Eleanor Rees The Kino-Khudozhnik and the Material Environment in Early Russian and Soviet Fiction Cinema, c. 1907-1930. January 2020 Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Slavonic and East European Studies University College London Supervisors: Dr. Rachel Morley and Dr. Philip Cavendish !1 I, Eleanor Rees confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Word Count: 94,990 (including footnotes and references, but excluding contents, abstract, impact statement, acknowledgements, filmography and bibliography). ELEANOR REES 2 Contents Abstract 5 Impact Statement 6 Acknowledgments 8 Note on Transliteration and Translation 10 List of Illustrations 11 Introduction 17 I. Aims II. Literature Review III. Approach and Scope IV. Thesis Structure Chapter One: Early Russian and Soviet Kino-khudozhniki: 35 Professional Backgrounds and Working Practices I. The Artistic Training and Pre-cinema Affiliations of Kino-khudozhniki II. Kino-khudozhniki and the Russian and Soviet Studio System III. Collaborative Relationships IV. Roles and Responsibilities Chapter Two: The Rural Environment 74 I. Authenticity, the Russian Landscape and the Search for a Native Cinema II. Ethnographic and Psychological Realism III. Transforming the Rural Environment: The Enchantment of Infrastructure and Technology in Early-Soviet Fiction Films IV. Conclusion Chapter Three: The Domestic Interior 114 I. The House as Entrapment: The Domestic Interiors of Boris Mikhin and Evgenii Bauer II. The House as Ornament: Excess and Visual Expressivity III. The House as Shelter: Representations of Material and Psychological Comfort in 1920s Soviet Cinema IV. Conclusion Chapter Four: The Workplace 162 I. Private Studies in Evgenii Bauer’s Films: Individual Desires and Power Relations II. Fantasy and the Everyday Reality of Labour: Aelita (1924) and Shinel´ (1926) III. Industrial Settings and Cinematic Expressivity: Proekt inzhenera Praita (1918) and Stachka (1925) IV. Objects of Desire and the Workplace: Vasha znakomaia (1927) and Zlatye gory (1931) V. Conclusion Chapter Five: Artistic Arenas 207 I. The Artist’s Studio !3 II. Film Studios and Cinema Theatres III. The Circus IV. Conclusion Conclusion 250 I. The Kino-khudozhnik: Versatile Multi-tasker, Technical Expert and Willing Collaborator II. Late-Imperial and Early-Soviet Set Design: Medium Specificity and National Cinemas III. The Material Environment: Authenticity, Psychological Intensity, Object Relations and Social Practices Filmography 259 Bibliography 265 !4 Abstract This thesis explores the figure of the kino-khudozhnik [set designer] in late-Imperial and early- Soviet fiction cinema in the silent era. In comparison to other members of the film-making team, such as the camera operator, the director and the script-writer, the kino-khudozhnik is a relatively under-researched subject. Drawing on film-makers’ memoirs, the contemporary cinema press and archival documents, this thesis examines the kino-khudozhnik’s contribution to the technical and creative sides of film-making in the period when cinema developed both as a new national industry and as a new art form in Russia. It thus considers cinema as a collaborative endeavour, an idea that held ideological significance in the early-Soviet era. It also provides an insight into the dynamics of studio film-making during the period, emphasising the role that available technology, the studio environment and professional partnerships, as much as the creative visions of individuals, played in shaping the evolution of film aesthetics. Many of the first kino-khudozhniki, who started their careers in Russian cinema in the 1910s, continued to work in the industry after its nationalisation in 1919. In examining the role of kino-khudozhniki across the late-Imperial and early-Soviet periods, this thesis highlights changes between these two eras, but it also emphasises continuities. In so doing, it questions traditional historical periodisations. In addition to examining the working practices of kino-khudozhniki, this thesis explores the sets they designed for films. Combining close visual analysis of a wide range of films and discussion of socio-cultural discourses of the period, it considers how representations of certain spaces – the rural provinces, the domestic interior, the workplace, and artistic and performative arenas – related to contemporary concerns about the material environment. In considering how film- makers harnessed cinema’s ideological potential and used set design to promote certain ideas about the material environment, this thesis situates cinema as a key driver in shaping discourses about the built and object world in late-Imperial and early-Soviet Russia. 5 Impact Statement In its examination of the kino-khudozhnik’s role in late-Imperial and early-Soviet cinema, this thesis contributes to existing scholarship in the field of Russian Film Studies. In comparison to other members of the film-making team, such as the director, the camera operator and the scenarist, the kino-khudozhnik is a relatively under-researched figure. Drawing on primary and archival sources, this thesis provides a typology of the kino-khudozhnik in order to reveal how the profession contributed to the creative and technical decisions involved in film-making. It considers how available technology, the studio environment and professional partnerships, as much as the creative visions of individuals, shaped the evolution of silent film aesthetics in Russia. In so doing, this thesis contributes to a growing body of scholarship in Russian Film Studies that examines the influence of technological innovations on cinema. In its analysis of the figure of the kino-khudozhnik, this thesis brings to light information on individuals such as Vladimir Balliuzek and Sergei Kozlovskii, who played a key role in film production but who have received little attention in scholarship on Russian cinema. Additionally, it draws attention to the involvement of such well-known figures as Lev Kuleshov and Aleksandr Rodchenko in the field of cinema design, which remains an under-researched aspect of their artistic oeuvre. Many of the first kino-khudozhniki, who started their careers in Russian cinema in the 1910s, continued to work in the industry after its nationalisation in 1919. Thus, unlike the majority of scholarship on Russian cinema, which considers the late-Imperial and early-Soviet eras separately, taking the 1917 Revolution as a historical divide, this thesis highlights the importance of the kino-khudozhnik as a point of continuity between the two periods. In so doing, it questions traditional historical periodisations, thus deepening our understanding of the complex relationship between late-Imperial and early-Soviet cinema. During this era, cinema developed not only as a new national industry, however; it also emerged as a new art form. The way in which the kino-khudozhnik’s role was theorised at the time reveals film-makers’ evolving understandings of cinema’s expressive potential and its relation to other artistic media. By situating debates about the kino-khudozhnik’s practice in the context of broader artistic developments during this period, this thesis provides a greater understanding of the close dialogue that developed between cinema and other artistic fields, including theatre, architecture, design and the graphic and pictorial arts. It thus contributes to histories of Russian art that examine artistic exchange between different media. Lastly, by combining close visual analysis of a wide range of films and discussion of socio- cultural discourses of the period, this thesis examines how kino-khudozhniki exploited cinema’s 6 ideological potential and used set design to explore contemporary concerns about the material environment. This thesis therefore contributes to existing scholarship on Russian culture that highlights the role that visual representations played in shaping discourses about the material environment in the late-Imperial and early-Soviet eras. In its focus on cinema set design, it draws attention to features of canonical films not considered in existing studies; it also reveals how less well-known films are remarkable from a design perspective, thus broadening the corpus of films usually discussed in scholarship on Russian cinema. 7 Acknowledgments I am grateful for the generous support of the Wolfson Foundation, who in part funded the research for this thesis with a three-year scholarship. I also thank the Design History Society and the School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES) for additional contributions towards two research trips to archives in Moscow. Some of the material included in this thesis I presented at seminars held by the SSEES Russian Cinema Research Group and the Cambridge Courtauld Russian Art Centre and at conferences hosted by the Courtauld Institute of Art, the Humboldt University and the Design History Society, the European Architectural Network and the Architecture, Space and Society Centre at Birkbeck University. Many thanks to those who were present for listening and to those who asked questions and gave suggestions. I am also indebted to Pat Kirkham and Sarah Lichtman, who offered me the opportunity to publish research for this thesis as a chapter for an edited book, and to the anonymous reviewers, who provided helpful comments on the chapter. I am very grateful to Philip Cavendish, who commented on drafts of this