Chapter IV POLITICAL CENSORSHIP IN THE 1940s-1991 Features of political censorship during the Second World War and post-war confrontation (1941-1956) Late 1930s was illuminated by the glow of an imminent war. Despite the outwardly peaceful nature of life, all Mass culture already in the USSR

Support the project Comments

sokrytoe

miklKIP wrote:

And then I see that this Pindos is an honorary doctor of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Malvador

ljazzy wrote:

67469899yes, for a wadded cattle brought up by the first channel, the book may seem like complete nonsense

Glory to Ukraine!
Are you from Dneproukropsk?

oandreya

miklKIP wrote:

67454491 I started listening and immediately abandoned it after the frank nonsense that the author flogged! It may be an excellent book to improve the general education of the Pindos, but for a Russian person it is complete nonsense. The view of a person from the outside, who does not understand either Russians or Russia. With the same success, you can ask a blind man to tell about a rainbow or a ram about cellular communications.

If the shaft of the tricolor does not press on the sphincter and there is time and desire, I can ask you to describe in more detail from the words "complete nonsense". And then somehow such a tearing of a vest on his chest with or without a loud fart into a puddle does not give an idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe book. But rather, it inclines to the idea that the "ripper" did not read it.
(this is just a postmodern paraphrase of the classic "We knew all of Feuerbach's mistakes without reading a single line of him")
And who knows, maybe it's not worth listening to, this book.

ljazzy

Malvador wrote:

67474021Glory to Ukraine!
Are you from Dneproukropsk?

Glory to heroes!
No, I'm from Kharkovukropsk =)

castrakis

sokrytoe wrote:

And then I see that this Pindos is an honorary doctor of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

And what?
Following the logic "since quilted jackets are hot, it means standing book"Why not give all assholes an honorary member in the same way?
Well, for the good cause of de-Stalinization and de-Sovietization?
Look, the idiot neighbors are knocking down monuments: they probably expect that after the next defeated plaster Lenin, there will definitely come a happy life and European integration.
But instead of a real story, they are being told at least some kind of ersatz in return about "proto-Ukrovs" for national pride, and we are offered to spoil our entire past and forget it like a bad dream.

Malvador

Almayson wrote:

67489190 Since it's hot for quilted jackets, the book is clearly worth attention.

Logically.
Quilters don't like a lot of things. For example, - g ... but eat.

nkos_ur

Malvador wrote:

Quilters don't like a lot of things. For example, - g ... but eat.

Why do you lie that they do not like? But what about Channel One and RTR? They love and ask for more.
P.S.
If there is no criticism besides the hysteria of the slaughtered, then apparently there is nothing to criticize meaningfully?
Then I'll listen.
P.P.S.
Ukrainian brothers, don't judge us by this cattle. We ourselves are ashamed of our fascist Russia. Hang in there. Together we will win.

Malvador

nkos_ur wrote:

67531777 Hang in there. Together we will win.

ljazzy

nkos_ur wrote:

67531777 Ukrainian brothers, don't judge us by this cattle. We ourselves are ashamed of our fascist Russia. Hang in there. Together we will win.

Yes, we ourselves have enough such cattle - Yanukovych and all other scum, someone chose at one time

ljazzy

Malvador wrote:

67575379 Thank you very much, gentlemen, for the transition to personalities, teachings and insults.
As far as I understand, European authority does not allow you to simply answer your questions.
Well, I dare not bother further.
Good luck in building a democratic and tolerant society under the banner of Dontsov-Konovalets-Bandera!

And the same to you, Vlasov underdog

Malvador

ljazzy wrote:

67588419 and the same to you, Vlasov underdog

I'll explain, sir froze.
Our Vlasovites are a bunch of outcasts who run to the so-called Russian marches.
I, like most of my compatriots, believe this:

Hidden text

oandreya

Malvador wrote:

Our Vlasovites are a bunch of outcasts who run to the so-called Russian marches.

Hmm, in order of enlightenment:
Vlasov - ROA soldiers under the command of General Vlasov.
Russian Liberation Army, ROA - the historical name of the armed forces of the Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia (KONR), who fought on the side of the Third Reich against the USSR, as well as the totality of the majority of Russian anti-Soviet units and units from Russian collaborators as part of the Wehrmacht in 1943-1944,
In total, these formations, according to various sources, numbered about 120-130 thousand people.
Most of them are Russians. It doesn't look like a "bunch" at all.
Z.Y. Also explain the meaning of the word collaborator? Until it turned out that this is a "bunch" of residents of Kolabino Lipetsk region

Malvador

oandreya wrote:

67603693In total, according to various sources, there were about 120-130 thousand people in these formations.
Most of them are Russians. It doesn't look like a "bunch" at all.

It was about the Vlasovites in modern Russia, and not about the Vlasovites of the 1944 model.
But even 70 years ago, even if your numbers are correct, the strength of the ROA was less than 1% compared to the strength of the Red Army. So in those days they, alas, were marginalized.

oandreya wrote:

67603693Z.S. Also explain the meaning of the word collaborator? Until it turned out that this is a "bunch" of residents of Kolabino, Lipetsk Region

Reduce your aplomb, please.
Thank you.

omat

miklKIP wrote:

67454491 I started listening and immediately abandoned it after the frank nonsense that the author flogged! It may be an excellent book to improve the general education of the Pindos, but for a Russian person it is complete nonsense. The view of a person from the outside, who does not understand either Russians or Russia. With the same success, you can ask a blind man to tell about a rainbow or a ram about cellular communications.

I have listened to half so far - I have no complaints about the author - everything is quite objective and not biased. If a question has not been fully studied or there is not enough data for a certain opinion, he directly warns about this every time.
And yet, the USSR is far from being only Russians and Russia, even if they are so incomprehensibly mysterious.

Malvador wrote:

67565487nkos_ur
ljazzy

1. Please explain, gentlemen, euro-intellectuals, to me, a redneck: why are the current rulers of Ukraine better for the people than those that were before the Maidan? Excuse me, of course, but it seems to me that if it was just bad under Yanukovych, now it's full f...pa. Please give links to articles and videos where you could see how the life of Ukrainians has improved over the past year, how successfully reforms are going on, GDP is growing, public debt is decreasing, etc. Otherwise, we, you know, have all the information blocked . Putin's propaganda fakes the entire YouTube on Mosfilm, and there are only horrors.
2. And more. Gentlemen European humanists, explain to me, a citizen of fascist Russia: what will Ukraine celebrate in May? Defeat of Nazism? But after all, this defeat put an end to the noble plans of your national heroes - Bandera and Shukhevych? Or will it be a day of victory for the whole of Europe, and a day of mourning for you? But you are civilized Europeans! Sorry, but my Colorado brain just can't handle that kind of cognitive dissonance.

The points:
1. The current rulers saw the Maidan. And they know that where there are two, there will, of necessity, be a third and a fourth. They were shown that the president, the prosecutor general and the head of the SBU are just salaried officials, who can always be replaced. Take the trouble to look for visual stimuli yourself if it itches like that.
2. Both the day of reconciliation and the day of victory were celebrated - no one died from breaking the template. Bandera and Shukhevych are the same absolute heroes as Stenka Razin and Emelka Pugachev. Don't exaggerate. As for the Ukrainian nationalists themselves, they fought much longer than the Nazis.
There is right there on Rutracker - it will be useful for you: [Lecture] Kirill Alexandrov - Bandera: Ukrainian nationalism and anti-communist struggle in Ukraine in the 1940s
And finally: does your "Colorado brain" suffer from "cognitive dissonance" when you see Lenin under the tricolor? Most of the dissonances you mentioned are your own creations. While you are faced with real ones every day and do not notice them.
UP: Listened to the end. I recommend it to everyone, especially people with an incomprehensible mental organization. It also helps to understand the current situation in and around Russia.

nkos_ur

Malvador wrote:

67565487nkos_ur
ljazzy
I don’t dare, due to my wretchedness, to argue with you, but still I can’t resist and ask two questions.
1. Please explain, gentlemen, euro-intellectuals, to me, a redneck: why are the current rulers of Ukraine better for the people than those that were before the Maidan?
2. And more. Gentlemen European humanists, explain to me, a citizen of fascist Russia: what will Ukraine celebrate in May?

1. But everything is not so good in Ukraine because it has to wage war with fascist Russia, which treacherously attacked Ukraine without declaring war.
2. Unlike fascist Russia engaged in victory, in Ukraine on May 9 they honored the memory of those who died in this bloody war.

PLextar

nkos_ur wrote:

Fixed typos
.

omat

PLextar wrote:

nkos_ur wrote:

1. But after all, things are not so good in Little Russia because they are not allowed to enter into a customs union with Russia, which, as the most faithful ally, keeps Little Russia from becoming a class of a country like Bulgaria or Latvia.
2. Unlike Great Russia involved in the celebration, in Little Russia they tried to celebrate on May 9, but by decree of the radical government, it was necessary to mourn how our ancestors won the war, and now we are trampling the Earth to spite them.

Fixed typos
.

"Great Russia", "Little Russia", "the most faithful ally". The lexicon speaks for itself. From a meeting with this most faithful ally, the coffins come home for the second year. Go n@xyy with such an alliance, brothers.

History of Soviet Russia from bourgeois revolution to geopolitical catastrophe (RSFSR, USSR 1917-1991)

The bourgeois revolution in Russia had been preparing for at least a century. The first attempt was the December Uprising on Senate Square in 1825, when secret societies of young officers oriented to the West launched a loud but unsuccessful rebellion.

The next attempt to abolish the Russian autocracy was made during the Spring of Nards (1848-1849), when an uprising broke out in Russian Poland. The authorities were also able to suppress this speech.

After for long years training, anti-Russian agitation within the country and the cultivation of the necessary personnel in secret revolutionary organizations at the beginning of the 20th century, the Russian autocracy fell as a result of the bourgeois revolution. But the situation of the weakening of Russian power was taken advantage of by the grassroots revolutionary forces, relatively independent of bourgeois customers, headed by V.I. Lenin and L.D. Trotsky, who managed to carry out the socialist revolution immediately after the bourgeois one. Russia became a socialist state.

After the terrible years of anarchy, terror and civil war, the Bolsheviks were able to establish solid power in Russia and ensure the safety of most of the Russian territory. The country again eluded the clutches of the international bourgeoisie. After all, Lenin's successor, Stalin, cleared out the Bolsheviks from those who were associated with external forces destructive for the country. First of all, it was L.D. Trotsky and his people.

The Great Patriotic War

Then the Western financial bourgeoisie, due to the impoverishment of American citizens (the Great Depression), managed to transfer significant funds across the Atlantic Ocean and use them to create a military monster of Nazi Germany to destroy the power of the Bolsheviks in Russia. This plan became known to Moscow, which hastily industrializes the young socialist state and prepares for defense.

The united European army, armed with Nazi ideology aimed at the extermination of the Russian population, crossed the borders of Russia in 1941. Through unthinkable efforts, Russian soldiers defended the land of their ancestors. The European army was stopped, driven back and destroyed in its home territory in the center of Europe.

Iron Curtain and Cold War

After the victory of the Soviet people over the Nazis, the West lowered the Iron Curtain and began the Cold War with Russia. In the Cold ideological and economic war, the West was able to defeat the USSR. Soviet people, drugged by Western propaganda, first of all with their own hands (but not without the help of Western agents) destroyed their state.

The Soviet period is a complex and contradictory phenomenon in the development of not only our history, but also culture. The 20th century gave the fatherland brilliant scientists and researchers, talented artists, writers, musicians, directors. It became the date of birth of numerous creative communities, art schools, trends, trends, styles. However, it was in the 20th century that a totalized socio-cultural mythology was created in Russia, accompanied by dogmatization, manipulation of consciousness, the destruction of dissent, the primitivization of artistic assessments and the physical destruction of the color of the Russian scientific and artistic intelligentsia. In a word, the culture of the Soviet period was never essentially monolithic. It is contradictory both in its individual manifestations and in general. And in this vein, it must be analyzed.

At the beginning of the 20th century, V.I. Lenin formulated the most important principles of the relationship communist party to artistic and creative activity, which formed the basis cultural policy the Soviet state. In the work “Party organization and party literature” (1905) V.I. Lenin clearly showed how untenable, in his opinion, is the desire of some creative people (we are talking about the turbulent era on the eve of the Russian revolution) to be “outside” and “above” the class struggle, since “... to live in society and be free from society it is forbidden". Therefore, the main goal of culture, according to V. I. Lenin, is not to serve “... a jaded heroine, not bored and obese “upper ten thousand”, but to millions and tens of millions of workers who make up the color of the country, its strength, her future." Thus, culture and, in particular, such a sphere of it as art, must become “part of the common proletarian cause”, express the interests of this class, and hence of society. Lenin's understanding of the class principle in any manifestations of culture became the starting point for further theoretical development in Soviet social science. The philosophical category “class bias” (or “class conditioning”) was an essential moment in the perception of any cultural phenomenon.

The socialist society, ideally, was conceived as a society where a new culture was to be formed. Perfect economic and socio-political relations, according to the classics of Marxism-Leninism, would contribute to the growth of the spiritual culture of the broad masses of the people and at the same time would increase the level of education of the main part of the population, which in total would contribute to the solution of the key task - the formation of a comprehensively developed personality. The October Revolution, according to its authors, was supposed to radically change the situation in the sphere of spiritual culture. For the first time, culture had to have the opportunity to belong to the people in the full and true sense, to serve as a spokesman for their interests and spiritual needs. However, the leaders of the revolution, considering it proletarian in essence, concluded that the new culture, which the new revolutionary society, must also be proletarian. The leaders of the revolution, in principle, refused to recognize cultural evolution, the continuity of cultural development.

The first post-October decade demanded the creation of a purely "proletarian culture" opposed to the entire artistic culture of the past. In the theoretical developments of the twenties there were many dead ends and contradictions. For example, many cultural concepts of that period are characterized by a class approach in the selection and evaluation of artistic means in the work of cultural figures. In the absolutization of the class aspect in artistic culture, two creative organizations stood out in particular - Proletkult and RAPP. Proletkult is a cultural, educational, literary and artistic organization that arose on the eve of the October Revolution and ceased to exist in 1932. The theorists of Proletcult A. A. Bogdanov, V. F. Pletnev, F. I. Kalinin argued that proletarian culture can only be created by representatives of the working class. In the proletarian concepts, the classical cultural heritage was denied, with the possible exception of those works of art, which revealed a connection with the national liberation movement. The activities of the Proletkult were sharply criticized even by the leadership of the Bolshevik Party. We are talking about the famous letter of V.I. Lenin in the Central Committee of the RCP (b) "On proletarian culture" in 1920. Another very influential creative group was the RAPP ( Russian association proletarian writers). Organizationally, the association took shape at the First All-Russian Congress of Proletarian Writers in Moscow in October 1920. Over the years, the leading role in the association was played by L. Averbakh, F.V. Gladkov, A.S. Serafimovich, F.I. Panferov and others. Calling for a struggle for high artistic skill, arguing with the theories of Proletkult, the RAPP, at the same time, remained on the point of view of proletarian culture. In 1932, the RAPP was dissolved. In the twenties, most cultural organizations and the press flaunted approximately the phrase that in order to come to its own culture, the proletariat will have to eradicate to the end the fetishistic cult of the artistic past and rely on the advanced experience of the present. And the main task of proletarian art will not be a stylization of the past, but the creation of the future. The class ideas of the twenties were continued in the “vulgar” sociology of art of the thirties and, with relapses, reached the beginning of perestroika. However, a number of prominent artists and, above all, writers and poets actively opposed this. In this row are the names of A. Platonov, E. Zamyatin, M. Bulgakov, M. Tsvetaeva, O. Mandelstam. The unconditional priority of the universal humanistic principle over the particular (including the narrow class) was for them an immutable law of creativity.

For a long time in Soviet social science the point of view dominated, according to which the 30-40s of our century were declared years of mass labor heroism in economic development and in the socio-political life of society. Much has been said and written about the scale of the development of public education, unprecedented in history. There are two decisive points here:

• 1) Decree of the XVI Congress of the CPSU (b) "On the introduction of universal compulsory primary education for all children in the USSR" (1930).
• 2) The idea put forward by I. Stalin in the thirties of the renewal of “economic cadres” at all levels, which entailed the creation of industrial academies and engineering universities throughout the country, as well as the introduction of conditions that stimulate working people to receive education in the evening and correspondence departments of universities “without out of production."

The first construction of the five-year plan, collectivization Agriculture, the Stakhanov movement, the historical achievements of Soviet science and technology were perceived, experienced and reflected in the public consciousness in the unity of its rational and emotional structures. Therefore, artistic culture could not but play an exceptionally important role in the spiritual development of socialist society. Never in the past and nowhere in the world have works of art had such a wide, such a massive, truly popular audience as in our country. This is eloquently evidenced by the attendance rates of theaters, concert halls, art museums and exhibitions, the development of the cinema network, book publishing and the use of library funds. The official art of the 1930s and 1940s was upbeat and affirmative, even euphoric. The major type of art that Plato recommended for his ideal "State" was embodied in the real Soviet totalitarian society. Here one should keep in mind the tragic inconsistency that developed in the country in the pre-war period. In the public consciousness of the 1930s, faith in socialist ideals, the enormous prestige of the party, began to be combined with "leaderism." Social cowardice, the fear of breaking out of the general ranks, has spread in broad sections of society. The essence of the class approach to social phenomena was reinforced by Stalin's personality cult. The principles of the class struggle were also reflected in the artistic life of the country. In 1932, following the decision of the XVI Congress of the CPSU (b), a number of creative associations-- Proletkult, RAPP, VOAPP. And in April 1934, the First All-Union Congress of Soviet Writers opened. At the congress, the secretary of the Central Committee for ideology, A. A. Zhdanov, made a report, outlining the Bolshevik vision of artistic culture in a socialist society. "Socialist realism" was recommended as the "basic creative method" of Soviet culture.

On the eve of the war in February 1937, the 100th anniversary of the death of A.S. Pushkin, in May 1938 the country no less solemnly celebrated the 750th anniversary of the creation of the national shrine “The Tale of Igor's Campaign”, and in March 1940 the last part of the novel by M. Sholokhov was published in the USSR “ Quiet Don". From the first days of the Great Patriotic War, Soviet art devoted itself entirely to the cause of saving the Fatherland. Cultural figures fought with weapons in their hands on the fronts of the war, worked in the front-line press and propaganda teams. Soviet poetry and song reached an extraordinary sound during this period. Genuine anthem people's war was the song of V. Lebedev-Kumach and A. Aleksandrov “Holy War”. Military lyrics by M. Isakovsky, S. Shchipachev, A. Tvardovsky, A. Akhmatova, A. Surkov, N. Tikhonov, O. Berggolts, B. Pasternak, K. Simonov were created in the form of an oath, crying, cursing, direct appeal. During the war years, one of the greatest works of the 20th century, D. Shostakovich's Seventh Symphony, was created. At one time, L. Beethoven liked to repeat the idea that music should strike fire from a courageous human heart. It was these thoughts that were embodied by D. Shostakovich in his most significant work. D. Shostakovich began to write the Seventh Symphony a month after the start of the Great Patriotic War and continued his work in Leningrad besieged by the Nazis. Together with professors and students of the Leningrad Conservatory, he went out to dig trenches and, as a firefighter, lived in a barracks position in the building of the conservatory. On the original score of the symphony, the composer's notes “VT” are visible - meaning “air raid”. When she advanced, D. Shostakovich interrupted work on the symphony and went to drop incendiary bombs from the roof of the conservatory.

IN postwar period national culture continued artistic development military theme. On a documentary basis, A. Fadeev's novel "The Young Guard" and "The Tale of a Real Man" by B. Polevoy are being created. In the Soviet humanities of this period, new approaches to the study of social consciousness begin to be developed. This is due to the fact that Soviet people begins to get acquainted with the culture of other countries and make spiritual contacts with all continents.

The artistic process of the 1960s and 1970s was distinguished by the intensity and dynamism of its development. He was closely connected with the well-known socio-political processes taking place in the country. No wonder this time is called the political and cultural “thaw”. The rapid development of scientific and technological progress, which determined many socio-economic processes of this period, also had a strong influence on the formation of the “thaw” culture. Ecological changes in nature, migration a large number population from the village to the city, the complication of life and life in modern cities led to serious changes in the consciousness and morality of people, which became the subject of depiction in artistic culture. In the prose of V. Shukshin, Y. Trifonov, V. Rasputin, Ch. Aitmatov, in the dramaturgy of A. Vampilov, V. Rozov, A. Volodin, in the poetry of V. Vysotsky, one can trace the desire to see the complex problems of time in everyday plots. The birth of the so-called “village prose” during the period of the “thaw” became a genuine phenomenon of Soviet culture. Its manifestation does not at all mean that the peasantry had special artistic needs, which differed significantly from the needs of other strata of Soviet society. The content of most of the works of V. Astafiev, V. Belov, F. Abramov, V. Rasputin and other “village people” did not leave anyone indifferent, because they dealt with universal human problems. Village writers not only recorded profound changes in consciousness; morality of a village person, but also showed the more dramatic side of these shifts, which affected the change in the connection between generations, the transfer of the spiritual experience of older generations to younger ones. Violation of the continuity of traditions led to the extinction of the old Russian villages with their centuries-old way of life, language, morality. A new way of rural life, close to the urban one, is coming to replace it. As a result, the fundamental concept of village life is changing - the concept of “home”, in which since ancient times Russian people have invested the concept of “fatherland”, “ native land", "families". Through the understanding of the concept of “home”, a deep connection between generations was also carried out. F. Abramov wrote about this with pain in his novel “The House”, and V. Rasputin’s stories “Farewell to Mother” and “Fire” are also devoted to this problem.

communist lenin culture artistic