Welcome to 20th Century Russia!

Youth in the Gun Sight of Psychological Warfare (1986)

The image above depicts a bourgeois propaganda poster. The poster was designed to weaken the revolutionary enthusiasm growing within the Soviet youth culture. It was also designed “to inoculate young people with apolitical attitudes, indifference to the historical fate of socialism, and to blunt its class consciousness” (Seventeen Moments Images). A clear example of youth’s feelings can be found in “Soviet Youth: a Turbulent Factor” when the author states, “‘We knew what our future was to be gray and immutable. We grew up in the seventies…[w]e simply lived the life you laughed about once you had put us to bed and firmly shut the door. No wonder you have turned out to be better prepared for the gust of fresh air which has knocked us off our feet'” (A Turbulent Factor). Another example of the divide between generations is seen in the Disaffected Youth (1984) video clip. This clip showcases how youth culture was divided from older generations, specifically concerning motorcycles, and a subject states “[w]hereever we go, we are in somebody’s way” (Seventeen Moments Video).

This semester, I have often looked into the role of women and family. The family unit within Soviet culture has been threatened as political tides have shifted, laws have changed, and exposure to the world has caused conflict in societal norms. The traditional Soviet youth was expected to take part in dated practices of the Komosol and antiquated school lessons (Seventeen Moments). The system wasn’t just outdated, but youth was rejecting out-of-date ways of life for more contemporary rock music and so on. With challenges to youth expectations increasing, “authorities had no answers to the questions agitating young people, and in fact ignored issues such as sexuality and the legitimacy of authority” (Seventeen Moments). With the truth coming out, youth began to question why they had to endure the same system of their parents. If there are problems, why not change them? Or at least challenge them.

Jurus Podnieks found that youth was “disenchant[ed] with Soviet mores” and they were struggling to figure out where the Soviet future would lead (Seventeen Moments). In the article “Invitation to Discussion: ‘Is It Easy to be Young?'” the author discusses how the film relates to the young and not the old. The older generations have failed the youth “[t]o all indications, because [they] failed to provide them with worthwhile pursuits, jobs and sensible entertainment, and because [they] failed to teach them how to put their free time to good use” (Invitation of Discussion). The document states the interests of youth are entertainment and materialism, not hard work and usefulness. Youth does not want to perform labor like the older generations were required to do so, therefore the transformation of youth will have negative consequences for the Soviet state (Invitation of Discussion). The document concludes with the need for music, art, film, etc. that promotes youth within Soviet ideals, rather than supporting laziness and reform (Invitation of Discussion).

In short, the youth of the Soviet Union was diverting away from traditional Soviet values. They were asking questions their parents had not and looking for answers in a time when change was occurring.

Sources:

http://dlib.eastview.com/browse/doc/19995802

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1985youth&Year=1985

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=article&ArticleID=1985sklyrenko1&SubjectID=1985youth&Year=1985

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=images&SubjectID=1985youth&Year=1985&navi=byYear

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=video&SubjectID=1985youth&Year=1985&navi=byYear

Music was very limited to traditional norms in the 60s and early 70s. Songs were centered around the Soviet motherland and culture in a very routine way. Departures from the norm would not gain recognition by those in power, and occasionally minor deviations from traditional composition were ignored if the message remained Soviet-based. For example, David Tukhmanov’s “My Address is the Soviet Union” contained Soviet patriotism, so the electric guitar was ignored by higher ups (Seventeen Moments). In a Report of the Board of Russian Republic Composers’ Union to the Third Congress of Russian Republic Composers, the report discusses the “characteristics of the most interesting works” in which “Russia has always been a country with highly developed standards” (Report of the Board). The importance of stage genre was upheld within the article, leaning toward tradition instead of toward innovation.

Contemporary music departing from expectations were slow to move across the country, often smuggled between individuals on tape recorders or records. Soviet authorities would work to eradicate the invasion of “inappropriate,” western music from Soviet society, but the music would eventually capture the country’s youth.

Tatyana Nazarenko: Dance Floor (1977)

While the Soviet Union resisted changes in musical norms, rock and roll was emerging in the west. The connection of the west to rock and roll would infiltrate Soviet society in 1973, leading Russian singers to sing rock songs in English, rather than Russian (Seventeen Moments). The influence of Andrei Makarevich, the lead singer of Time Machine, would change the face of western rock and roll to Soviet based music, relating to the Soviet Union and Soviet culture (Seventeen Moments). There is an identifiable contrast between Tukhmanov’s “My Address is the Soviet Union” and Makarevich’s “You or Me,” both released in 1973 (Seventeen Moments).

Innovation did not necessarily meet prace and the “press featured vitriolic attacks against the Western influence presented in rock music” (Editorial Roundtable Discussion). The infiltration of western influence, while criticized by many, was due to an expanding world. According to the “Editorial Roundtable Discussion,” “[t]he broadening of contacts with foreigners has intensified the exchange of information” (Editorial Roundtable Discussion). The discussion goes on to try and understand rock music and interpret the societal impacts of the music.

The rave of rock music peaked in 1987 when Billy Joel went to Moscow. He was one of the first American rock artists to perform in the Soviet Union since the construction of the Berlin Wall. The crowd at the show in Moscow had never experienced a show like the one before them, but the excitement and energy of the show would ignite rock and roll passion within Soviet youth (To see the show, here is a link to the performance). The controversy of the event was seen in the bright lights used during the show. The crowd would freeze under spotlight, fearing action would be taken against them.

The transition of Soviet music to mainstream rock and roll was gradual, but the ease to transfer information across the country, and across the world, would open the door to exchange thoughts, art, music, and ideas around the globe. The continuing technological advancements in the 80s, 90s, and 2000s have resulted in nearly instantaneous communication. The worlds of individual cultures unaffected by popular fads in other countries was officially a thing of the past.

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Joel#Trip_to_the_Soviet_Union

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1973rock&Year=1973

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=article&ArticleID=1973sots1&SubjectID=1973rock&Year=1973

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=music&SubjectID=1973rock&Year=1973&navi=byYear

http://dlib.eastview.com.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu:8080/searchresults/article.jsp?art=0&id=13644135

America in the 1960s represented an entirely different form of the generation gap than the gap seen in Soviet culture in the late 60s. American youth was facing recreational drug use, the infiltration of sex into mainstream culture, and anti-war protests. These ideals did not span across all generations, but caused a rift between the older and younger generations. Soviet society did not face the dramatic differences found in America, or even other countries during the late 1960s. Instead, the radical generation gap discussed in America wasn’t rampant in the Soviet Union (Seventeen Moments). Drugs, sex, and anti-war and anti-government protests did not plague Soviet culture at this time.

Life for the youth of the Soviet Union was significantly improved from that of the generation before them. The youth of the 1960s was “the first…to

L. S. Samoilov: Which One Should We Push? (1965)

command the leisure and disposable income to make questions of style paramount” (Seventeen Moments). In other words,  appearance was a central issue for the generation gap as well as work ethic principles (Seventeen Moments). The youth of Russia was seen as lazy compared to the collectivized older generations that had relied on a heavy work ethic for success. In the image to the right, two youth sit on a couch pressing buttons to the left reading: mom, dad, grandma, and grandpa (Seventeen Moments Images). This reminded me of a commercial that has been on TV lately: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UntdGA7gH3Q. This commercial shows an American youth calling the house phone to ask his grandmother for something rather than walking into the other room to talk to her directly. Older generations always see youth as lazier than the generation before them, but opportunity can lead

to a decreased work ethic and lack of appreciation. The idea of individuality was lost on older generations who saw the youth losing sight of specific values for superficial reasons. Youth fashion caused a disturbance, creating a widening generation gap. Laziness could be inferred, but the clear evidence of individuality in youth clothing was a constant reminder of the ever changing culture. In the image below, the caption reads: “You know how it was when we were young. We walked around starving, without clothes … So at least my daughter should dress properly!” (Seventeen Moments Images).

V. Goriaev: Memories of Old (1964)
“You know how it was when we were young. We walked around starving, without clothes … So at least my daughter should dress properly!”

Laziness and fashion were not the only influences on the generation gap in Soviet culture. The infiltration of western culture and rock-n-roll would exacerbate the divide between young and old (Seventeen Moments). Illegally smuggling in records would be commonplace in Soviet youth culture as we discussed in class. Youth was continuously distancing its generation from those before them. According to “To Dance ‘In the Style’ is Forbidden,” the curiosity of youth leads to a motto of “I want to know everything” (To Dance ‘In the Style’ is Forbidden). Forbidding youth from activities, such as a certain dance style would result in intensified rejection of rules. Like any teenagers, the more authority says you cannot do something the more you want to do it.

The Soviet culture was morphing as youth distanced themselves from their elders, just as the government was faced with growing discourse. Under Khrushchev, the people were asked to vocalize discontent and opinions, a change that would lead to an end in his leadership. In “On the Evils of Individuality,” the importance of communism was threatened by individuality as the document states,  “[w]e are living at a time when each member of our society must participate actively, militantly and with initiative in the building of communism, rather than passively or contemplatively” (Evils of Individuality). The document exposes the necessity for all citizens to actively participate in building communism for the better of the country. To the extreme, the document states, “our society has declared a decisive and merciless war on every idler, parasite and other morally depraved person who is striving in one way or another to avoid socially useful labor and to enjoy the benefits of society without giving society anything in exchange” (Evils of Individuality). The document lays out ideas and roles of school and teachers in developing a generation to build communism rather than threaten its development.

Sources:

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=article&ArticleID=1968idashkin1&SubjectID=1968generation&Year=1968

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=images&SubjectID=1968generation&Year=1968&navi=byYear

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1968generation&Year=1968&navi=byYear

http://dlib.eastview.com/browse/doc/13789871

In 1954 the illegality of abortions was repealed as seen in “On Repealing the Criminal Liability of Pregnant Women for Having Abortions.” According to the document, the decision to abort a child was no longer illegal, but those committing illegal abortions and those who coerced a woman to abort her child would be criminals under the law (Seventeen Moments: Repealing Liability). Other develops were the reintroduction of co-education that had been ended in 1943 and the media recognizing the “double burden” felt by women at home and work (Seventeen Moments). With de-Stalinization, Krushchev aimed to improve “social services, housing, and educational opportunities” (Freeze 425).

O. Iensen: Vacuum Cleaner Ad (1954)

In 1954, women also faced set backs. Traditional gender roles were reinforced, just as they had been for the last two decades (Seventeen Moments). The traditional woman was confined to the home and family. The consumer economy targeted women, encouraging women to “pretty up their apartments or even themselves, by a visit to the department store or local hairdresser” (Seventeen Moments). In 1954, an ad for a vacuum cleaner targets women, using their defined roles of maintaining the house as an advertisement tool for a product.The ad states, “Electric Vacuum Cleaner. Cleans dust from rugs, clothes, furniture and walls quickly and well.” This ad implies the importance of a dust-free home was of high importance to any woman in the Soviet Union. Other home products of great importance included cookbooks. The cookbook resembled the basis for the family and the center of a wife’s purpose. She was responsible for feeding her family and activities outside the home often centered around food as well. In The Bookshelf: A Gift to the Family article, the author exposes the role of the wife by stating, “‘A Book on Appetizing and Healthful Food’ * takes into consideration the high level of our trade and our food industry; it is written for Soviet women who, as a rule, combine housework with jobs and community activities.” The duty of feeding the family lies solely on the woman. To promote the housewife’s duty to her family, the text also states, “[d]o not neglect either your own or your family’s diet” as though by not cooking a proper meal she is neglecting the ones she loves.

Henri Cartier-Bresson: Window-shopping (1954)

Home products were not the only expected interest for women. Department stores often displayed products to bring the consumer into stores. In the image to the right, women are seen admiring window displays. This use of space shows the influence the consumer world would have on creating the “soviet woman” of the 1950s. Another example of creating the ideal traditional woman, is the use of fashion to reinforce gender. Women were expected to look a certain way as defined by fashion. This idea reminded me of “Leave it to Beaver” when his mother is vacuuming in a long floral dress, wearing pearls and heels, and her hair is perfectly curled. This image, although in a different context, shows how certain perceptions of gender can lead to expectations in ordinary life. These ideas alone would not have held the same impact if “role models such as the housewife and school teacher [serving] as foundations for gender differentiation” had not been utilized (Seventeen Moments).

The cultural view of “the woman” can be seen in “It is Her Right.” The document shows a conversation between two parties with one stating “So, according to you, women enjoy doing the washing when they come home from work” and the other responding

Henri Cartier-Bresson: Fashion Show (1954)

“What do you mean? They’re women, aren’t they? Anyway, physical labor is good for you” (It Is Her Right). The limitations faced by women who were expected to run a household and family were being ignored. The document notes these limitations by giving an example of “a young woman at the height of her powers who wants to study and has the qualifications for any higher educational establishment in Kalinin, Moscow or Leningrad, and who is debarred from a higher education because her family takes up all her free time…” (It Is Her Right). The overall message of the document is to remind officials to take women into account as participants outside of the home.

In the 1950s, women faced combating traditional gender roles and stereotypes. Despite the role of women in manufacturing during World War II, joining the workforce did not cause cultural changes in family life expectations. Instead of noting the woman’s role outside of the home, she was expected to balance home and work. Furthermore, she was expected to do both without faltering, seeing as her focus should be on family despite financial needs associated with developing a family. As seen in many other facets of Soviet life, the Soviet people were stuck within defined roles despite changing culture and lifestyles associated with modernizing the USSR. The success of production and improving economy can be to blame for this distinction between male and female (Freeze 424). With more consumer products and a better standard of living, people were buying more products and extravagant purchases. Fashion and nicknacks were commonly admired and bought, rather than solely for the upper classes. With any new phase, the role of women would alter again when the novelty of consumerism began to wear off.

Cited Sources:

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1954women&Year=1954&navi=byYear

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1954women&Year=1954&navi=byYear

Vacuum Image: http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=images&SubjectID=1954women&Year=1954&navi=byYear

Fashion Show Image: http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=essay&SubjectID=1954women&Year=1954&navi=byYear

Window Shopping Image: http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=essay&SubjectID=1954women&Year=1954&navi=byYear

Gregory L. Freeze, Russia: A History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 423-426.

The Bookshelf: A Gift to the Family: http://dlib.eastview.com/browse/doc/14110659.

ID of a Murdered Polish Officer (1943)
Source: Iu. Krasilnikov: Katyn. 1999.

The USSR as one of the major military powers in terms of soldiers and equipment failed against the Nazi Army in the early 1940s. German victory over the Soviets was accomplished “[a]t the operational and tactical levels of…the German Wehrmacht,”  one of the best forces in the world (Freeze 376). Other factors linked to Soviet weaknesses in the early 1940s were the political purge of the military in the late thirties, demoralization of the Red Army, and Stalin’s ineffective leadership against the Germans (Freeze 376-379). Stalin’s failures lie in his “foreign policy based on co-operation and collusion with the Nazis, evidently hoping that they would exhaust themselves in a lengthy war of attrition against the French and British” (Freeze 379).

Stalin’s plans fell through when Germany turned against the USSR, taking lands in Poland as they marched toward the USSR. The partitioned Polish lands between the Nazis and USSR fell under Nazi control, dividing the two allies. With Nazi invasion, Stalin joined the Allies against Hitler.

While under Nazi possession, soldiers found a mass grave in the Katyn Forest near Smolensk, Poland. Bodies located in the grave were Polish officers. The Germans quickly implicated the Soviets, hoping to alienate the USSR from the allies. In response, “the claim was denounced by Stalin as a ‘monstrous invention by the German-fascist scoundrels'” (Seventeen Moments). The Polish Government-in-exile called for the Red Cross to conduct an investigation, ultimately ending relations with the USSR (Seventeen Moments).

May 1943 (1943)
View of the exhumations from the air. Recovered bodies are laid in rows. In the background, the main road.
Source: Iu. Krasilnikov: Katyn. 1999.

The denials of involvement would continue until Gorbachev admitted Soviet blame. This event showcases one of many horrors conducted by the Soviet Union under Stalin. The purpose for the massacre was to rid the Soviets of prison costs. The man power, funding, and supplies needed to house

prisoners of war led to mass execution of prisoners. This brutality was compounded with false claims of counter-revolutionary activities by Polish officers and other POWs. In the Order for the Katyn Massacre, the documents states, “[t]he military and police officers in the camps are attempting to continue their counter-revolutionary activities and are carrying out anti-Soviet agitation. Each of them is waiting only for his release in order to start actively struggling against Soviet authority”(Order for the Katyn Massacre). The document also states the NKVD’s recommendation to deal with prisoners as follows “together with the cases of 11,000 members of various counter-revolutionary organizations of spies and saboteurs, former land owners, factory owners, former Polish officers, government officials, and escapees who have been arrested and are being held in the western provinces of the Ukraine and Belarus and apply to them the supreme penalty: shooting” (Order for the Katyn Massacre). This site is just one of many atrocities conducted under Stalin.

Works Cited:

Image Citations: http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=images&SubjectID=1943katyn&Year=1943&navi=byYear

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=article&ArticleID=1943katyn4&SubjectID=1943katyn&Year=1943

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1943katyn&Year=1943&navi=byYear

http://www.pbs.org/behindcloseddoors/in-depth/katyn-massacre.html

Anatolii Chernov: Children are our Future (1946)
“Don’t deprive yourself of the joys of Motherhood”
http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=images&SubjectID=1936abortion&Year=1936&navi=byYear

The emergence of the Bolsheviks and liberation of citizens in terms of divorce, abortion, and other cultural values met opposition in the 1930s. The “new Soviet” with values and morals altered by the government were now being curtailed, specifically for women when “[o]n May 26, 1936 the draft of a law ‘On the Protection of Motherhood and Childhood’ was published in Soviet newspapers” (Seventeen Moments). Freedom to divorce and have abortions was seen as a threat to the family unit, so the government took action to reinforce the family values it had originally aided in debilitating (at least in the minds of the leaders).

The 1930s evidence of “a declining birth rate” raised worry over the future of the Soviet Union, ushering in a law against abortion and supporting growth of the family. In Seventeen Moments, according “[t]o Stalin, giving birth was ‘a great and honorable duty’ which was ‘not a private affair but one of great social importance'” (Seventeen Moments). In other words, motherhood was for the state and for society, not a light decision that could jeopardize the future of the Soviet Union.

The greatest opposition came from young women in cities whose concerns were the “strains that bearing and raising children would impose on their pursuit of a career, on available living space, and other quotidian concerns” (Seventeen Moments). For example, a mother wrote, from the Discussion in Izvestiia, May 29, 1936, stating, “[f]or eighteen years I went out to work and was a member of a Trade Union for fourteen years (1918-32). Then I had a daughter. After the girl had… frequently fallen ill, the doctors advised me to take her home and look after her personally. I was working at the Soyuz factory where I was released after procuring a certificate stating the reason for my absence. But after a while the Group organizer refused to mark my Trade Union card and thus annulled my standing as a worker…I think this was wrong” (Seventeen Moments). Contemporary controversy over a woman’s rights over her body were not within the debate.

V. Baiuskin: Children are Happiness for a Soviet Family (1940)
http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=images&SubjectID=1936abortion&Year=1936&navi=byYear

The “On the Protection of Motherhood and Childhood” law was passed in 1936 and “[t]he number of officially recorded abortions dropped sharply from 1.9 million in 1935 to 570,000 in 1937, but thereafter began to climb, reaching 755,000 in 1939. Despite criminal liability for performing illegal abortions, the actual number was probably a good deal higher” (Seventeen Moments).

As stated in Freeze, Stalin proclaimed, “‘[l]ife has become more joyous’…the myth of a joyful people achieving great feats and adoring their genial leader – was woven into the fabric of Soviet Life” (Freeze 362). The government pushed the “happy life” of a family, pushing to continue population growth and family growth, rather than push independence and individuality. Like so many things, the Bolsheviks and Stalin were pulling back on past promises and tightening their grip on power. The peasants were systematically put under government control, working for the collective. Politically, the de-kulakization pushed the disbursement of the peasantry, removing the “richer” peasants from the stratified peasantry. Further, the “mir” was dissolved and an internal passport system was implemented.  The economy of the peasants was seen as “backward” and “capitalist” leading to collectivized farms more in line with the Soviet way of life. State farms, collective farms and machine tractor stations established an economy based on collectivized farming. This allowed for political control and modernization. The MTS provided a mode be make make use of costly/vital materials.

The Soviet Union had to be sustained at all costs. Promoting the family led to a collectivized society, rather than promoting independence and individuality. The political motivations to dissolve the peasantry to a singular level, the economics of collectivized farming, and the cultural shift would lead the Soviet Union into the 1940s and World War II, with Stalin at the helm.

Seventeen Moments: http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1936abortion&Year=1936&navi=byYear

Seventeen Moments: http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=article&ArticleID=1936izabort1&SubjectID=1936abortion&Year=1936

Gregory L. Freeze, Russia: A History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 362.

Dmitrii Moor: Woman to the Rudder (1923)
For International Woman’s Day

The Bolsheviks identified the need for political, economic and social reconstruction. According to the Freeze text, these changes must include “values, myths, norms, mores, aesthetics, popular images, and traditions” (Freeze 329). To redefine the Soviet Union, all changes had to include all parts of society in order to create a common collective state with a conditioned mentality. This was the most evident during the 1920s, when the Bolsheviks believed the transition, called “‘building socialism’ was the inculcation of a new world-view” (Freeze 329); however, in efforts to create the “new soviet man,” the regime ultimately created the “new soviet woman.”

In 1929, the new soviet person “would live simply but cleanly, and their work lives and home lives would be stitched together seamlessly” (Seventeen Moments). The Soviet Union promoted education of people, including those who had not had access prior to the revolution. Women and other nationalities were gaining opportunities, although under the vision of a socialist state with a collective culture. As the Bolsheviks performed changes, the youth of the state were influenced by specific ideas and traditions. The Bolsheviks were creating a new definition for the family and the individual (Freeze 331). The old way of life was falling aside for a new society.

Transitions from the church, promotion of work, abortions, the ease to divorce, and other social reforms showcase how the Bolsheviks were changing society. These concepts are easily seen in “Bed and Sofa,” a film produced in 1927. The story opens on a couple living in a communal living space in Moscow. As we discussed in our lecture, the right to living space in Moscow was limited and in order to work someone needed a living space. This restructuring of living allowed the emergence of Volodia, Kolya’s friend. When Kolya was away on a trip, Volodia showed Luida the bourgeois way of life, taking her flying and to the movies. This vision of a changing lifestyle of Russian citizens is reflected in Luida’s transition to Volodia’s side. Volodia’s personality would soon reflect Kolya’s, leaving Luida to wonder about her future — a question intensified by her pregnancy. The decision to keep the child and move from the city alone shows how the role of women had left the home. The patriarchal society before the revolution was equalizing and men and women were taking on the role of individuals (although limited in several regards). The collective society of the Bolsheviks was taking form, creating a new society within the family circle. Youths would continue these values and traditions after the older generations lost power.

Works Cited:

Dmitrii Moor: Woman to the Rudder (1923) citation: http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=images&SubjectID=1917woman&Year=1917&navi=byYear

Seventeen moments: http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1929byt&Year=1929&navi=byYear

Bed and Sofa image: http://blogs.lt.vt.edu/soviethistory/files/2013/10/BedSofa.jpg

Gregory L. Freeze, Russia: A History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 329-340.

Bed and Sofa. Dir. Abram Room. Perf. Nikolai Batalov, Lyudmila Semyonova, Leonid Yurenyov. Sovkino, 1927. Film.

Kornilov waving to Crowds
http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=images&SubjectID=1917kornilov&Year=1917&navi=byYear

In March of 1917, in the face of societal unrest and military defeats, Nicholas II abdicated the throne of Russia. Nicholas relinquished power to his brother, Michael, calling on the people to support the tsar, working together to form a new Russia. The letter came when soldiers did not put down demonstrators against the tsar.  Following Nicholas II’s abdication, a dual power system was created between the Provisional Government and the Soviets led by the Petrograd Soviet. Aleksandr Kerensky became one of the leaders of the Provisional Government and would play a vital role in the Kornilov affair.

After the April Crisis, Kerensky appointed General Lavr Kornilov as the commander-in-chief and “he implicitly sanctioned Kornilov’s plan to restore the army’s fighting capacity by restoring discipline and the death penalty,” but Kornilov “doubted that the coalition had the will either to win the war or to stabilize the domestic front” (Freeze 287). Kornilov did not agree with the implementation of dual power and aimed to end dual power in Russia. Kornilov aimed to challenge the government of Russia, and his support for his cause is evident in hist address to the people, “The true son of the Russian people always perishes at his post, and sacrifices the greatest thing that he has, his life, for his Motherland” (Seventeen Moments)

General Kornilov, leader of the Kornilov Affair
http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=images&SubjectID=1917kornilov&Year=1917&navi=byYear

With Kerensky’s alleged support, Kornilov led troops to Petrograd to restore order; however, Keresky took advantage of the general in order to gain personal power. The event became known as the Kornilov affair.

“The main victor in the Kornilov Affair was the radical left, and in particular the Bolsheviks” (Seventeen Moments). The affair compromised the authority of Kornilov, Kerensky, and the Provisional government.

The chaos of revolution opened the door for conflict between the political right and left. Contradictions on how to handle social and economic developments and crises led to drastic efforts to establish a government in line with a specific ideology. From dual power, Kerensky and Kornilov saw the opportunity to eliminate chaos and “save” Russia from destroying itself; however, the long-term effects of the failed Kornilov affair “facilitated the Bolshevik seizure of power” (Freeze 288).

Despite failures, strikes continued to intensify, leading to the October Revolution of 1917. As October, and the events surrounding revolution, approached, Lenin and the Bolsheviks poised for political change, building off the stresses of the war and civil unrest.

Cited Sources:

Abdication of Nicholas II, March 2/15, 1917 documents: http://www.dhr.history.vt.edu/modules/eu/mod03_1917/evidence_detail_23.html

Seventeen Moments in Soviet History: 1917: Kornilov Affair: http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1917kornilov&Year=1917&navi=byYear

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&show=images&SubjectID=1917kornilov&Year=1917&navi=byYear

Gregory L. Freeze, Russia: A History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 287-288.

Gapon in London 1905

In 1904, Georgii Gapon, an Orthodox priest, recruited members into his ‘Assembly of Russian Factory Workers’ (Freeze 250). Although the police funded and infiltrated the organization to diminish anti-autocratic sentiment, the organization exposed members to Western ideology. “When in December 1904, some workers at the giant Putilov factory, members of Gapon’s Assembly, were dismissed, with little justification, in what appeared to be an effort to reduce the Assembly’s influence, the organization could not maintain its credibility unless it rose to the defense of the injured parties” (Freeze 251). Facing injustices, Gapon brought the workers under a united vision, inspiring a strike in January 1905. A mass march was organized against the Winter Palace, the home of Nicholas II. The petition of the organizers included demand for higher wages, shorter hours, and “free elections based on direct, universal manhood suffrage” (Freeze 251). Instead of receiving the petition, Nicholas II called for military action against the crowd consisting of men, women and children. January 9, 1905 became known as ‘Bloody Sunday‘ and was the turning point of the public against the tsar.

Despite marching over one hundred people to their deaths, Gapon gained popularity across the world. The press became interested in the man who inspired the strike and the type of change he envisioned. The New York Times published an article on Gapon on 18 Feb 1906. The article provides background on the man who inspired action in Russia. Gapon “turned his organized strikers into revolutionists and determined to make the Czr, by force if necessary, listen to the complaints of the strikers” (New York Times). The New York Times article also suggests the Ministry had promised the striker’s petition would be received without violence or resistance. The article also mentions the surprise of the police when the military took action against the crowds.

Although Father Gapon escaped harm, the whereabouts of Father Gapon became surrounded by mystery. What happened to Gapon? Conspiracy invaded the press in regard to Gapon. On May 14, 1906, the New York Times ran a story titled ‘MAY BE GAPON’S BODY.: Corpse Hanging from a Nail Found in a Villa in Finland.’ The story address the finding of a corpse whose “features resembled those of Gapon, and the clothing corresponded with that worn by the missing labor leader.” The media jumped on the controversial leader, expecting the Russian government to take action against the organizer.

The truth, saturated with conspiracy theories, may never be fully known; however, the change Gapon inspired allowed the Revolution of 1905 take place. ‘Bloody Sunday’ caused the country to turn on Nicholas II, although the petitioned topics were not successfully executed following the Revolution of 1905. Change, as typically seen in history, was not immediate.

Image Citation: “Gapon, the Hero of “Bloody Sunday”.” New York Times (1857-1922), Feb 18, 1906. http://ezproxy.lib.vt.edu:8080/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/96601455?accountid=14826.

Cited Sources:

“Gapon, the Hero of “Bloody Sunday”.” New York Times (1857-1922), Feb 18, 1906. http://ezproxy.lib.vt.edu:8080/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/96601455?accountid=14826.

“MAY BE GAPON’S BODY.” New York Times (1857-1922), May 14, 1906. http://ezproxy.lib.vt.edu:8080/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/96642990?accountid=14826.

Gregory L. Freeze, Russia: A History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 250-252.

http://novaonline.nvcc.edu/eli/evans/HIS242/Notes/Gapon.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/bloody_sunday