Russia Conference

Nonsuch and Wallington students attended a conference together on Russian History.  Below are some reports about their views on the speakers and their research.
What do you think?  Do you agree with their reviews?

Orlando Figes


On 22nd November, the sixth form History students attended a ‘History In Action’ conference on 20th century Russia, and were given the opportunity to learn the perception and evaluation of several reputable historians. The final historian to speak was Orlando Figes - an award winning writer and professor at Birkbeck College, University of London - who gave a lecture that encapsulated the period from the February Revolution to the Civil War.  

Surprisingly, considering that each historian was only given half an hour to cover a complicated period of history, Figes’ session began with a lengthy piece of self-promotion about his books and website. After the “short” diversion from the topic of lecture, Figes went into great depth about the main historical events within his given time period. His chosen form of explanation were through historical sources, which can be deemed a success, given that source analysis features heavily in the a-level history exam.

Much of the expert knowledge Figes imparted to the audience was taken with interest. Perhaps the most insightful aspect was his analysis of the causes of the February Revolution and the Civil War; much of his focus was on the influence of violence. One reason for the revolution that Figes outlined was the fact that the majority of Serfs remained under the control of gentry and magnates, despite their supposed emancipation. A cause of the Civil war was Lenin’s drastic approach to change, including the introduction of equal citizenship and the immediate transfer of power to the proletariat, all of which worked to destroy the bourgeoisie.

Overall, the lecture did offer some valuable knowledge for use in A-levels, although Figes’ main message seemed to be: if students hope to understand Russia’s revolutionary history, they should use his website and, most importantly, pay the subscription.

AD and FB


Dr Zoe Knox

This lecture by Dr Zoe Knox was considering whether Bolshevism could be considered a religion. She outlined how the Bolsheviks feared traditional Russian Orthodoxy, as it was seen to be a rival belief system with a conflicting ideology. Not only this, but religion was a major impediment to the establishment of Communist authority in the countryside, as the Orthodox Church had long had considerable control over the lives of villagers, as it was the many religious festivals and events that controlled the village calendar. Back then religion was a way of life and in Russia the religion that dominated was Christianity. When the Bolsheviks came to power there was among them the very real fear that the Church had the ability to wield more power and authority over the people. 

Dr Knox touched upon the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church had always been a powerful tool of the Russian monarchy, with the Church encouraging people to follow the tsar to a fault. The Church preached that Tsar Nicholas II was their “little father” appointed over them by God himself.

Despite the Bolshevik contempt of religion, there is much evidence to suggest that not only did they want to eradicate Russian Orthodoxy, but they attempted to create their own kind of rival religion. Knox points to the posthumous cult of personality created around Lenin that resulted in him becoming a revered, god-like figure, with his dead body in Red Square becoming a pilgrimage site much to the disapproval and despair of Lenin’s wife. Dr Knox also described the many secular festivals and traditions created by the Communists to undermine the traditional religious ones, an example being the Soviet New Year. this particular festival was a poignant dig at the orthodox church as it marked and celebrated the change from the Julian calendar which has been used by the church for centuries to the Gregorian calendar.

We enjoyed Dr Zoe Knox’s lecture, as she posed new questions and brought new ideas that we had not previously heard. As well as this we especially appreciated the way she separately analysed the cult of Lenin and Stalin. However we would have liked to see more evidence as to whether Bolshevism actually managed to replace religion especially in the countryside where the Church had been its strongest. Furthermore, she did not come to a conclusion deciding whether she thought Bolshevism could be seen as a religion or not and we would have liked to seen her own opinion.

 AE and EA

Jan Palmer

On the 22^nd of November at a conference at UCL, we had the privilege to see several lecturers, including Jan Palmer, who spoke about Communist Russia during the 1900s. Palmer focused on the Stalin era and the role he took as a dictator. The speaker mentioned the steps Stalin took through his rule including his return to traditional values, the ‘Great Terror’ in 1937 and the ‘Stalin cult’ that emerged in support of the leader in 1929 and continued throughout the 1930s. For example, he explained that Stalin carried out highly publicised show trials in attempt to cause fear upon potential enemies and recriminalised homosexuality in 1933 and abortion in 1936 to attempt to return to these more ‘traditional’ values. Furthermore, Palmer spoke about the ‘Great Patriotic War’, discussing Russia’s involvement in the Second World War from 1941 until 1945 and how the victory is still a unifying story of Russia to this day.

Additionally, Palmer broke down various aspects of the Stalin era such as the five-year plans and included an overview of communism in the USSR from the 50s to the 90s and linked it to other political climates at the time such as the fascist dictatorship in Spain. Palmer also discussed how the Stalin era affected society in more unexpected ways, for example art changed from the Avant Garde and dynamic style of the futurists which had promised change and hope to the more traditional realism.

Overall, the lecture was enjoyable as his talk was engaging and Palmer successfully presented an overview of Stalin’s time in power. Furthermore, the presentation used appeared to be well thought through as it had extra context which Palmer didn’t have time to cover and images which aided our understanding of the information we were being taught. However, to improve the lecture, the speaker could have gone into more depth about specific areas of the Stalin era as the short time given for each lecture did leave us wishing for more details on certain topics he discussed. Moreover, Palmer presented us with a reasonably thorough and very engaging overview of the Stalin era which introduced us to a range of topics we could later research ourselves.

SW and AL


Professor Dominik Lieven


During November we had the opportunity to visit UCL for the day to enjoy a Russian history course in which various knowledgable speakers and historians spoke about their findings of Tsarist and Communist Russia. Professor Dominik Lieven spoke about the Russian monarchy and its challenges and failure. Lieven stated that with the empire being so diverse and large, one person leading the country autocratically was doomed to fail. The Tsar faced problems of popular sovereignty and compared to Britain and France. Russia was very backwards- property was less secure, there were less literate people and a smaller middle class. Additionally Lieven expressed his view that pre-modern Russia was very successful and no other empire had been faced in such harsh geographical context yet still achieved thorough autocracy. After the monarchy had almost collapsed in 1905 after a great economic slump and losing the Russo-Japanese war, people of Russia had already began to see the weaknesses of the Tsar. The professor also showed us that during 1905-14 there was a constitutional monarchy and the government was expanding, becoming more complicated and unpopular. When revolution came in 1917 nobody was prepared to defend the in Lieven’s words a ‘shy, untrustworthy and uninterested in politics’ Tsar, this was because the people of Russia had lost confidence in him and were unwilling to start a civil war in defence for a monarch who they thought was incapable of ruling such a large empire.

Overall Lieven gave an engaging and articulate lecture on the Russian Empire leading up to the revolution. He highlighted the strengths of the Russian monarchy which we would have normally overlooked, and how autocracy actually did benefit the people of Russia to a certain extent. This was very interesting as in class we mainly look at how the monarchy failed the Russian people and essentially caused its own demise. To improve the lecture, Lieven could have included a powerpoint to list down the key points that he had.

AK and AG

 

 

Midnight in St Petersburg

“ Here we are in our poor Russia, a country like a boiler, with the pressure mounting, about to blow, and no safety valve. “

Published in 2013, ‘Midnight in St Petersburg’ by Vanora Bennett follows the life of a young, Jewish Inna as she flees the anti-semitic culture of Southern Russia in Kiev, to the freedoms she hopes Nevsky Prospekt in St Petersburg will bring her. Through the novel, we see the way her life develops as Russia does also; how things change with the abdication of the Tsar, the Provisional Government’s changes, the Bolshevik takeover and the Civil War. An insight is given into the life of a Russian citizen in these times, as well as the additional hardships Jews and foreigners (known as the ‘enemy class’) experienced also. Thus, despite serving as fiction, realities are integrated into the storyline, merely emphasising the emotion the characters lives can cause.

The story starts off in the Winter of 1911; Stolypin, the Prime Minister, was assassinated in a theatre, and when a consequence of this is propaganda being produced blaming Jews for such an act, Inna steals a passport and flees North, hoping to escape a pogrom. She goes to Yasha -- the son of the family who fostered her after the death of her Aunty Lubya (caused by influenza), who she stayed with after the death of her parents (caused by an anti-Jewish hate crime). Yasha lives with the Lemans, who take an instant liking to Inna: Madame Leman appreciating her hard work around the house, and the men of the house enthralled by both her beauty and musical talent. Also charmed by Inna is an English jeweller, eager for Inna to play the violin for his Bohemian friends and even fellow classicists. Despite the disadvantages we see Inna put at in the first part of the novel -- the Jewish slurs yelled at her on her train journey, her desperate attempt to cut herself a new lifeline on the palm of her hands, not being allowed to leave the house due to her papers being illegal, and eventually having Yasha (whom she fell in love with) run away to join the revolution he loves -- the year of 1911 was certainly easier on her than the years to come. The beginning section of the story ends with Inna agreeing to marry Horace Wallick, the Englishman, after he so carefully courts her, and protects her from the malicious acts of policemen seeking out Jews to blame for their troubles.

The second part of the text is set between the years of 1916 and 1917, continuing at a time where Russia had been at war with Austria and Germany for two years. Now married, Horace and Inna discuss someone whom they once bonded other: Father Grigory, now known infamously as Rasputin. Inna, despite the stories she hears of him being a drunk who actively participates in orgies, remembers the man before he lost his innocent: when he was the peasant who helped her find her way in St Petersburg without being stopped at the train station by gendermes. Therefore, when Felix Youssoupoff -- the Prince who commissioned Horace for paintings and gifts throughout the years -- and his friends assassinate Rasputin in an attempt to save the Tasarina (who is now running the country) and her reputation, Inna feels betrayed, for Horace still takes Youssoupouff’s money. As revolution begins in February, things between Inna and Horace only become more estranged, as Inna reunites with Yasha on the day the soldiers joined in on the riots in the bread queues. Yasha tells her that he was in prison the whole time for they found illegal revolutionary papers on him -- that he never wanted to leave her. The two start an illustrious affair, ending only when Yasha begs Inna to leave Horace -- something she cannot do in fear of hurting him, and losing the security she has in their lives together. Yasha decides to move closer to the Soviets, hoping that now the Tsar had abdicated, the closer proximity will bring him closer still to revolution. He is right when he sees Lenin return one day, becoming intrigued by the Bolshevik rise to power, joining the party as he has always wanted to do. The Lemans, however, are less impressed with the new regime of government, for they lost work once the Bolsheviks began to requisition items both at the jewellers and the violin workshop. Yasha realises he has become an outsider when away from his comrades, and departs from the Lemans -- and Inna -- for good.

In part three of the novel, the year is 1918, and Civil War in Russia between the Reds and the Whites is fast approaching. Inna finds herself hating new life in Russia, from the brutal acts of the Cheka and the mob attacks on foreigners. She fears Horace isn’t safe, but when she asks for them to leave, he is unwilling -- unwilling to leave the artistic and cultural Russia he found a home in, to return to the dull England he dreads. Even when a letter arrives from Youssoupoff, saying he will help them if they come to him in Yalta (a place in Crimea dominated by the Whites), Horace decides there is no need to flee. It isn’t until February 1919 when Inna sees Yasha again -- at a meeting, sitting talking to a known Cheka officer. He tells her afterwards that he was forced into the job: that, because he was once a Bundist, they would arrest him if he refused (and no one refused the Cheka). The two share one night together, before Inna returns home. A few nights later, Inna’s fears realised themselves when Bolsheviks showed up to requisition their apartment and, upon noticing Horace’s foreign origins, ambushed him. With an injured foot and a fear of causing more upset to the Lemans, he finally agrees that the journey to Yalta is one he and Inna must make. The journey was long -- made longer by the way the pair tactfully avoided places where the war was at its peak -- and when finally close, Inna makes a discovery whilst Horace lies sick in bed (an illness brought on by the infection in the wound caused by the attack the night they chose to leave): her period is late, the days coinciding with her last night with Yasha, and thus she came to the conclusion that she’s pregnant. The discovery came at the same time Yasha himself arrived, asking Inna to go with him to America so he can help a trade union after they dropped Horace off at an English boat. Inna finds herself yet again choosing between two men she loves, though as the finally reach Yalta and the boats which will take them away from Russia  for good, something else makes her decision for her: knowing she is pregnant with his child, Yasha makes the sacrifice of his life to allow Inna to safely board the boat with Horace, rather than be requisitioned and attacked by Reds that interrupted their journey. The novel ends with Inna and Horace on the deck of the boat, the glistening sea reminding Inna of the words Father Grigory once spoke to her before he lost his innocence, finding closure in the loss of Yasha knowing she was carrying a part of him in her child, and starting a new life as she watched her last Russian sunset.

Following the story with a pre-knowledge of the historical events happening in the background played a part in amplifying the great emotions provoked by the work: the realisation of the identity of the peasant man with the entrancing eyes who slowly transformed into something else; recognising the name ‘Youssoupoff’ even before he became integral to the story; having an ironic knowing that the people in the story shouldn’t be pleased with the abdication of the Tsar when another revolution and war was just around the corner. Having the characters, whose stories were evolved and discovered so intrinsically, experience the tumult of events alongside the reader, also, merely emphasised what the author was trying to display: the life in Russia for minorities and majorities alike; the similarities in everyone’s hardship and the way people can change.

However, what I enjoyed most about ‘Midnight in St Petersburg’ was the constant presence of violins in the story -- from Inna playing it herself (separated duets with Yasha at night or nervous performances in Bohemian bars) or making her own (rough, nervous pieces made with Monsieur Leman before grief broke him during the first world war, to the final Stradivarius masterpiece she helped to repair: her final work with Yasha other than their child). The way the characters treated the fiddles -- Yasha loving how the wood would forgive your mistakes and allow you to recarve the future, Horace loving how they could pave an artistic future for his wife whilst also bringing her happiness, Marcus Leman loving how he could take pride in continuing his father’s work for him, and Youssoupoff ruining his collection as a child to use in duels with his brother -- show the deepest part of their characters, and the motif of music and instruments in the novel is perhaps the most constant in the story at all.

When Inna begins to think of playing the violin again at the end of the novel, despite not having done so since Yasha first left in 1911, the reader is delivered closure too.

“ ‘I was cutting myself a better lifeline’, she said. “

“ Feeling the deadwood melt away as the curves of its true shape emerged..he brought the future into existence. “

“ These would be the sides of her violin one day -- or, in luthier’s talk, the ribs, because violins were little human bodies in the making.

AS

Russian Civil War Poster

GCSE Year 10 classes may find this poster of use for their source analysis. It says (in Russian) "Wrangel hits again, finish him off without mercy."

You can find the poster and lots of other ones at this excellent blog which looks at the history of graphic design.