« Previous | Main | Next »

THE YEARS OF STAGNATION AND THE POODLES OF POWER

Post categories:

Adam Curtis | 14:59 UK time, Wednesday, 18 January 2012

Everybody is always remarking about how stuck our society feels these days. The music doesn't change, the political parties are all exactly the same, and films and TV dramas are almost always set in the past.

We are also stuck with an economic system that is not delivering the paradise that it once promised - but is instead creating chaos and hardship. Yet no-one can imagine a better alternative, so we remain static - paralysed by a terrible political and cultural claustrophobia.

I want to tell the story of another time and another place not so long ago that was also stifled by the absence of novelty and lacking a convincing vision of the future. It was in the Soviet Union in the late 1970s and 1980s. At the time they called it "the years of stagnation".

 

There are of course vast differences between our present society and the Soviet Union of thirty years ago - for one thing they had practically no consumer goods whereas we are surrounded by them, and for another western capitalism was waiting in the wings to fill the vacuum. But there are also echoes of our present mood - a grand economic system that had once promised heaven on earth had become absurd and corrupted.

Everyone in Russia in the early 1980s knew that the managers and technocrats in charge of the economy were using that absurdity to loot the system and enrich themselves. The politicians were unable to do anything because they were in the thrall of the economic theory, and thus of the corrupt technocrats. And above all no-one in the political class could imagine any alternative future.

In the face of this most Soviet people turned away from politics and any form of engagement with society and lived day by day in a world that they knew was absurd, trapped by the lack of a vision of any other way.

But in the late 1970s a post-political generation rose up in Russia who retreated from all conventional political ideologies, both communist and western capitalist, and instead turned to radical avant-garde culture - in music and in literature - to try and protest against the absurdity of the system. I want to focus on their story - because it is fascinating and forgotten (and they produced some great music) - but also because of what happened to them when the Soviet Union collapsed.

Despite the differences between east and west, I think that the fate of that post-political generation does offer a glimpse of what happens in a stagnant political culture when a door finally opens on a different kind of future. Especially as some of the choices they made were very unexpected - and the outcomes sometimes very sad.

 

At the heart of the Soviet dream was The Plan.

The fundamental idea was that the whole of society could be planned and organised in a rational way. A giant headquarters had been set up in Moscow in the 1920s called Gosplan, it's job was to work out the needs of every single person and then make sure those needs were fulfilled.

And for a while it worked - the Soviet economy grew faster than America in the the 1950s. But then in the 1960s it faltered and those who ran the Plan began to discover that they could not control such a complex system. Their scientifically planned targets began to take on a strange and increasingly absurd life of their own - and the planners found that the system was controlling them.

In 1992 I made a film called The Engineers' Plot which told the story of the Plan and what happened to it. Here is a section from the end which shows the bizarre world the failure of the Plan created for the life of all Soviet citizens.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

I've followed it with an extract from a Panorama programme made in 1981. The crew managed to get into the Soviet Union and secretly film bits of everyday life. It is a brilliant and vivid portrait of the emptiness and disillusion that was spreading through all levels of society - and how no-one believed in anything any longer. The woman who talks as she wallpapers a flat expresses this in a beautiful and touching way.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

The disillusion had begun back in the 1960s as the economy faltered. As a result a new generation began to turn away from politics - and to begin with they looked to America and its pop culture as an alternative.

The problem was that it was very difficult for Russians to get hold of anything American. But then Dean Reed turned up.

Reed is an extraordinary figure. In the 1950s he had been a not very successful teen idol, but then he reinvented himself in the mid 60s as a singing leftist revolutionary, travelling the world singing songs that attacked American imperialism, not just in Vietnam but in Latin America and the Middle East.

 

This led him inevitably to the Eastern bloc countries, and then to the Soviet Union where he became a superstar. It was a bit odd - a generation of Soviet teenagers loved Dean Reed because he brought American music and modern culture into their society, yet Reed himself loathed America and had come to Moscow as part of his quest to expose the corrupting influence that America was having on the world.

Back in the 1990s the Arena series made a great  film about the life - and very strange death - of Dean Reed. It was presented by the journalist Reggie Nadelson. Here is an extract about Dean Reed's arrival in the Soviet Union and the effect he had. The Russian rock critic, Atermy Troitsky, who appears will also turn up later in this story.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

The disillusion with the communist dream grew throughout the 1970s. The millions of people who worked in the factories began to notice that the managers whose job was to run the plan were beginning to use the absurdities for their own purposes - to loot the system for the own profit.

Then in 1979 came the invasion of Afghanistan. It is now looked back on - rightly - as a disastrous decision that further undermined the Soviet Union. But what is forgotten is how for many of a young, disillusioned generation in Russia it was seen as a way to regenerate the ideals that were collapsing at home.

Sir Rodric Braithwaite, who used to be Britain's ambassador to Moscow, has written a wonderful book called Afgantsy. It tells the story of the Soviet invasion through the eyes of those who took part, and that includes the thousands of aid workers and civilian advisers that also went in. Their aim was to try and build 'socialism' in Afghanistan, just as thousands of westerners would later try and build 'democracy'.

 

Braithwaite quotes a Soviet youth adviser called Vladimir Snegirev who went to Afghanistan. In March 1982 he describes watching the Afghan New Year celebrations in the Kabul Stadium, and how they express the dream of creating a new world.

"There is a striking contrast which is only possible here: many of the women on the terraces conceal their faces under the chador - a primitive, medieval superstition; but parachutists are landing in the stadium and they are women too, who grew up in this country. The chador and the parachute. You don't have to be a prophet to foretell the victory of the parachute"

For Snegirev it was the ageing and corrupt Soviet leadership  under Brezhnev that was the problem. He later wrote of the optimistic vision that Afghanistan seemed to offer:

"Were it not for our sclerotic leadership, people like Brezhnev, everything would work out differently. That's what I thought, that's what many people my age thought. When we arrived in Afghanistan we began to do what we had prepared ourselves to do for the whole of our previous lives.

In Afghanistan it was as if time had gone backwards, but now a power had arisen in this land which wanted to drag the people out of their superstition, to give children the chance to go to school, women the opportunity to see the world directly, instead of through the eye slits of the chador. Was that not a revolution? The battle of the future against a past already condemned?"

Here is part of a documentary made in Kabul in 1983 that filmed life under the Soviet occupation. It shows the Soviet advisers trying to transform this ancient world, including the celebrations for the new idea - Afghan Womens' Day

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

And here are some of the video rushes of the celebrations of Afghan independence day in 2002. They are happening exactly twenty years later in the Kabul Stadium - the very place that Snegirev watched the Afghan women celebrate their liberation. Now the women tell the camera they are celebrating the freedom brought by America and democracy.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

But soon millions of Russians at home began to find out the futility and the horror of what was really happening in Afghanistan. Zinc coffins containing the dead soldiers were dumped in the middle of the night on the doorsteps of their families (sometimes it is alleged they contained the wrong body), soldiers returned with smuggled photographs and diaries that recorded brutal and horrific massacres of Afghans.

The mood of the generation who had turned away from politics and ideology now became much harder, cynical and sceptical. And one of the main casualties of this was the singer Dean Reed. Those who had once idolised Reed now turned against him.

Reed found himself trapped. He wanted to counter what he saw as American imperialist propaganda - and in 1986 he appeared on the US current affairs show Sixty Minutes to defend the Soviet Union, and that included defending their presence in Afghanistan.

To the Russian youth, who increasingly knew the truth about Afghanistan, this was absurd. He was now seen as Brezhnev's propagandist. And Reed found himself isolated. This isolation was powerfully expressed in a bitter song written as a message to him by one of his few friends left in America called Johnny Rosenburg.

A few weeks later Dean Reed was found drowned in a lake in a forest in East Germany. There are many conspiracy theories, some say he was killed by the CIA, others believe it was the KGB. But it was probably suicide.

Here is Soviet youth turning against Reed, and Johnny Rosenberg's song - from the Arena film.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

Instead, in the 1980s, many Soviet youth turned to a new kind of music and culture that also borrowed from America, but it was one that attacked both the hypocrisy of western bourgeois capitalism and state communism. It came directly out of the punk movement in New York in the mid to late 1970s.

One of the key early figures was a Russian avant-garde write in exile in New York called Eduard Limonov. He had been expelled from Moscow by the KGB in 1974 and he arrived in New York just as the punk scene was taking off. Limonov became friends with people like Richard Hell of the band Television, Patti Smith, and the Ramones.

Limonov took the punk vision (best expressed, he said, in Richard Hell's song Blank Generation) and fused it with with Soviet disillusion. Limonov argued that that the West was in many ways just a more sophisticated version of the Soviet Union, with more sophisticated propaganda - plus a similar intolerance of real dissent.

Sophie Bassouls/Sygma/Corbis

In 1979 Limonov expressed this in a novel called It's Me, Eddie. In it he portrays a fictional version of himself on a dark, violent and pornographic journey through the hidden underworld of America. It was funny but also a cold and merciless depiction of the real effect Power has on modern American society and those in it. It shocked many people - but it became a best-seller in France and Germany, and Limonov was hailed as the voice of a new punk avant-garde.

These ideas had a big effect on the blank generation in the Soviet Union - and a new avant-garde underground grew up in Leningrad and Moscow who turned to culture, above all music, as a way of expressing the absurdity of their society, something that they believed politics was incapable of doing.

In 1986 the BBC captured the tamer end of this underground in a documentary they made about a Leningrad musician called Sergey Kuryokhin and his friends.

Kuryokhin was a classically trained pianist who had embraced the new musical radicalism - and formed a band called Popular Mechanics. Here are some extracts from the film - with Popular Mechanics rehearsing, conducted in a wonderful way by Kuryokhin. It is also a very good picture of the mood of that group, many of them children of high-up party members, who have completely detached from believing in any political future.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

But the punk movement was not just composed of the children of the party bosses. In the 1980s a very big and influential cultural underground flourished throughout Russia, and it was much more than just a copy of western punk. One of its leading bands came from Omsk in Siberia, it was called Grazhdanskaya Oborona which translates as Civil Defence (the name was shortened to GrOb - which also means grave or tomb).

GrOb was led by a legendary singer called Yegor Letov. He was once incarcerated in a psychiatric hospital in Omsk for three months because of his rebelliousness. The music that Letov created was far more interesting than the western punk that had inspired it. His songs mixed modern noise with Russian folk in a full on attack on the emptiness of the world he saw around him.

 

The very perceptive journalist Mark Ames who edited the eXile magazine in Russia throughout the 1990s, and knew many of the avant-garde, says that Letov was one of the great geniuses of Russian literature.

Ames wrote of Letov:

"Punk may have started in New York and London, but the bravest spawn of all was Letov and his followers. When he began in the 1980s, Letov shunned the artsy irony of other anti-establishment bands in favour of raw violence and reckless confrontation against the blandness of the Soviet Union and the vapid optimism of Gorbachev's Perestroika. He left every band and every dissident in the dust, and they never forgave him for it.

Letov himself was the incarnation of what Edward Limonov calls "Russian Maximalism", the tendency to take things to their extreme."

Here is part of one of GrOb's greatest songs - Everything Is Going According to Plan - followed b a beautiful song by another member of the Siberian punk scene, Yanka Dyagileva, who was also Letov's lover in the 1980s.

 

I have cut the music to pictures of what was just around the corner, the sudden collapse of the Soviet union that began in 1989, and its strange aftermath. I have also added the lyrics to GrOb's song. The key lyric to Yanka Dyagileva's song that follows is "the television is hanging from the ceiling, and no one knows how f***ing low I'm feeling."

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union this generation faced a terrible question. In the 1980s they had retreated from any engagement with political ideology of both left and right, and they distrusted the west as much as the hated communist oppression.

They had turned to culture instead and built an ad-hoc avant-garde movement to try and mimic and expose the absurdity of the system.

But now the system had gone - what did they believe in?

One of the group decided to try and express this dilemma in a dramatic way. In 1991 Sergey Kuryokhin, of the band Popular Mechanics, went on  a popular TV talk show. He set out to prove that Lenin was really a mushroom. Kuryokhin wanted to show that in a society where no-one believed in anything the media could be used to make anything real.

To western eyes it is a bit silly, but at the time it caused a sensation. Here is a short extract

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

And you can watch a longer version here

The leading members of this post-political generation were now going to split and go off in very different ways.

Some made very sad, personal choices. In 1991 Yanka Dyagileva was found drowned in a river. It is believed that she committed suicide. Two other leading members of the underground punk scene also committed suicide.

But others decided to use the ideas that had driven the underground movement to try and create a new kinds of politic and new ways of running society in the wake of the catastrophic collapse.

These visions would manifest themselves in very different - and opposing - ways. But what linked them was a belief that in the avant-garde culture lay the seeds of a way of escaping the old, failed forms of politics.

The leader of one of these movements was the novelist Eduard Limonov.

When the Soviet Union collapsed Limonov had been allowed to return from exile. In 1992 he watched aghast as Yeltsin and a small group of technocrats decided to impose western-style free market capitalism overnight through "shock therapy". To Limonov this was a disaster, because from his experience of America he was convinced that American capitalism was no different from Soviet totalitarianism. It was just more subtle in its forms of oppression.

Limonov set up a political party. He called it The National Bolshevik Party. It's aim he said was to recapture the original aims of the Bolshevik revolution and integrate it with a modern nationalism.

The National Bolshevik Party almost immediately became the bete noire of both Soviet and Western liberals who saw it simply as the rise of a right-wing nationalism that was trying to hold back  the inevitable modernisation of Russia.

This seemed to be confirmed dramatically when, in 1992, the BBC filmed Limonov on the mountains overlooking the besieged city of Sarajevo. He had come there as a supporter of Radovan Karadzic - and the film shows Limonov firing a large Serbian sniper rifle into the heart of Sarajevo.

It was part of one of the most imaginative and perceptive pieces of documentary journalism the BBC has ever made. It is called Serbian Epics - made by Pavel Pawlikowski. The central figure of the film is Radovan Karadzic and the poetry he writes, and in one hour the film tells you more about the Bosnian conflict and its roots than any other film I have seen.

Here is the section containing Limonov - and it is also beautifully shot.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

The shots of Limonov with the sniper rifle caused a scandal in Russia. Limonov has always claimed that the sequence was edited in a way that distorted what was happening.

But what is true is that Limonov, his party and the ideas behind it are far more complicated and interesting that they at first seem.

Limonov has explicitly said that his aim is to take ideas and attitudes from avant-garde art and music and use them to try and create a new kind of confrontational politics - one that could break through the fake ideas of western democracy to show how the new bourgeois elites were greedily destroying the Russian state.

Much of this Limonov says comes directly from his experience in New York in the 1970s:

"Loud denial of so-called values of civilisation, grotesque, trash, screaming, some borrowings of Rightist aesthetics, were all common for the New York City punk movement of the 1970s as well as for the first National Bolsheviks in the 1990s.

The newspaper of the party 'Linomka' (the name of a hand grenade) was in the 1990s the most radical and most punish of the whole world. With its slogans like "Eat the Rich!" or "A Good Bourgeois is a Dead Bourgeois!" or "Capitalism is Shit!" We were in the punk tradition, what else?…."

And the party symbol was deliberately designed, Limonov says, to play just such punkish games

 

One of the first members of the National Bolshevik Party was the punk legend Yegor Letov - leader of GrOb (he was member number 4). Then Sergey Kuryokhin - the leader of the Popular Mechanics band joined and the party soon became a home to many members of the 1980s avant garde music scene.

You can watch some footage of Letov playing at an NBP rally here.

Together they reached back into the past - and borrowed, as punk had done, from fascist and revolutionary aesthetics (and even further - both Limonov and Latov idolised Mayakovsky), in order to invent dramatic ways of confronting contemporary smug westernised culture. They also associated with some very nasty people who took nationalism to racist and xenophobic extremes.

To western liberals who want to spread democracy round the world someone like Limonov is a frightening alien because he is reawakening the dangerous force of nationalism. But he in turn sees western liberals as fools who have been duped, and are really the unwitting agents of a corrupt economic global elite. Limonov believes that the only way to confront that corruption is to harness a force that appeals to the mass of the people.

Here are some glimpses of Limonov and his party on a march called by the communist party in 1997 as President Yeltsin was letting the oligarchs loot Russia - Limonov's young supporters mingling with the old communists. One of the National Bolshevik Party banners has a fantastic slogan.

RUSSIA IS EVERYTHING
EVERYTHING ELSE IS NOTHING

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

But there was another route that this generation took.

The key figure is a man called Vladislav Surkov. He is half-Russian, half-Chechen. He was born in the provinces, but like all the others he came to Moscow in the 1980s.

 

Surkov is shadowy and secretive, but he has given a very unusual window into his life and ideas. In 2009 Surkov allegedly published what seems to be an autobiographical novel under an assumed name. It is a cynical satire called Almost Zero and it tells the story of Egor, a disillusioned youth who comes to Moscow in the 1980s.

Egor can see through the fake ideology of the Soviet Union and he becomes a hanger-on of the Moscow underground movement - dabbling in avant-garde theatre. In the post-communist 1990s he then becomes a cynical PR man who will promote anything for anyone.

Egor is compared in the novel to Hamlet - someone who can see through the superficiality of the present age, but is unable to have any beliefs or even feelings about anything. In real life Surkov worked in the late 1990s doing PR for the oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, but then, in 1999 he switched and started working for Putin - and became a ruthless manipulator of modern politics.

Reuters/Corbis/Sergei Karpukhin

Surkov created a modern and innovative way of managing the new democratic system - but in a way that his critics say has sidelined the mass of the people and completely diminished real democracy.

To do this Surkov created a constantly shifting political tableau. As well as being one of the architects of Putin's own party, United Russia, Surkov also allegedly helped to set up opposition parties the Kremlin could then use for their own purposes. And he copied Eduard Limonov - he set up a quasi-military nationalist youth group called Nashi.

Nashi claims to be an "anti-oligarchic, anti-fascist movement" but members have reportedly compared themselves to the Hitler Youth. And the Kremlin allegedly uses them to beat up opposition journalists.

At the same time Surkov writes lyrics for a rock group called Agata Kristi and essays on conceptual art.

A TV journalist who worked in Soviet television called Peter Pomerantsev has written a fascinating article about Surkov. You can find it here. In it he argues that Surkov has turned Russian politics into postmodern absurdist theatre. In a way, just like Limonov, Surkov is adapting avant-garde ideas to this new political world.

"The novelist Eduard Limonov describes Surkov himself as having 'turned Russia into a wonderful postmodernist theatre, where he experiments with old and new political models'.

There's something in this. In contemporary Russia the stage is constantly changing: the country is a dictatorship in the morning, a democracy at lunch, an oligarchy by suppertime, while, backstage, oil companies are expropriated, journalists killed, billions siphoned away.

Surkov is at the centre of the show, sponsoring nationalist skinheads one moment, backing human rights groups the next. It's a strategy of power based on keeping any opposition there may be constantly confused, a ceaseless shape-shifting that is unstoppable because it is indefinable."

Here is part of a report the journalist Tim Whewell did for Newnight about the forces behind Nashi. He shows them using the very same slogan - "Bury the Dollar" - that Limonov's party uses.

And at one moment Whewell manages to doorstep Surkov and grab an interview. Whewell is a brilliant reporter with a range and cleverness that few others beat.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

Eduard Limonov and Vladislav Surkov hate each other.

But in many ways they are very similar because both are convinced that western democracy is a complete sham - and both are trying to create political alternatives to what they see as the second wave of stagnation that took over Russia in the 1990s. This was the result of the corruption caused by the attempt to impose western capitalist and democratic ideas on the country.

Surkov believes that the truth is that the idea of democracy will always be an illusion, that all democracies will always be "managed democracies" whether east or west. So the solution is for a strong state to manipulate people - so that they feel they are free, while they are really being managed.

Limonov's solution is the opposite. He wants to bring The People back onto the stage of history - and make them active participants in building a new future. He believes that the way to do this is to use revolutionary propaganda, and to borrow from avant-garde ideas of the spectacle, in order to galvanise the masses and break through their torpor.

Opinion in the west is divided about Limonov. Many see him as leading the resurgence of the neo-fascist right. But others believe that he is misunderstood - that Limonov is genuinely trying to create a new kind of politics.

A French novelist called Emmanuel Carrere has just won the prestigious Prix Renaudot for a widely-acclaimed novel about Limonov's life. In it he portrays Limonov as an ambiguous hero of our time who is struggling with the great question of our age - how to create a vision of a new and different future in a post-political age where all ideologies are despised and distrusted.

Here are the rushes of one of Limonov's "revolutionary provocations" where members of the National Bolshevik Party invaded the Finance Ministry in the heart of Moscow in 2006. It is very like some of the activities of the Occupy movement that would happen later in London and New York - and it may be that both Surkov and Limonov are ahead of us. We're just at the start of trying to work out how to escape from our years of stagnation.

The protestors are shouting "Return the Money to The People" and "Putin Must Go".

I've also included some rushes of members of the NBP held in a cage in a court after another provocation - including one moment that shows just why liberals are frightened of Limonov's party.

This is followed by Limonov outside the court talking about the trial. The woman you glimpse behind him in the swirly coloured blouse is Anna Politkovskaya - who would be shot by an assassin in 2006.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

Then, last December, thousands of people in Moscow came out and demonstrated against Putin and his "managed democracy". They too were shouting "Putin Must Go". It was exactly what Limonov and his supporters had been doing for ten years - but on a vast scale.

Limonov held his own rally alongside - obviously hoping that he would be the vanguard for this new insurgency. But he and his supporters were completely ignored. The protests swept on past them.

A week later, in response to the protests, Putin demoted Surkov - sidelining him from power. Surkov gave a great quote:

"I am too odious for this brave new world"

Maybe history is finally moving Limonov's way, but in its ruthless way it is leaving him behind - his job done.

Or maybe not. Maybe the new Surkovs will find a way of managing the protests. No one knows

Meanwhile rock music in Russia is a pale shadow of its former glory. Last year one of Russia's most famous rock critics, Artemy Troitsky, went on television and attacked rock musicians for becoming the poodles of those in power. In particular he savaged the lead singer of Agata Kristi, Vadin Samoylov, for being "the trained poodle of Surkov". This is because Surkov had written lyrics for Agata Kristi.

Here is a picture of Putin with his poodle - Tosya. The Kremlin image managers have always tried to keep Tosya hidden - because they consider poodles not to be very butch.

 

Troitsky's remarks caused a massive row, and he is now being sued for criminal slander.

Troitsky has reportedly defended himself by saying he loves dogs - and that he didn't think that calling someone a "poodle" was an insult. Poodles he said in court are actually "kind, intelligent, endearing dogs" and that he would not be offended if he was called "Che Guevara's trained poodle"

Brave man - standing up against the system.

 

 

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 2.

    When an authoritarian regime approaches its final crisis, but before its actual collapse, a mysterious rupture often takes place. All of a sudden, people know the game is up: they simply cease to be afraid. It isn’t just that the regime loses its legitimacy: its exercise of power is now perceived as a panic reaction, a gesture of impotence. Ryszard Kapuściński, in Shah of Shahs, his account of the Khomeini revolution, located the precise moment of this rupture: at a Tehran crossroad, a single demonstrator refused to budge when a policeman shouted at him to move, and the embarrassed policeman withdrew. Within a couple of hours, all Tehran had heard about the incident, and although the streetfighting carried on for weeks, everyone somehow knew it was all over. Is something similar happening now? (Zizek)

    www.charlesfrith.com

  • Comment number 3.

    Didn't Neue Slowenische Kunst (NSK) do something similar (to what Limonov did) in the 1980s during the wilderness period between Tito's death in 1980 or whenever and the break-up of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s? This was when Yugoslavia couldn't decide on a replacement for Tito and was instead governed by a council of mostly faceless politicians. Most of us probably remember NSK for the band Laibach but there were also Red Pilot aka the Sisters of Scipion Nasice (or something similar) who represented the drama wing of NSK, a painters' group called Irwin (I think) and a couple of women architects.

    NSK have their virtual state at nskstate.com and I believe anyone can apply to be a citizen and get a passport but apart from that NSK seem to be very obscure these days.

  • Comment number 4.

    Thanks. A very interesting post and interesting comments beneath it. Change is coming to this world. I wonder who could take a Limonov type role in the UK? What's Ian Bone up to these days?

    I'm from Ireland. We don't have much time for that sort of thing. We used have a Limonov of sorts. His name was deValera. It didn't work out.

  • Comment number 5.

    Adam where are you going to make a post about anarchism? This "left right" definition of politics is a bit old and boring.

  • Comment number 6.

    uhh sorry i meant when*

  • Comment number 7.

    Just loving adam curtis blogs right now. Welcome back!!!

  • Comment number 8.

    Hi Adam, or should that be Mr. Curtis? Web etiquette always confuses me, if I saw you on the street I'd say can I have your autograph please Mr Curtis. I digress.

    Thank you for another excellent post. Yesterday two of my friends told me they had joined The Communist Party of Britain recently. I was flabbergasted, mainly because I had no idea we still had a communist party and also because they seemed like such reasonable people up till that point. When I asked them why they had taken such a bold/odd move they explained. It is not because they are "true believers" in the cause but because they are fed up with how stuck we have become politically. They went on to explain that the right has adopted such an extreme monetarist view that Communism seemed the left equivalent. Taking an extreme position gets you into a dialogue (I suppose I should out of deference to them say dialectic) where a reasonable compromise position somewhere between the two may be thrashed out and put on the political agenda.

    I have to admit it's an appealing argument. I will however point them in the direction of your blog before I decide to take the plunge and join the Free Presbyterian Spartacist Palestinian People's Liberation Army of Zion. - Eastbourne branch.

  • Comment number 9.

    A Bio of Limonovs friend Karadzic captured in 2008,unfortunately a movie material.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ8CnasrC-c&feature=fvwp&NR=1

  • Comment number 10.

    Interesting thoughts on NSK, Nausika. Pulling in the pop culture thoughts again, I recollect that the spin off book from ABC's early 90's futurological/conspiracist mini-series (and generally acknowledged failure) 'Wild Palms' featured a small piece by NSK. The series inception itself seems, in retrospect, fascinating: a set of concepts developed from the metaphysical cod Cyberpunk narrative crafted by Bruce Wagner for Details Magazine in the very early 90's, executive produced by Oliver Stone only a year or two after 'JFK' and aiming to capitalise on the perceived popularity of 'Twin Peaks', the series bombed, but the accompanying book is an oddly fascinating snapshot of what was deemed to be truly avant-garde in America c. 1993. NSK (bizarrely enough) share page space with a motley crew including such luminaries as the New Wave science fictioneers Thomas Disch (who shot himself in 2008) and Norman Spinrad (once notorious for writing a version of Hitler's career as if it had been bad pulp science fiction), robotics pioneer Hans Moravec, Timothy Leary's sometime co-collaborator Genesis P. Orridge, punk impresario Malcolm Mclaren and Motorhead bassist Lemmy, cyberpunk authors de jour William Gibson, Bruce Sterling and Pat Cadigan, and the ever fascinating Watergate burglar and sometime cheap paperback novelist E. Howard Hunt (aptly enough contributing material on surveillance and disinformation). Equally fascinating to me is the abiding conviction the series/comic appears to have put into the notion that come the early 21st century, Japan would be vying with the US for global dominance - a seeming article of faith with every future scryer from c. 1984 or thereabouts onward - but virtually forgotten today; so, too, seems to be the early 90's fascination with holography as the technology of the future equally enshrined there. Some might say that 'Wild Palms' concerns with the abstruse origins of Scientology and the ever increasing media manipulation of the social and artistic landscape, however, remain as pertinent today as ever - though I digress.

    My point, I suppose, was that the cultural conceptions of the early 1990's (not even, comparatively speaking, that long enough) appear, from this distance, to almost inhabit another country.

  • Comment number 11.

    @ Leeravitz: Yes I remember Genesis P-orridge and the industrial music scene that included the Australian band SPK (whose founder Graeme Revell now writes soundtracks for Hollywood movies), Monte Cazazza, Survival Research Laboratories, William S Burroughs and Bryon Gysin. I have read "Difference Engine" by William Gibson and Bruce Sterling. It all seems so long ago!

    SPK's fellow Australian industrial music acts Severed Heads and Jim Thirlwell aka Foetus (once upon a time Thirwell's Foetus project was known as Scraping Foetus Off The Wheel which to this day remains my all-time favourite 1980s band name) are still alive and well although Severed Heads ended up morphing into a ho-hum dance electronic music act and I think now has a new name.

    @ generally:

    Very informative post from AC here. I would like to add my two cents' worth to these paragraphs:

    " ... Maybe history is finally moving Limonov's way, but in its ruthless way it is leaving him behind - his job done.

    Or maybe not. Maybe the new Surkovs will find a way of managing the protests. No one knows ... '

    I determined to look up some information on Limonov on the Internet myself and came across the libertarian / conservative writer Justin Raimundo's 2006 "Russia's Fifth Column" at antiwar.com. I read in Raimundo's article that Limonov and the NPB, like fellow Russian opposition political activist Alexei Navalny, have received funding from the National Endowment for Democracy, a private US-based organisation which receives some funding from the US government. The NED Board includes as a director Michael Novak of the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, a right-wing thinktank.

    I am now suspicious of any "opposition" movement in any country, no matter how oppressive the government there is, that has anything to do with the NED, former associates of the Serbian group OTPOR (some of whose members have joined the ruling Democratic Party in Serbia) and / or the DIY revolutionary manual "From Dictatorship to Democracy" by Gene Sharp of the Albert Einstein Institute.

    I saw the Ruaridh Arrow film "How to start a Revolution" which is about Sharp and his manual last year and thought the documentary gives too much credit to ideas suggested in the manual of wannabe rebels trying to win over the hearts and minds of people and of the police and armed forces in particular.

    Folks, if you end up in bed with the police, units in the armed forces or certain religious groups because they're also all against the government,%

  • Comment number 12.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 13.

    (attachment to Comment 11): Folks, if you end up in bed with the police, units in the armed forces or certain religious groups because they're also all against the government, you may find that when the government has gone, you'll be in thrall to these allies' own agendas. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood endorses Sharp's manual and distributes copies of them. That should make us all think.

    I guess I have made a few grown people here cry.

  • Comment number 14.

    I actually give the central premise of this thesis, that we are stagnating in a analogous fashion to the soviet empire a great deal stock. The main difference is that the response to this stagnation is not liner in time IE not after the event but more concurrent. thou perhaps more disturbing.

    In this regard I detect this post modern shapeshifting absurdity of the US political landscape. The tea party, Ron paul etc. In a way the US two party system has always had to accommodate candidates who were political chimeras.

    very interesting post

  • Comment number 15.

    It is not because they are "true believers" in the cause but because they are fed up with how stuck we have become politically. They went on to explain that the right has adopted such an extreme monetarist view that Communism seemed the left equivalent.
    In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood endorses Sharp's manual and distributes copies of them. That should make us all think.
    My point, I suppose, was that the cultural conceptions of the early 1990's (not even, comparatively speaking, that long enough) appear, from this distance, to almost inhabit another country.
    kız oyunları

  • Comment number 16.

    When I read this line:

    "The politicians were unable to do anything because they were in the thrall of the economic theory, and thus of the corrupt technocrats."

    I couldn't help but think of the ongoing Euro fiasco.

  • Comment number 17.

    "Their aim was to try and build 'socialism' in Afghanistan, just as thousands of westerners would later try and build 'democracy'."

    'Try and' is a genuine English idiom, but an aberrant, strange one that looks wrong when you draw too much attention to it. I mention it because you tend to use it a lot where 'try to' would be better.

    It's a baggy language, but 'try and' is hanging by the outer threads; it's consistent with some rules but clashes with others. It might be said that, in writing at least, 'try and' is best reserved for when one wants to imply that something can be accomplished if only one tries, rather than where success would be uncertain, as in the case of bringing new political systems to foreign countries.

  • Comment number 18.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 19.

    Grammar Lesson No 2: Correct Use of Prepositions

    Consider these statements:

    1/ The US government began funding the Afghan mujahideen AFTER the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in December, 1979
    2/ The US government began funding the Afghan mujahideen BEFORE the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in December, 1979.

    Most people still accept that Statement 1 is correct.

    The fact is that Statement 2 is correct: the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan on 24 December 1979 was actually provoked by the United States government.

    Zbigniew Brzezinski admitted in an interview to "Le Nouvel Observateur" in 1998 that the US government began giving aid to forces opposed to the socialist government in Kabul in July 1979. On 3 July 1979, President Carter signed a directive approving such aid and Brzezinski as National Security Advisor expressed his view in a note to the President that the aid would lead to Soviet military intervention and give the USSR its own Vietnam War disaster.

    Rather than try to quote verbatim what Brzezinski actually said, I'll let Counterpunch.org do for it me: http://www.counterpunch.org/1998/01/15/how-jimmy-carter-and-i-started-the-mujahideen/

    Brzezinski's interview took place 2 years after Robert Gates, the present US Defense Secretary, published a memoir of his time as CIA director in which he said that the US had started funding the mujahideen in July 1979.

    At the time the government in Kabul had been replaced in a military coup by one more pro-Soviet and attempting to impose a new model society on the Afghan people in a ham-fisted Stalinist way. If the West had left Afghanistan alone, certainly the alternatives don't look at all good and the country might have had its own version of what Cambodia went through from 1975 to 1979. But we wouldn't have had al Qa'ida, Islamic fundamentalism and its stranglehold on Middle Eastern politics, and Osama bin Laden would have stuck to being an engineer and. Plus the global arms industry would be a lot smaller.

    Homework for us is to figure out why and how, after setting up a trap for the Soviets that would bog them in a futile war for nearly 10 years, and using US and UK taxpayer money through the CIA and MI6 respectively to create and arm al Qa'ida, the US then proceeded with the benefit of hindsight to walk into the same trap in 2001.

    Class dismissed!

  • Comment number 20.

    Sorry, scrub out that dangling conjunction in the second-last sentence of the antepenultimate paragraph!

  • Comment number 21.

    Dear Adam,

    Would you please consider putting up the complete 'Serbian epics'? I'd gladly pay for a dvd or a download, but I can't find it anywhere, not even on BBC. Both the specific story of the breakup of the former Yugoslavia and the context in which you set the section above are extremely relevant in understanding the future of Europe. Thank you.

  • Comment number 22.

  • Comment number 23.

    Hey Adam... don't despair too much regarding the music scene. Here's a brilliant newish artist that is heavily inspired by Yanka:

    http://www.alinasimone.com/music/?a=makeyourown

    She's even done a tribute album:

    http://www.alinasimone.com/music/?a=everyone

  • Comment number 24.

    Fascinating Adam, thank you again.

    I think the answer to Nausika... above is that the people who have power are nowhere near wise enough to judge the consequences of their actions, and are playing with more and more powerful tools with less and less awareness of consequences. The principle of set something going and see what happens is the answer to uncertainty, the greatest fear being a loss of momentum, because they grabbed hold and are enjoying the ride, but they don't know how to get things going from a stop, and have exploited and alienated all those that do know and will work hard.

    I understand more and more the myth of the Tower of Babel - 'screw this, let's just say we don't understand each other and get off this grand project to reach the infinite so we can live our own lives not someone else's version.' Feeling very strongly the message from the past encoded in the myth.

    Those in power do not know what they are doing or where they are going, and that is the last thing they will admit when it should be the first. Still, such a system needs a bust so that the system can be cleaned out; our current leaders seem admirably suited to driving the system and its passengers into the abyss.

  • Comment number 25.

    @ worotan: Is Comment 24 referring to Comments 11,13 or 19? Could apply equally to all described in those situations. The US government's modus operandi in Afghanistan in 1980s might differ in details from what has been done around the world since the 1990s but the basic template can be discerned: locate a focus of opposition to a government you don't like, feed the rebels cash, weapons and information, get the rebels to incite the people to riot and when the government is overthrown, leave everyone in the lurch to clean up the mess.

    It would be easy to say we should get rid of the CIA and their like, and reduce powers of governments to conduct secret wars in other countries but that will have the effect of driving the people in these organisations into private companies like Academi (the former Blackwater / Xe Services) where they will simply take up where they left off and be even less accountable to the public.

    @ P Pilkington and anyone else interested: some more Russian music to liven up the day!

    i/ Kama Records website: http://www.kamarecords.ru/en/index.html
    Kama Records is based in Izhevsk, Udmurtia, specialising in electronic music generally and the folk music of the native Udmurt and Beserman people of the area. And yes Izhevsk is still the home of Mikhail T Kalashnikov who invented the AK-47 assault rifle.

    The Wire magazine might still have back copies of that issue that featured Izhevsk's electronic music scene. See here: http://www.thewire.co.uk/issues/252/?show=full and follow the instructions if you want to order.

    ii/ for more information about the Russian electronic music scene, check out Tunguska Electronic Music Society http://tunguskagrooves.com/en/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1 and Shum.Info: http://www.shum.info/about/

    I had thought Andrei Kiritchenko (I have a CD of his) and the female electronicist Zavoloka were also Russian but they are from Ukraine. They both have entries on Wikipedia if anyone is interested.

  • Comment number 26.

    Again, thanks Adam for another fascinating blog.

    I've just finished 'Red Plenty' by Francis Spufford, a lively, insightful look at how the optimism of the planned 'plenty' of Khrushchev, to be reality by 1980, fell away.
    With real and fictional characters, told in a series of snapshots in various institutions of the USSR, as well as more ordinary lives.
    From geniuses with ideas to harness 'Cybernetics' to scheming managers, prices, technology, culture even a shooting of peaceful protestors in an impoverished town in 1962, Spufford brilliantly weaves a story of grand plans that turned to stagnation.

    Very highly recommended.

  • Comment number 27.

    SONICBOOMER, I agree: 'Red Plenty' is one of my favourite books of recent years, a fantastic mixture of well researched reportage and fictional treament, with, at times, a decidedly science fictional air (there is some lovely homage to the work of the Strugatsky brothers, whose 'Roadside Picnic', which influenced 'Solaris' has been mentioned by Adam on this very website, for instance - Arkady Strugatsky's daughter married Yegor Gadar, one of the primary architects of post Soviet 'Shock Therapy' in Russia, as Adam pointed out). On the other hand, I hope that Adam, at least, got a complementary copy of 'Red Plenty' as the chapter on Gosplan is based on research primarily derived from -you've guessed it - 'The Engineer's Plot' episode of 'Pandora's Box'. Any similarity of theme is entirely intentional (and Spufford honest enough to annotate all the details in fairly extensive footnotes!).

    I also enjoyed post 15 above, which I can only conclude was either a server error or an attempt at postmodern artistic self-reflexivity, but may prove, in contrast to Nausika's comment, that the 'cut up' technique of William S. Burroughs is still, in fact, alive and well and flourishing on these very forums ;).

  • Comment number 28.

    I would like to know what HornOfAfricaHope wrote above? his whole comment was removed for what exactly? Are our minds so fragile that we need Mary Whitehouse moderating everything on this blog?

    This must be Adams least substantial work yet, I expected more considering the time taken between uploads. I don't mean to sound overly critical but when one considers Machines of Love and Grace, this feels like a Cbeebies story by comparison.

  • Comment number 29.

    Nice one. There is a small mistake. ''The newspaper of the party 'Linomka' (the name of a hand grenade)'' in fact it is called Limonka.
    The idea tha Russia is 'more postmodern' than the West is something that is discussed even in Russia. http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=1371

  • Comment number 30.

    This is really interesting. And it's complicated; I can't help but think that what Limonov did, using symbology from Nazism and Bolshevism is a dangerous strategy, for obvious reasons. You've also got to buy that the movement did really have a profound effect on the general population and inspired subsequent resistance to Putin.

    I also wonder this - how does this differ from other attempts to awaken the past and use it as the basis for a new society? Like Thatcher did. Or the approach that Adam describes in another post?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2010/09/the_pope_and_the_axis_of_terro.html

    Is this not similar to what D'Annunzio did? How do you use the positive power of such an approach, without awakening old prejudices and extremism? They sound like they have fundamentally similar aims, no?

    Couldn't the Occupy movement or any other movement have the effect of raising consciousness in everyday people, without having to resort to the symbolism of nationalism? Couldn't they create their own powerful movement and message? Do you have to drag up the dark past to counteract and heal the dessicated and atomised society we live in, to create a sense of unity and obligation? I don't think you need to be a 'maximalist'. Aren't the Yippies better role models (despite their failings)?

    You'll can't move people with the current dry politics, but if people get "lost in the spectacle" isn't it just a rerun of every deception, and subsequent tyranny, in history? Bolshevism is a good example - a powerful 'Soviet' movement existed for a while, but eventually Leninism destroyed it, propelled by the same art and propaganda that powered the original movement.

    At least it would be a start though, at least something would be happening. The Labour Party should really change its name. To The Cowards maybe. Are they gonna get off the stool or what?

  • Comment number 31.

    @ theartteacher2:

    The more I read about Limonov, the more I think of him as a clown. There is another way we can read the mix of Nazi and Bolshevik imagery, as indicating a lack of imagination and ideas on the NBP's part. I don't know that he had a big impact on Russian people - he might have done for middle class people there but on the rest of the population, his influence might have been over-hyped by Western media.

    Likewise the impact of Mir Hossein Moussavi on the general population in Iran was small in 2009 when the presidential elections were held and his supposed influence was jollied up by Western media reporting. He was popular only with upper and middle class people and those privileged youth who had access to the Internet and social networks. He did no campaigning outside the cities and really had nothing to offer people except "market reform" which would have made them suspicious. The Washington Post conducted a poll across Iran three weeks before the elections and found most people planned to vote for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad anyway even without the electoral fraud. Significantly Moussavi did not win in his own region (northwest Iran which is home to a large population of ethnic Azeris; Moussavi is Azeri).

    In the 1980s the Slovenian band Laibach used a mix of Nazi and Bolshevik imagery for ironic effect and to satirise Western attitudes and stereotypes regarding fascism as much as to satirise their country's politics. The effect the band had across Europe and North America ranged from panic to puzzlement. Even I was a little unsure about Laibach when I first heard about them in the late 80s.

    If there are any people or movements dredging up nationalism, they are usually trade unions, talkback radio hosts, news media and politicians and by now many if not most people are disillusioned with those institutions and individuals.

    As for Yippies, their failure is thinking that to change organisations, you join them and learn about how they operate so you know what rules to break; the problem with that is you end up being changed by the organisation and you never change the organisation. This is the problem with so many good people: we think we can change institutions from the inside but we underestimate how much our surroundings and contacts with people can change us and our mentality. Although knowing that this happens is a good thing in itself; you realise how flexible humans really are and that's cause for hope.

    I don't think the Occupy movement is resorting to nationalist symbolism and ideology at all. For the time being it is deliberately vague as to its organisation, structure and message. Perhaps a good thing in a way, to avoid the pitfalls of being stuck in an ideology and to encourage diversity and flexibility in its thinking; perhaps a bad thing, in that most people still want something definite to guide them and tell them what to do. We may see a lot more activity from the Occupy movement when the northern hemisphere summer arrives and the London Olympic Games propaganda circus starts to crank up.

  • Comment number 32.

    @ theartteacher2:

    Sorry, my response at Comment 31 about Yippies was triggered by seeing "Yuppies" instead of "Yippies"!

    The Yippies were very good role models indeed. These days the only decent stunt I've come across was that time in 2007 when the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation leaders summit was held in Sydney and the street behind the building where I work was closed off. The Chaser comedian group was allowed by police to breach the restricted zone and the guys ran a fake motorcade that stopped when Chas Licciardello got out of the car dressed as Osama bin Laden.

  • Comment number 33.

    It's long fascinated me, the connection between modernism/avant garde and the fluid nature of political affiliations. For a long time just never seemed to make sense to me that those on the right side of the equation would ever make anything artistically interesting, and so it was really hard to understand someone like Ezra Pound. One really interesting attempt to explain the connections was this lecture series I heard years ago http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/courses/Course_Detail.aspx?cid=292 . The professor made a distinction between the 'Paleo-Moderns' and the 'Neo-Moderns', the former having fascist sympathies and the latter communist sympathies -- and he tried to show the aesthetic parallels. I don't think his thesis completely holds up, after all he put Gertrude Stein in the Neo-Modernist camp, yet I've read she really was right-leaning in her views, and was protected by authorities of Vichy France through the war (even though she was a Jew and a Lesbian). But he is on to something there.

    As for the avant garde, which i understand is what cutting edge modernism became after world war 2, the point it seems to me is disruption of the political status quo. So that can come from the right or the left, but really right or left is not the right way to think of things, for perhaps by the end of the 1960s, the distinctions became blurred.

    Limonov is certainly an interesting figure, considering his affiliations with the punk rock scene in the US. It's an anarchy thing, which has strong affinities with nationalism, and possibly xenophobia. So it makes sense, I guess, that Limonov would go down that road. He's anti-totalitarian, but he's looking for the identity in whatever is unique about Russia and wants to go back to an idealized version of what the Bolshevik revolution was supposedly about.

    Whether a nationalist movement can ever lead to a more free society, that's a different question (doesn't usually, not sure it ever has).

  • Comment number 34.

    "Whether a nationalist movement can ever lead to a more free society, that's a different question (doesn't usually, not sure it ever has)."
    Actually that's silly, I take that back, nationalism is probably the start most or all government upheavals. Maybe I should just stay away from big generalizations like that.

  • Comment number 35.

    Thank you, we in the United States are woefully informed about the world and how it works. In the sixties it was a coin toss on which of the world powers would collapse. I saw the coup in Britain as a signal that it would be the West.
    Now it appears that this next collapse will be world wide and managed not by Swiss gnomes but by the folks in Malaysia and China. Of course the crystal ball gets cloudy...
    Putin being a creature of the Center for the New West will survive. The rest of the management team will be sidelined. The giveaway of the people loading the deck, a visual.
    There is a statue on the Mall In Washington D.C. It is supposed to be of Martin Luther King Jr. Look again and one sees the Great Helmsman. It was made in China: because there are no qualified artists to handle such a project in the United States.
    Managing the dismantlement of Soviet Russia required the cooperation of many information gatherers as well bankers managing the oligarchs. The stirring of the world masses is well managed. What happens when the lid is removed?

  • Comment number 36.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 37.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 38.

    @ Leeravitz: Referring to Comment 27, the Tarkovsky film that was inspired by Boris and Arkady Strugatsky's "Roadside Picnic" novel, and for which they also wrote the screenplay, was "Stalker". "Solyaris" was inspired by the Stanislaw Lem novel of the same name.

    I did find "Stalker" a very moving film about loss of faith and hope. Several actors and members of the film crew, including Tarkovsky himself, later died from cancer which might have been caused by being exposed to toxic fumes and chemicals in the disused plant where the movie was filmed. One person who worked on "Stalker" was Konstantin Lopushansky who later made "Dead Man's Letters" which is very like "Stalker" in its look and some of its ideas.

    There was a slew of science fiction movies made in the Soviet Union and eastern Europe (Czechoslovakia in particular) in the period from the late 1950s to the 1980s and while a lot of these were propaganda vehicles pure and simple, some films managed to have a subversive little message inserted that government censors missed. The quality of the plot varies but production values were often quite high. The ones I have seen are:

    Vladimir Chebotaryov and Gennady Kazansky, “Chelovek-Amfibiya" / "Amphibian Man” (1962) - this is a teen romance with a thriller element set in a Latin American country

    Mikhail Karyukhov and Alexander Kozyr, “The Sky Calls” / “Nebo Zovyot” (1959)

    Pavel Klushantsev, “Planeta Bur’ ” / “The Planet of Storms” (1962) - very lowbrow but with impressive sets and production

    Yakov Protazanov, “Aelita, Queen of Mars” (1924) - not sci-fi actually but features a sub-plot where the main character dreams about going to Mars and helping to start a workers' revolution there

    Yevgeny Sherstobitov, “The Andromeda Nebula” / "Andromeda Tyumennosty" (1967) - originally intended to be the first of a series of films (which never happened due to low audience turn-out), this is about how a colony of humans might live and cope with long-term space travel

    Vasily Zhuravlov, “The Space Voyage” / “Kosmicheskiy reys: Fantasticheskaya Novella” (1936) - a rare sci-fi film made before WW2

    I've also seen Marek Pestrak's "Pilot Pirx's Inquest" which was a joint Polish-Estonian production made in the late '70s and two Czechslovak films by Jindrich Polak: "Ikarie XB-1", made in 1963, is about how humans might cope in a Biosphere-like environment and the unique problems th

  • Comment number 39.

    @ Leeravitz: Oops, had a dangling phrase in that first paragraph! Should have said "Referring to Comment 27, I note that the Tarkovsky film ..." and so on. That should stave off any death ray attacks!

    (cont) ... I've also seen Marek Pestrak's "Pilot Pirx's Inquest" which was a joint Polish-Estonian production made in the late '70s and two Czechslovak films by Jindrich Polak: "Ikarie XB-1", made in 1963, is about how humans might cope in a Biosphere-like environment and the unique problems they encounter on their way to a distant planet; and "Tomorrow I'll Wake Up and Scald Myself with Tea" (1977), a sci-fi comedy about time travel, identical twins and the powers of dishwashing liquid in the future. I've yet to see "You are a Widow, Sir" and "Gentlemen, I Killed Einstein", also '70s-made sci-fi comedies from Czechoslovakia.

    East Germany and Bulgaria also made sci-fi films, often jointly with other Eastern Bloc countries. I've heard of "Eolomea" which was a joint East German / Bulgarian / USSR effort.

    The output of such films starts to peter out in the 1980s and those sci-fi films that were made then, apart from Lopushansky's efforts and Georgiy Danieliya's "Kin-dza-dza!", were aimed at children. This agrees with the general tone of disillusionment in Brezhnev's USSR and eastern Europe generally.

  • Comment number 40.

    Nausika, you are quite right - I meant 'Stalker', not 'Solaris', just a slip of the cursor, really, rather than a genuine mistake! I know it as a movie well, and think of it as a very beautiful piece aesthetically, and Tarkovsky as a film maker of genius (of course, he directed the original version of 'Solaris' a decade or so earlier also, hence - probably - my momentary lapse!). I believe when Adam was referring to the material, however, he was actually more interested in the concepts of the original novel, as the film is a (relatively) loose adaptation of the themes - though the brothers wrote the screenplay for Tarkovsky as well, as you say.

    I am, in point of fact, quite an adherent of Soviet era science fiction altogether (when I can get hold of versions in translations as I can't read Cyrillic), so I know versions of most of the originals from which the films you are talking about were derived - and am fascinated by the whole conception of reformulating a society on the basis of, essentially, science fictional values that seemed to dominate in the USSR at various junctures during its existence. This almost absurd, but remarkably idealistic, attempt to ignore the realities of quotidian human life and demand that it conform to values otherwise accessible only in art and abstract philosophies, remains astonishing to me whatever else may be said about it (and, indeed, seems to be part of the driving fascination that Adam evinces with the subject matter in 'The Engineer's Plot'). The French Revolution almost came this close to embodying such audacity: restructuring the very nature of measuring time and coming perilously close to redefining the whole pedagogical and societal formation of the nation, but the Terror proved its own undoing before events reached quite the pitch that they were to later in the Russian Revolution.

    I haven't, it's true, seen as many of the film versions of the stories as you list, and I will try and seek them out. I think the Czech essays in the satirical/science fictional/fantastic genres seems to have held a particular cachet in the West (particularly in the 60's) - not least, perhaps, because of the Western admiration for Dubcek, and the despair felt over the Prague Spring, but there was certainly interesting work that also came out of Poland etc. during the years of the Iron Curtain. And even American based science fiction writers with Soviet antecedents, such as Algis Budrys, seem to have been writing particularly fascinating meditations on Cold War oppression, espionage and paranoia in

  • Comment number 41.

    in the 50's and 60's. The science fiction generated in the ex Eastern Bloc countries is often particularly interesting compared to that of the West because the central preoccupation with individualist achievement that is so characteristic of the American influenced Western mode is so often absent.

  • Comment number 42.

    @ Leeravitz: All the films I mentioned in Comments 38 and 39 have been uploaded to Youtube. For most of them there are sub-titles or you can click on the icon that says CC below the film to get captioned translations in English. The version of "Tomorrow I'll Wake Up and Scald Myself with Tea" I saw on Youtube had no sub-titles but I was able to find a synopsis of the film on Imdb.com and Wikipedia. I was afraid that I might not understand it without the sub-titles especially as the plot emphasises time-travel and I'd just seen an American comedy "Primer" by Shane Carruth which is so similar to the Czech film in its narrative structure that it's possible Carruth might know of it. But Polak's movie was surprisingly easy to follow. I actually had trouble following Alexander Dovzhenko's "Aerograd" which is a much older film and is more propagandistic (again, there were no English sub-titles).

    You might like "Ikarie XB-1" and "The Andromeda Nebula" because both films have a strong theme about co-operation for survival in space and although the captain has the final word, he (it's always a he) takes advice from others and doesn't come across as a presidential or monarchical figure. I've seen a few episodes of "Star Trek: The Next Generation" with Patrick Stewart and I was struck by how king-like and dominating his character was. Similarly "The Sky Calls / Nebo Zovyot" aka "The Call of Heaven" is a plea for humility and co-operation between the superpowers in seeking scientific knowledge; there is also a sideswipe at the Western news media in jacking up national rivalries!

    I recommend also "Dead Man's Letters" if you like "Stalker": the Lopushansky film is Stalker-lite but it's also very moving and the final scene is visually and thematically beautiful. Not giving anything away here!

  • Comment number 43.

    I speak through the centuries on the subject of freedom from tyranny. If you really want to see where the dark heart of inhumanity beats then follow the moneypower.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svly7TJMtzw

    Everyone must find out how the money system works and therein will find the solution.

  • Comment number 44.

    Sorry, my response at Comment 31 about Yippies was triggered by seeing "Yuppies" instead of "Yippies"!
    Couldn't the Occupy movement or any other movement have the effect of raising consciousness in everyday people, without having to resort to the symbolism of nationalism?
    oyunlar1

  • Comment number 45.

    Although symptoms may look similar on the surface and a large part of the
    population of the "first world" feels stuck in a society that stinks from the head
    the situation is very different than in the former USSR.
    The former democratic societies are getting restructured into a more autoritarian
    militaristic deenlightened neofeudalistic society while the remaining superpowers
    strategize over the remainig resources.

  • Comment number 46.

    Article some might find interesting

    http://www.newstatesman.com/200611270027

    And the BBC Putin doc is still available on IPlayer - interesting in relation to this blog.

  • Comment number 47.

    @ theartteacher2: To be honest, I generally distrust mainstream Western media reporting on Russia and in particular Russian politics and I prefer to rely on news from Russia Today. My suspicion is that opposition parties in Russia are receiving funding and information from the CIA through the National Endowment for Democracy and the GOLOS Association which claims to be an independent watchdog agency monitoring elections and their conduct but which has accepted money from the United States.

    Here in Australia the news media hardly reports anything on Russia and what it does report is sourced from British media, especially The Guardian and The Independent, and I trust those sources least of all. I think Peter Hitchens from the Daily Mail did better reporting on Russia and Kazakhstan when he travelled through the latter country.

    I'm not surprised most people in Russia support United Russia in spite of its leadership. They believe Putin may be the best of a bad lot and is the only politician who'll stand up to the Americans who have established military bases in Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Georgia and Azerbaijan. Some of those bases were old Soviet bases. I have to wonder why it's necessary for the US to surround Russia and China with military bases it can ill afford.

    @ Leeravitz: Been having so much fun on the latest AC post about the Costa Concordia that it's only now I remembered what you said in Comment 40 about science fiction values dominating Soviet society in the 1960s. Of course this was the period of Sputnik, space exploration and competing with the Americans to send humans to the moon or Mars. The Russians were more fixated on sending people to Mars which explains why a film like "The Sky Calls" deals with travel to Mars. The Russians also sent satellites to explore Venus during these years and this explains the plot behind "Planet of Storms". The film has a silly plot and sillier monsters but Klushantsev did an excellent job on the alien landscapes for the film. He made an earlier film "Road to the Stars" which was actually a serious science education film with some speculation as to the future of space exploration and travel.

    Generally this period was one in which the Soviet government tried to mend fences with the public after the Stalinist period and started pouring money into schools, higher education, sport, holiday resorts and culture (within certain limits). Making science fiction and space exploration films was one way of educating the public about the benefits of Soviet science, inspiring people to support the government and pushing culture as well.

  • Comment number 48.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 49.

  • Comment number 50.

    In fact, the entire series of which these two articles are parts is well worth a look:

    http://christian-eriksson.co.uk/series/whats-the-problem-with-a-flatlining-economy

 

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.