The Socio-Cultural Nature of the Canon: The Art and Cinema of the Stalinist Era
Abstract
When it comes to Soviet-era films, scholars and historians often ignore or make little of the political and socio-cultural context, focusing on the artistic merits or the director's position. This even made it possible to divide the productions of certain periods into two categories: films that remained within the ideological agenda, and truly auteur works that went beyond the canon. There is no denial, though, that the creators of both existed within the same cultural framework that largely determined the artistic choices they made. That is why it is so important to consider the canonical component of Soviet cinema, inextricably related to the communist ideology.
A brief overview of complying with an artistic canon throughout the history of art reveals its sociopolitical nature: the canon is often a reflection of the values and attitudes that are (or should be) dominant in the society at the time.
One of the most typical and indicative periods in the history of Russian cinema is the Stalinist era, from the early 1930s to the mid-1950s. The cultural and ideological turn to socialist realism alongside with the strengthening of the censorship allows one to talk about the formation of well-established standards in Soviet film industry. The specific nature of the socialist realistic canon, at least in relation to cinema, lay in its ambiguity and dependence on the personal decisions of those in power. In many respects, the canon exists within abstract concepts, including three principles of Socialist Realism: popularity, ideological commitment and concreteness. The plasticity and versatility of these concepts largely allowed them to be used freely in the form most suited to the prevailing circumstances.
About the Author
N. V. Kotik
S. A. Gerasimov Russian State University of Cinematography (VGIK)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
PhD Student
References
1. Bychkov V. (1994) Duhovno-esteticheskie osnovy russkoj ikony [Spiritually-aesthetic foundations of the Russian icon]. —Moskva: Ladomir, 1994. — 332 p. (in Russ.).
2. Wagner G. (1987) Kanon i stil' v drevnerusskom iskusstve [Canon and Style in Old Russian Art]. — Moskva: Iskusstvo, 1987. — 286 p. (in Russ.).
3. Vlasov V. (2004) Vozrozhdenie. — Novyj enciklopedicheskij slovar' izobrazitel'nogo iskusstva. V 10 t. [Renaissance. — New encyclopedic dictionary of fine art. In 10 vols]. — Sankt-Peterburg: Azbuka-Classica, Volume II, 2004. — 709 p. (in Russ.).
4. Zaytseva L. (2010) Kinoyazyk: opyt mifotvorchestva. Puti obnovleniya (1930–1934) [Film language: the experience of mythmaking. Ways of Updating (1930–1934)]. — Moskva: VGIK, 2010. — 328 p. (in Russ.).
5. Zorkaya N. (2014) Istoriya otechestvennogo kino. XX vek [History of National Cinema. XX century]. — Moskva: Bely Gorod, 2014. — 512 p. (in Russ.).
6. Margolit E., Shmyrov V. (1995) Iz"yatoe kino. 1924–1953 [Seized cinema. 1924–1953]. — Moskva: Informational and analytical firm Double-D, 1995. — 132 p. (in Russ.).
7. Margolit E. Sovetskoe kinoiskusstvo. Osnovnye etapy stanovleniya i razvitiya [Soviet cinema art. The main stages of formation and development]: (A brief outline of the history of cinema art): textbook / E. Margolit. — All-Union Correspondence National Univ. of Arts, Fact. of Film and Photo Art. — Moskva: VZNUI, 1988. — 98 p. (in Russ.).
8. Assmann J. (2011) Cultural Memory and Early Civilization: Writing, Remembrance, and Political Imagination. — Cambridge University, 2011. — 319 p.
9. Coleman K.M. (ed.) (2006) Martial: Liber Spectaculorum. — Oxford University Press, 2006. — 416 p.
Review
For citations:
Kotik N.V. The Socio-Cultural Nature of the Canon: The Art and Cinema of the Stalinist Era. Vestnik VGIK. 2023;15(2(56)):22-35. (In Russ.)
Views:
56
Email this article 