Thanks everybody for the teaching on the subject. It has opened new vistas
for all of us down here in Chile.
David D. Preiss Ph.D.
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
www.uc.cl/psicologia
-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
Behalf Of Leif Strandberg
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 4:02 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] Luria & the USSR
Hi,
Dan Friedman once wrote a brilliant article about this issue:
"The Soviet Union in the 1920s - An historical laboratory"
Practice, vol 7 #3 1990,
Leif
Sweden
ps
Just to add something to my previous mail: Why did not Luria asked the
peasants about their (brilliant and hi-tech) water system (karez)?
ds
2006-03-15 kl. 08.30 skrev Steve Gabosch:
> Eugene, Leif, Mike, all,
>
> Thank you. What great posts on many very important questions. Much
> more can and needs to be researched and analyzed - and debated. Who
> else has written on these issues? Some of the material by Bakhurst in
> Consciousness and Revolution in Soviet Philosophy (1991) comes to
> mind, for example.
>
> - Steve
>
>
>
>
> At 09:54 PM 3/14/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>> Dear Leif and everybody--
>>
>>
>>
>> I respectfully disagree with Leif that the Great Stalinist terror
>> started
>> after Luria-Vygotsky cross-cultural research in 1932. There is
>> evidence that
>> the terror actually peaked around 1931-1932. About 10-20 million of
>> people
>> were killed around this time -- mostly illiterate peasants. One of the
>> cryptic stories was that Stalin’s wife Nadezhda Alliluyeva committed
>> suicide
>> in 1932 after she witnessed the tragedy of collectivization
>> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health
>> <http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?
>> sec=health&res=940DEEDB113FF937A
>> 25757C0A96E948260> &res=940DEEDB113FF937A25757C0A96E948260. But I
>> understand
>> Leif because it is rather common to think that the Great Terror was
>> around
>> 1937 when city-based literate intelligencia became its target. However
>> tragic, it could not be compared with the crime of so-called
>> collectivization in terms of the scope of the organized terror. You
>> can read
>> about that in Solzhenitsyn's Archipelago GULAG.
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree with Steve that this is very important to keep in mind when
>> reading
>> Luria and Vygotsky’s discussion of their cross-cultural work. It is
>> important to consider the responsibility of scholars, especially in
>> our
>> paradigmatic family, when they (we?) participate in social
>> engineering.
>>
>>
>>
>> Leif asked about “who paid for tickets”. Good question. There is some
>> evidence that Nikolai Bukharin one of the top Party leaders was one
>> of
>> their big supporters. The fall of Luria and Vygotsky from leading
>> Marxist
>> psychologists was in part associated also with the fall of Bukharin.
>> I wrote
>> an XMCA message about that in 2000 (see below). By the way, the
>> expedition
>> was supposed to be international with participation of mainly German
>> Gestalt
>> Psychologists but it did not work out (Koffka participated but for
>> very
>> short time). See the book by Valsiner and Veer “Understanding
>> Vygotsky”.
>>
>>
>>
>> I also agree with Mike that many scholars from former USSR think that
>> CHAT
>> and sociocultural rejection of the deficit model promoted by Luria and
>> Vygotsky is nothing more than “political correctness.” Like Mike, I
>> tried
>> many times to convince them to the contrary but in vain. I recently
>> wrote a
>> paper about that analyzing the fate of Vygotsky legacy in South
>> Africa and
>> in US.
>>
>>
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>>
>>
>> Eugene
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> RE: Luria in Uzbekistan
>>
>>
>> From: Eugene Matusov ( <mailto:ematusov%20who-is-at%20udel.edu?
>> Subject=RE:%20Luria%20in%20Uzbekista
>> n&In-Reply-To=%3CNCBBJJPJODEAKNMOFEBKIEHDDFAA.ematusov@udel.edu%3E>
>> ematusov@udel.edu)
>> Date: Wed Jan 26 2000 - 15:46:37 PST
>>
>> * Next message: Sara
>> <http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2000_01.dir/0297.html> L.
>> Hill:
>> "RE: documenting the flow"
>> * Previous message: Paul
>> <http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2000_01.dir/0295.html>
>> Dillon: "Re:
>> middle class/intellectual labor"
>> * In reply to: Mike
>> <http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2000_01.dir/0289.html> Cole:
>> "Luria
>> in Uzbekistan"
>> * Next in thread: Peter
>> <http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2000_01.dir/0309.html>
>> Farruggio:
>> "Re: Luria in Uzbekistan"
>> * Messages sorted by: [
>> <http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2000_01.dir/date.html#296>
>> date ] [
>> <http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2000_01.dir/index.html#296>
>> thread
>> ] [
>> <http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2000_01.dir/subject.html#296>
>> subject ] [
>> <http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Mail/xmcamail.2000_01.dir/author.html#296>
>> author
>> ]
>>
>> _____
>>
>> Hi Mike and everybody--
>>
>> One brief comment on Luria.
>>
>> Mike wrote,
>> > Second, Luria's work was never published in the USSR at the time
>> > and could hardly have been a cause of anything... until we get to
>> > the first report in 1970-71 and then 75-76 in Russian and English.
>> > Very different times.
>>
>> It is true that Luria's work was never published in the USSR at the
>> time.
>> But why? There is some historical evidence that Vygotsky and his
>> colleagues
>> were supported in part by Bukharin, one of the top party leaders of
>> that
>> time. Luria-Vygotsky research glorified rather consciously and
>> deliberately
>> collectivization of peasant farms and (forced) schooling that were on
>> the
>> political agenda of the time. However, their affiliation with
>> Bukharin and
>> some other top communist functionaries that became increasingly
>> unpopular
>> with Stalin led them into troubles (among other things). My point is
>> that
>> the only reason that the Luria-Vygotsky research did not (hopefully)
>> play
>> any role in the tragedy of those days was that they by themselves
>> became a
>> target of political attacks (especially Vygotsky). I want to remind
>> that the
>>
>> Luria-Vygotsky work in Uzbekistan was done when Stalin organized
>> artificial
>> famine in rural parts of the Soviet Union to force peasants
>> (especially
>> those who were "from remote villages") to join collective farms.
>> According
>> to some estimations between 10 and 20 million of people died (or
>> better to
>> say "killed") during that time of early 30th. I personally very glad
>> that
>> neither Vygotsky nor Luria contributed to this crime but they were
>> very
>> close to such contribution.
>>
>> Taking this into account I'm very sympathetic with Jim Wretsch's
>> position
>> described by Mike
>> > First, this exchange indexes with special clarity why people like
>> > jim wertsch prefer the term socio-cultural to cultural historical
>> > or activity theory. Luria was a modernist. Not the only one around
>> > at the time in either Russia or the US. In so far as history
>> > implied progress/development, it is a very unfortunate term to use
>> > as a paradigm name. Or at least, some think so.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Eugene
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>>
>> > From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
>> [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
>>
>> > Behalf Of Leif Strandberg
>>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 2:41 AM
>>
>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>
>> > Subject: Re: [xmca] Luria & the USSR
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Hi,
>>
>> >
>>
>> > The Luria-conversation is great - and important. Important from
>> > many
>>
>> > perspectives:
>>
>> >
>>
>> > The historical context 1932 when Luria and his team went to
>>
>> > Uzbekistan was not the Great terror - it started 2-3 years later.
>> The
>>
>> > context was The war against the peasants. And the purpose of the
>> Luria
>>
>> > expedition was an investigation of peasants (!) and nomads.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Here comes a team of young and enthusiastic students from Moscow
>> (the
>>
>> > Capital) to the fpeasants. Who paid the tickets? The same rulers
>> who
>>
>> > now killed the peasants.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > They came with a lot of logical premises (one of them: Moscow is
>> more
>>
>> > advanced than Tasjkent. Another: The concept (!) of collective
>> farms is
>>
>> > more advanced than working with goats and camels in Bohara). They
>> > -
>>
>> > the team - came with The Truth to people with "Lower Mental
>> Functions".
>>
>> > Of course the team was not - as far as I can see - in a subjective
>>
>> > sense against the farmers in Uzbekistan absolutely not! - but if
>> > we
>>
>> > look at the expedition from the perspective of Activity Theory it
>> > is
>>
>> > easy to see the inequality of the relations between the researchers
>> and
>>
>> > the Uzbeki people.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > The use of Aristotelian logic is also surprising - as the team
>> wanted
>>
>> > to explore mind in culture - why use a typical cognitivstic
>> > (Platon!
>>
>> > Bucharin!) method?
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Inspired by Harold Pinter (the Nobel Prize winner 2005 - You know,
>>
>> > Pinter is always interested in power relations in ordinary
>>
>> > conversations) I wrote down the test protocols (from Making of
>> > Mind)
>>
>> > and read them from a "Pinter-angle" trying to see what the farmers
>>
>> > actually said to the researchers. Reading the protocols in such a
>> way
>>
>> > it is - to me - easy to see that the conversation was reciprocal:
>> The
>>
>> > farmers had something to say to the young men (I have not found any
>>
>> > female researcher in the team):
>>
>> >
>>
>> > - Do not have illusions! (about what is going on) The farmers did
>> not
>>
>> > only reflected on the Muller-Lyers arrows!)
>>
>> > - Do not have prejudices when talking about other parts of the
>> country
>>
>> > (the cotton- and bear-example)
>>
>> > etcetera
>>
>> >
>>
>> > If we create such a languge-game with the text we will find
>> something
>>
>> > else than the cognitive analysis. It is also clear that Vygotskij
>> did
>>
>> > not gave full support to the expedition of Luria. "It is your
>>
>> > expedition".
>>
>> > There are so many methodolgical errors in the research (errors -
>> if we
>>
>> > want to explore what mind in culture can be. From a Piagetian
>>
>> > perspective the results are more okay. (But Piaget did often the
>> same
>>
>> > mistakes as Luria did 1932)
>>
>> >
>>
>> > I am not saying that the expedition is bad or unintersting. It was
>> and
>>
>> > is very interesting - (the fact that psychologists "came out" from
>> the
>>
>> > Insitutes is per se interesting) - but to me the expediton says
>> > more
>>
>> > about the risks when we do investigations on The Other than it says
>>
>> > about peasants' IQ:s
>>
>> >
>>
>> > The team members were young, naive and captured in some false
>> premises
>>
>> > and they knew to little about farmers and the history and the great
>>
>> > culture of Samarkand. But they were not racists - which was the
>> common
>>
>> > case in most of the research from that time. In my country -
>> Sweden -
>>
>> > we had a Race-Institute from which "researchers" came to my part of
>>
>> > Sweden - The North - doing research on Sami people - with a very
>> clear
>>
>> > racistic perspective. Compared to their "research" the Luria
>> expedition
>>
>> > is more than great. But, from a cultural-historical perspective
>> there
>>
>> > are many thing to say. I have tried to say some of these things.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Read:
>>
>> > Harold Pinter - The Cartetaker (and Pinter's Nobelprize-speech)
>>
>> > Frantz Fanon "Les damnés de terre"
>>
>> > Aleksandr Etkind "Psychoanalysis in the time of the Russian
>> Revolution"
>>
>> > (Eros Nevosmomozjngo" from 1993.
>>
>> > Osip Mandelstam
>>
>> >
>>
>> > I am looking forward to read Mike's new book - I have not found it
>> yet
>>
>> > - perhaps some of what I am saying here will be changed after
>> reading
>>
>> > Mike's book.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Greetings from Leif, a peasant from The Arctic Circle in Sweden
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > 2006-03-14 kl. 06.07 skrev Steve Gabosch:
>>
>> >
>>
>> > > Mike describes some of the reaction to Luria's research among the
>>
>> > > Kashgars on page 214-215 of his "Epilogue: A Portrait of Luria"
>> > > in
>>
>> > > Luria's autobiography, The Making of Mind. His research and
>>
>> > > explanations in this work "met with strong, not to say vitriolic,
>>
>> > > disapproval."
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > > Although Mike does not go into this, I think it is vital to point
>> out
>>
>> > > that this kind of poisonous attack - one that represented a
>> "mixing of
>>
>> > > scientific and political criticism in 1934" - took place during
>> the
>>
>> > > full-scale Stalinization of nearly every aspect of Soviet
>> > > society,
>>
>> > > including all the sciences. It was not the *content* of Luria's
>>
>> > > cross-cultural studies but its *suppression* that satisfied
>> "Soviet
>>
>> > > doctrine" (whatever "soviet doctrine" was in Stalin's brutal
>> campaign
>>
>> > > to drive out scientific discussion and debate in the USSR
>> beginning
>>
>> > > with Lenin's death, and reaching a fever pitch prior to WWII).
>>
>> > > Excepting Stalin, the entire original leadership of the Bolshevik
>>
>> > > revolution had been killed, imprisoned or exiled by the end of
>> > > the
>>
>> > > 1930's, culminating in Trotsky's assassination in 1940. In the
>> late
>>
>> > > 1920's and throughout the 1930's, a death grip was being placed
>> > > on
>>
>> > > scientific work, which included, among much other repression, the
>>
>> > > banning of Vygotsky's writings. Lysenko's quack theories of
>> genetic
>>
>> > > inheritance and his mismanagement of Soviet agricultural research
>> was
>>
>> > > a shining example of the scientific "accomplishments" of this
>>
>> > > Stalinization process.
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > > This does not mean that Luria's analysis of the Kashgars (how
>> > > they
>>
>> > > used syllogisms, etc.) is above scientific and political
>> criticism. I
>>
>> > > think ARL did make certain errors (seeking cognitive rather than
>>
>> > > socio-economic, historical and class explanations for his
>> results),
>>
>> > > along with creating brilliant precedents for conducting this kind
>> of
>>
>> > > field research. I also think Luria would have welcomed such
>>
>> > > commentary. But there is no reason to believe that the
>> poison-filled
>>
>> > > reaction to his work - and the suppression apparently of even any
>>
>> > > mention of this work - was an aspect of any coherent doctrine,
>> > > let
>>
>> > > alone a worthy scientific critique. Rather, as I see it, the
>> poison
>>
>> > > campaign Luria endured was part of the general Stalinization
>> process
>>
>> > > of destroying independent thinking in the scientific community.
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > > - Steve
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > > At 05:45 PM 3/13/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>> > >>
>>
>> > >> Dear XMCARs,
>>
>> > >>
>>
>> > >> A class of mine was studying Luria by the last 2 weeks, Mike's
>> DVD
>>
>> > >> included,
>>
>> > >> and one of the questions that arose was that of the conclusions
>> of
>>
>> > >> the Asia
>>
>> > >> studies and whether the way they were skecthed in the book
>> published
>>
>> > >> by
>>
>> > >> Harvard's press in the late 1970s would have been the same in
>> case
>>
>> > >> the book
>>
>> > >> would have been published after the collapse of the Soviet
>> > >> Union.
>>
>> > >> That is:
>>
>> > >> >From all what is said in the book, what can be attributed to
>> > >> >the
>>
>> > >> needs to
>>
>> > >> satisfy Soviet doctrine and what can be attributed to the real
>>
>> > >> thinking of
>>
>> > >> Luria. Maybe it would help us to elarn what were the ideas
>> related to
>>
>> > >> that
>>
>> > >> study that kept it unpublished for so many years and whether
>> they had
>>
>> > >> to be
>>
>> > >> sublimated to reach final publication. I know that's a difficult
>>
>> > >> question,
>>
>> > >> but maybe it can be answered by some of you here that knew Luria
>>
>> > >> personally.
>>
>> > >> Feel free to reply to all since I am copying to my students. All
>> of
>>
>> > >> them
>>
>> > >> will be very grateful of your imputs.
>>
>> > >>
>>
>> > >> Thanks!
>>
>> > >> David
>>
>> > >>
>>
>> > >> David D. Preiss Ph.D.
>>
>> > >> Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
>>
>> > >> www.uc.cl/psicologia
>>
>> > >>
>>
>> > >> _______________________________________________
>>
>> > >> xmca mailing list
>>
>> > >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>
>> > >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > > _______________________________________________
>>
>> > > xmca mailing list
>>
>> > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>
>> > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>> > >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > _______________________________________________
>>
>> > xmca mailing list
>>
>> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>
>> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 01 2006 - 01:00:13 PST