, much like the last category in two very different ways. “Changes in the Relationship between Slavery and the Law in North Carolina” takes an in-depth look at the legal systems in place in North Carolina at the time of slavery while “The Impact of Private Clubs on Hunting” argues that the creation of private hunting clubs, as well as regulations over hunting, not only saved relations between different groups of hunters but also stopped the extinction of certain animals. The last category is “Healing of Memories: Rethinking History.” This section looks at how we should view or learn about important events from history. “Sudan’s War on Religious Freedom” explores the role of British Colonialism in the later religious wars in Sudan and the mistake Britain made in dividing society based on religion. “How to Remember the Complicated History of Malcolm X and Thurgood Marshall and His Legacy” both rethink the way we remember two influential men of 5 the Civil Rights Movement. The first one argues that Malcolm X should not be remembered as a violent anti-white leader and the second argues that Thurgood Marshall should be remembered for more than his work with the Supreme Court. I sincerely hope you enjoy reading these papers, learn something new, and find something that challenges your thinking. There is much that can be learned from looking into our past and from looking outside of our personal area of interest. A lot of research and time has been put into presenting these ideas and we hope they inspire you to take a deeper look into history. Sincerely, Sophia Wooden Senior Editor and 2019 Editorial Staff 6 Contents Section I – Soviet Studies Dominique Joe “Literature, Control and Dissidence in Stalinist Soviet Union”………………………8 Thomas Stewart “Soviet Operation Barbarossa”………………………………………………………17 Finn Hunsaker “To Kabul and Collapse: The Soviet-Afghan War and the Dissolution of the USSR”…………………………………………………………………………..….. 26 Section II – Historical Destinies of American Women Lauren DiAngelo “The Realities of ‘Freedom’ Experience of Enslaved Women in the American South”……………………………………………………………………………..…36 Julia Taglianetti “Press Attention and Public Admiration: The Historical Significance of Celebrity First Ladies”………………………………………………………….……..……….55 Section III – Regulations and Legal Systems in American History Gabriella Gutierrez “Changes in the Relationship between Slavery and the Law in North Carolina”…...74 Michael Olsakowski “The Impact of Private Clubs on Hunting”………………………………………….94 Section IV – Healing of Memories: Rethinking History Callie Stewart “Sudan’s War on Religious Freedom”………………………………………..……113 Sophia Wooden “How to Remember the Complicated History of Malcolm X”…………… … …125 Michael Grell “Thurgood Marshall and his Legacy”……………………………………… …….137 7 Section I Soviet Studies 8 “Literature, Control and Dissidence in Stalinist Soviet Union” Dominique Joe Writing in general, but literature especially, had a particularly important function within the Soviet Union’s history, first in disseminating socialist ideology prior to the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, and then after the revolution to endear the Soviet people to the leader of the Communist Party and the Soviet cause in general. The most interesting and intentional time that this idea of propagandist manipulation through literature was practiced was during Stalin’s regime. Much of Stalin’s regime was marred by corruption, terror and fear, but was also upheld by propagandist manipulation of the Soviet people through literature. The creation of the Union of Soviet Writers was just one way for Stalin to influence and control the Soviet people. Stalin’s greater preoccupation with enemies all around him and dissidents within the Soviet Union is truly exemplified in the way in which the Union of Soviet Writers operated. The Union of Soviet Writers’ expressed purpose was to force control and order onto the cultivation and production of literature. But in Stalin’s pursuit of control, looking especially at the issues within the Union of Soviet Writers, one can see that disorder and dissidence still remained. By forcing multiple literary organizations together, along with the level of bureaucratic influence in the maintenance of the Union of Soviet Writers, one can see that Stalin’s obsession with dominance only caused more dissidence and disorder over which he meant to control. The Union of Soviet Writers was created in 1932 at the behest of Stalin to consolidate all literary organizations, proletarian or not, within a single entity.1 Literary organizations such as RAPP, or the Russian Association of Proletarian Writers (which was in its own right a large conglomeration of smaller proletarian writers groups and had already had a monopoly on the censorship and production of literature) were subsumed by the Union of Soviet Writers. It is well documented that Stalin’s initial creation of the Union of Soviet Writers was meant to merge different literary organizations into one group to better control the literary output in Russia, to make sure that literature was not disparaging to the Soviet Union, socialism, and probably most importantly Stalin himself. The Union of Soviet Writers became the only 1 Gleb Struve, Russian Literature under Lenin and Stalin, 1917-1953 (Norman: University of Oklahoma, 1971), 253. 9 dispensary of truly state-approved, meaning Stalin approved, literature that could be disseminated to the Soviet people during Stalin’s regime. The point of the Union of Soviet Writers was also to produce literature that fell within the artistic style of Socialist Realism. Socialist Realism was Stalin’s state-mandated and state-imposed artistic motif that showed the heroism of the working class and the importance of, and reverence for, the Communist Party, and arguably most importantly Stalin himself.2 In an article written by Al. Surkov for Pravda in 1950, Surkov outlined what Soviet literature should be communicating, saying that it should “[not distort] Soviet reality, [and not] retreat from the principles of socialist realism. The people do not accept such works. The writers must always remember that the very rich, colorful content of our Soviet reality, the greatness of the historic deeds of our people, cannot be expressed-in faded, grey literary works.”3 So, the literature coming from the Union of Soviet Writers was meant to communicate this lofty and idealistic ideal of the Soviet Union. As with much artwork such as the “Girl on the Tobacco Plant, 1930” by Ilya Mashkov or the painting “From Mowing the Grass to Cutting the Flesh” by Pyotr Konchalovsky, Soviet forms of art were meant to evoke idyllic images of hard work done by real and true Soviet people that were colorful and bright. The Union of Soviet Writers was meant to produce literature that took on these themes and assemble works of literature on the working class and socialist ideals with a certain level of efficiency. But in Stalin’s attempt to do so, by bringing together many different facets of the literary communities in the Soviet Union under one body, issues arose. Stalin’s need for total and complete control caused infighting and disorder that, overall, undermined his own ambitions.