scholarly journals Cinema for the “Soviet East”: National Fact and Revolutionary Fiction in Early Azerbaijani Film

Slavic Review ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 645-678
Author(s):  
Michael G. Smith

Before the eyes of the vast, ignorant masses of the eastern nationalities, the fast-moving frames of cinema will reproduce the many achievements of human knowledge. For the illiterate audience, the electric beam of the magic motion-picture lamp will define new concepts and images, will make the wealth of knowledge more easily accessible to the backward mind.Bakinskii rabochii, 18 September 1923Pictures, so the first Bolsheviks believed, speak louder than words. Visual propaganda was essential in their campaign to reach the illiterate and poorly literate masses, to engage them in a new Soviet style of life. By the end of the civil war, every leading member of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party valued the political uses of film. As commissar of nationalities, Iosef Stalin recognized its potential; in his simple expression, film was “the greatest means of mass agitation.” Like cinema, the Bolsheviks appeared at the confluence of two worlds, the traditional and the modern. For them, film was the perfect medium by which to critique the old and celebrate the new. Film viewed the world as they did, with one measure of hard realism, another of soft utopianism.

2019 ◽  
pp. 512-519
Author(s):  
Teymur Dzhalilov ◽  
Nikita Pivovarov

The published document is a part of the working record of The Secretariat of the CPSU Central Committee on May 5, 1969. The employees of The Common Department of the CPSU Central Committee started writing such working records from the end of 1965. In contrast to the protocols, the working notes include speeches of the secretaries of the Central Committee, that allow to deeper analyze the reactions of the top party leadership, to understand their position regarding the political agenda. The peculiarity of the published document is that the Secretariat of the Central Committee did not deal with the most important foreign policy issues. It was the responsibility of the Politburo. However, it was at a meeting of the Secretariat of the Central Committee when Brezhnev raised the question of inviting G. Husák to Moscow. The latter replaced A. Dubček as the first Secretary of the Communist party of Czechoslovakia in April 1969. As follows from the document, Leonid Brezhnev tried to solve this issue at a meeting of the Politburo, but failed. However, even at the Secretariat of the Central Committee the Leonid Brezhnev’s initiative at the invitation of G. Husák was not supported. The published document reveals to us not only new facets in the mechanisms of decision-making in the CPSU Central Committee, the role of the Secretary General in this process, but also reflects the acute discussions within the Soviet government about the future of the world socialist systems.


2021 ◽  

Historians of political thought and international lawyers have both expanded their interest in the formation of the present global order. History, Politics, Law is the first express encounter between the two disciplines, juxtaposing their perspectives on questions of method and substance. The essays throw light on their approaches to the role of politics and the political in the history of the world beyond the single polity. They discuss the contrast between practice and theory as well as the role of conceptual and contextual analyses in both fields. Specific themes raised for both disciplines include statehood, empires and the role of international institutions, as well as the roles of economics, innovation and gender. The result is a vibrant cross-section of contrasts and parallels between the methods and practices of the two disciplines, demonstrating the many ways in which both can learn from each other.


Author(s):  
Kang Sok CHO

This paper deals with three different perspectives appeared in foreign visitors’ records on Korea in 1900s. Jack London was a writer who wrote novels highly critical of American society based on progressivism. However, when his progressive perspective was adopted to report the political situation of Korea in 1904, he revealed a typical perspective of orientalism. He regarded Korea and ways of living in Korea as disgusting and ‘uncivilized.’Compared with Jack London’s perspective, French poet Georges Ducrocq’s book was rather favorable. He visited Korea in 1901 and he showed affectionate attitude toward Korea and its people. However, his travel report, Pauvre et Douce Coree, can be defined as representing aesthetic orientalism. He tried to make all the ‘Korean things’ seem beautiful and nice, but it is true that this kind of view can also conceal something concrete and specific. This perspective at once beautifies Korea and also conceals the reality about Korea.E. Burton Holmes was a traveler and he often used his ‘motion-picture’ machine to record things he witnessed while travelling around worldwide countries. So, his report (travelogue) and motion picture film on Korea written and made in 1901 was based on close observation and rather objective point of view. Nonetheless, he couldn’t avoid the perspective of the colonizer’s model of the world, in other words, geographical diffusionism of western culture.


2020 ◽  
pp. 002198941989730
Author(s):  
Sushmita Sircar

The world wars definitively changed the relations with the state of the peoples of India’s northeastern frontier. The wars were both fought on their terrain (with the invasion of the Japanese army) and led to the recruitment of people from the region to serve in the British Army. The contemporary Anglophone Indian novel documents the lingering effects of this militarization in the many insurgencies that have fragmented the region in the postcolonial era. Kiran Desai’s The Inheritance of Loss (2006) depicts the Gorkhaland uprising of the 1980s in the Kalimpong district of West Bengal, which demanded a separate state, while Easterine Kire’s Bitter Wormwood (2011) describes the Naga peoples’ traditional way of life against the backdrop of attempts to declare independence from the Indian state. In this article I argue that these novels capture how these secessionist movements use the experience of the world wars to craft a political identity based on military brotherhood to claim independence from the Indian state. These movements thus undertake a complex reworking of the valences of the figure of the “soldier”, central to so many accounts of national integrity. At the same time, reproducing the nationalist logic of the Indian state, these novels more readily recognize an “indigenous” identity based on a claim to the land as the political basis of nationhood. Hence, these novels about secessionist struggles reveal how certain narratives of nation formation become the only legitimate means for making claims for political rights and independent statehood over the course of the twentieth century.


2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-151
Author(s):  
William Lewis

AbstractAs an accompaniment to the translation into English of Louis Althusser's 'Letter to the Central Committee of the PCF, March 18th, 1966', this note provides the historical and theoretical context necessary to understand Althusser's 'anti-humanist' interventions into French Communist Party policy decisions during the mid-1960s. Because nowhere else in Althusser's published writings do we see as clearly the political stakes involved in his philosophical project, nor the way in which this project evolved from a 'theoreticist' pursuit into a more practical one, the note also argues that the letter is of importance to Althusser scholars, to historians of Marxist thought, and to those interested in the relevance of Althusser's work to contemporary Marxist philosophy.


1979 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 521-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Gunton

Not far below the surface of most modern theological dispute lies the question of the interrelationship of theology and culture. How shall those who take their intellectual orientation from the Christian Gospel understand their position in relation to the intellectual currents that represent the spirit of the age? Should the stance be that of Tertullian, Eusebius, or Augustine; Kierkegaard, Barth, or Tillich; or of some variation and combination of these and others? One of the many ramifications of this complex area of inquiry concerns the relationship of the Christian community to the institutions of the society and the world in which it carries on its life, as is well illustrated by recent controversy over the aims and methods of the W.C.C. Programme to Combat Racism. Here, of course, are obvious, if highly complex, moral and practical issues. But underlying them is a further theoretical and theological question: What is Christianity? In this paper, I should like to suggest that both the theological and the ethical problems can be illuminated by an examination of the interrelationship between conceptions of the person of Christ and the church's understanding of its relation to earthly rulers.


Author(s):  
Harutyun Marutyan

On April 24, 1965, Armenians both in the Soviet Armenia and Diaspora commemorated the 50th anniversary of Mets Yeghern. In the Soviet Armenia this became possible not only due to the changes within the wide circles of the society after the Khrushchev Thaw but also because of the political will of the Armenian authorities, namely, Yakov Zarobyan, the First Secretary of the Armenian Communist Party. The decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was preceded by a long sequence of preparatory work, among which was a letter addressed to the authorities of Moscow in December 1964. Thanks to some ideological statements there, the Armenian Genocide has been moved from the level of a solely Armenian tragedy to the level of the world history. The commemoration of the 50th anniversary of Mets Yeghern took place on two levels: people and state/party. The mass demonstration, peoples’ march, the distribution of leaflets and intrusion to the Opera building were the sure indicators of a national outbreak. Thanks to a position of the Armenian authorities no mass persecution against the participants was followed. The commemoration of April 24, 1965 in Yerevan broke the wall of official silence and revealed the truth about one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century to the wide public. It gave rise to scholarly researches, publication of books and archival records relating to the events of 1915 and resulted in the inclusion of the 1915 Genocide into the textbooks. Finally, it was a unique case when the authorities and people were fighting for the same cause even though from the opposite ends. They fought and reached their goal. One of the evidences of this fight was the construction of the Memorial during 2,5 years, which immediately took its place among the symbols of the Armenian identity. It has been 50 years since that people are organizing annual April 24th marches to the Memorial. On April 24-25, 1965 in different parts of Diaspora Remembrance Day of the Victims of Mets Yeghern was solemnly commemorated. It can be stated, that the solemn commemoration of April 24, 1965 in different communities of the Armenian Diaspora displayed the qualitative transition from the culture of mourning to another level of commemoration ceremonies. Particularly, the idea that the perpetrators of the Armenian Genocide are finally getting/should get their worthy punishment/assessment was present. On the eve of April 24, many memorials are being built in different corners of the world. On April 24, 1975, for the first time the authorities of the Soviet Armenia officially paid tribute to the memory of Mets Yeghern victims by visiting the Genocide Memorial. At 7pm a Moment of Silence in the memory of the Genocide victims was announced on the television and radio. On November 22, 1988, the Supreme Council of the Armenian SSR adopted the law on the “Condemnation of the Armenian Genocide of 1915 in the Ottoman Turkey” and recognized April 24 the “Remembrance Day of the Victims of the Armenian Genocide.” During the Karabakh Movement or the Armenian Revolution (February 20, 1988 – August 23, 1990) the change in the essence of the Remembrance Day has occurred: it became the day of presenting political demands on different issues of social life. The article details the commemoration of the Remembrance Day of the Genocide victims in the context of the commemorative rituals of the Armenian people. In 1965, during the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of Mets Yeghern, the memory of Genocide attained a new status. It can be stated that it became a pan-national “property,” a feature for the whole Armenians. The Genocide memory became a constituent part of the Armenian identity and through the efforts of Hay Dat and other similar organizations became known to the world. On the centennial of the Armenian Genocide not the memory of Mets Yeghern but the memory of Armenian Genocide still remains as one of the most important manifestations of the Armenian identity. This memory is one of the unique elements which unite different political forces and started influencing not only the preservation but also the formation of a nation. Executive and legislative bodies of more than twenty-five countries as well as various international organizations have now recognized the Armenian Genocide. The vast majority of recognitions as a rule happen on or around April 24. More than hundred years have passed since the Armenian Genocide. It is high time to reconsider the concealed meaning of the Remembrance Day, transform it, and at least change its emphasis by putting another wording for April 24 into circulation: “Remembrance Day of the Victims of the Armenian Genocide and the Heroes of the Selfdefense Battles.”


2019 ◽  
pp. 140-172
Author(s):  
Marc Crépon ◽  
James Martel

This chapter looks at the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Few are the testimonials, novels, novellas, or philosophical analyses that help evaluate, politically and morally, what happened there in August of 1945. Of course, there have been “world conferences against nuclear weapons” and “peace movements” that cannot be separated from the memory of that day. For Kenzaburō Ōe, who observed many such conferences and movements and gathered accounts from the victims, the politics and the recollection of that day were far from compatible or consistent with one another. Most of the great philosophers of the second half of the twentieth century judged it unnecessary, beyond some rudimentary reflection, to dwell on the event or to examine critically the official reasons for and justifications of it. Even less attention has been paid to the widespread and silent consent of the political class to nuclear weapons, despite the many protest movements directed against them. It was understood that making an example of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had proven the necessary “efficacy” of deterrence. Consequently, the memory of the event was made a prisoner of the geopolitical and strategic questions of the Cold War, just as the question of nuclear arms today is understood in the context of the potential terrorism of so-called “rogue” states.


2018 ◽  
pp. 355-368

This chapter is an addendum to Sahajanand’s main narrative which ended with imprisonment in April 1940. He actually wrote this part during 1946 to make his narrative up to date. He differed with the Congress decision to launch the Quit India Movement in August 1942 as he felt the situation had radically changed with Hitler’s attack on the Soviet Union. The world in general and India in particular was faced with the prospect of the fascist menace. It was during this phase that most of the political parties emerged from the Kisan Sabha and the Communist Party of India tried to take over the All India Kisan Sabha. Sahajanand became very critical of the political party system and reiterated his final decision never to join any political party. His narrative ends with a reference to the Dumraon struggle against the Dumraon Raja.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document