RE: [xmca] Krementsov, N. (1997). Stalinist science

[Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>]

Thanks Anton. It's good to know its limitations. p

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Anton Yasnitsky
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 1:10 PM
To: Anton Yasnitsky; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] Krementsov, N. (1997). Stalinist science

A **scholarly** review of Figes' bestseller has been detected:

A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution 1891-1924 by Orlando Figes Review by: James D. White Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 49, No. 7 (Nov., 1997), pp. 1321-1323

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/154088?uid=3739448&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=3737720&uid=4&sid=47699064012707

QUOTE:


translated into the language of aims and objectives, the author says: 'My aim has been to convey the chaos of those years, as it must have been felt by ordinary men and women. I have tried to present the revolution not as a march of abstract social forces and ideologies but as a human event of complicated individual tragedies'.
This approach not only justifies an anecdotal treatment of the subject, but also frees the author from any obligation to come up with an interpretation of the revolution in the conventional sense. 'Chaos' and 'individual tragedy' *are* the interpretation. That there was chaos, horror, mindless cruelty and a great deal of suffering in the Russian revolution and the Civil War is beyond dispute, and to be reminded of the fact is of course salutary. But that knowledge can hardly count as a new and original interpretation of the revolution. It is only a starting point from which an interpretation might be constructed.

 another QUOTE, conclusion, last paragraph:

Authors like to have their books described as 'brilliant'. This is without doubt a brilliant book. It sparkles in the way it presents its string of picturesque episodes, and it dazzles in the confidence and verve with which it presents even its erroneous erudition. But it is brilliant as a novel or a play is brilliant. As a work of history it has little point, because it does not give what a reader of a historical work normally demands. It does not set out and explain the various episodes of the revolution with any clarity. It does not even seek to do so because it holds that no such clarity exists, that all is confusion and chaos. The book consequently cannot be recommended as an introduction to the subject, although it is a general history of the Russian revolution. It does, however, provide a rich fund of stories, some of which might bear re-telling, if the selection is made with caution and the audience is not overly squeamish.

END of QUOTE.

Consider the review, attached; for what it's worth. To anyone interested in the scholarly and unbiased history of Soviet science, Krementsov, N. (1997). Stalinist science is still highly recommended.

Cheers,
AY


________________________________
 From: Anton Yasnitsky <the_yasya@yahoo.com>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Sunday, June 3, 2012 7:35:47 PM
Subject: Re: [xmca] Krementsov, N. (1997). Stalinist science
 
I do not know anything about this specific book, but would definitely be suspicious about any attempt to recast the history of Russian Revolution in terms of "tragedy". Quite popular during the Cold War (in the West) or perestroika (back in the USSR), such black and white narrative tends to look fairly simplistic and helpless these days, especially since a great deal of fairly balanced and unbiased scholarly works came out.


I guess of primary interest to us here, in this online community, is the history of Soviet science in its social and cultural context. To those interested, I would strongly recommend Nikolai Krementsov's "Stalinist Science" (Princeton, 1997) that equally well serves as an introductory and pretty advanced reading on the topic of Russian/Soviet science of the first half of 20th century. Very good comprehensive treatise that goes far beyond dated and naive narrative about the "oppressed science", which, as a matter of fact, is the dominant axiomatic standpoint among the so-called historians of Soviet psychology back in Russia these days.  The book is currently out of print, but can be easily found on abebooks.com or barnesandnoble.com . A little bit expensive, but definitely a classic one.





________________________________
From: Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>; " (pazaroff2001@yahoo.com)" <pazaroff2001@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 3, 2012 5:55:04 PM
Subject: [xmca] A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution: 1891-1924 by Orlando Figes

To fill in one of the many gaps in my historical knowledge, I've ordered "A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution: 1891-1924" by Orlando Figes
http://www.amazon.com/dp/014024364X/ref=pe_175190_21431760_M2C_SC_dp_1

Does anyone know anything about this account of the revolution? The one I recently saw on PBS really sounded like US propaganda. So I'd like to know if the Bolsheviks got off to a more positive start than was suggested by that documentary, as they call them.
__________________________________________
_____
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