Stalin - classic or dud

However, if not, then it is just a simple matter of bethune not having learned that, if one point of view is obviously wrong, it does not make the opposite side obviously right. The propaganda wars of the twentieth century were like Duelling Banjos - both sides were playing the same damn lying banjo.

http://www.soviethistory.org/images/Chrome/photobar1936.jpg

Can we stop scaring bethune away with taunting? I'm interested in what he/she has to say.

http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/images/pho/t059/T059123A.jpg

Cathy, I heart you, but I said that it wasn't available for free in my post!

"Stalin, who presided over the ensuing iron age of the USSR, was an autocrat of exceptional, some might say unique, ferocity, ruthlessness and lack of scruple. Few men have manipulated terror on a more massive scale. There is no doubt that under some other leader of the Bolshevik party the sufferings of the peoples of the USSR would have been less, the number of victims smaller. Nevertheless, any policy of rapid modernisation in the USSR, under the circumstances of the time, was bound to be ruthless and, because imposed against the bulk of the people and imposing serious sacrifices on them, to some extent coercive."

Apparently, he was only 5'3".

Ah, but I have. ;-) His stuff always ends up on reserve over here, so I've dipped in from time to time.

I have to say that piece you're quoting doesn't do much to change my image of him.

actually in ref. to TOMBOT's earlier question, soviet film probably represents the single most lasting and awesome artistic achievement by the USSR. of course, the vast majority of the good stuff was mercilessly cut by censors or flat-out banned (and was usually implictly critical of the regime and especially socialist realism anyway), but there's a lotta good shit to be found.

otm

It's telling that German soldiers would walks 200+ miles to be captured by the Americans.

I think German policy in the occupied Soviet Union might have a lot to do with that.

The early Soviet era (pre-Socialist Realism) - revolutionary era blending into Lenin with stragglers into Stalinism was ripe with art. Rodchenko and Malevich and El Lissitzky, Constructivism/Suprematism, etc. Eisenstein and early Soviet film, of course.

Also, The Man With The Camera and I Am Cuba for later achievements. And Tarkovsky.

Also at issue is our insularity - westerners in general know relatively little about the painting or the photography or the writing of the later Soviet era, and film knowledge is largely confined to those who broke into the Euro art film market (Tarkovsky), but not much about popular film making.

You can also treat the failures with more than a 'well, shucks, it was bound to hurt anyway' diffidence.

dovzhenko's "earth"

kuleshov

meyerhold

all totally brilliant

ts: the great depression vs collectivization/"liquidation" as a "kulak"/mass famine

Not to mention that maybe if there hadn't been all those military purges then just maybe the Nazis wouldn't have been so successful as they were initially. And how much further death was the result?

That isn't how I understand Hobswbawm's attitude at all. But, oh well.

Anybody seen "Night Watch"?

Katyn Forest Massacre

These "objective" observers obviously have a vested interest in painting as dark a picture as possible of most of the SU's most successful and transformative policies and programs.

The Artificial Famine/Genocide in Ukraine 1932-33

Having quasi-left wing versions of Holocaust deniers is a major bummer.

I really like The Age of Revolution. I love Hobsbawm's throwaway details, and his painting-with-broad-strokes style. Not for everyone though, I'm sure.

kids these days irl

My son drew this five years ago. Other artists have failed to capture Stalin’s cheeky grin. pic.twitter.com/FziNNJVtnQ

— Jon Dennis (@JonDennis) November 21, 2021

Stalin knew how to read books pic.twitter.com/CMQgz2gIHH

— Daniel Zamora Vargas (@DanielZamoraV) February 19, 2022

"rubbish" "scumbag" "piss off"

^^^

me reading the Graun