Coming into this class, I’ll admit, I didn’t think we’d be watching many cartoons. Especially cartoons made for kids, which I assume this is. That being said, I found Cheburashka to be reminiscent of the socialist realist genre, in the sense of unity through work and overcoming struggle.
The story of a little furry ball of mystery, a crocodile, and a little girl caught me a little off guard. I wasn’t quite sure what the message was until they started building, but then the theme of unification of work was readily apparent. Not only do those three meet and decide they want to build a house for others, but they want to build that house for anybody who needs a friend. It’s clear that this is a message to children about the values of friendship, but the fact that they met that larger group of people through building that house makes me think that there’s a message just beyond the surface. That message regards how work can build a community, which was a major feature of previous socialist works. I also saw the emphasis regarding the ambiguity of the little fur ball as meaning that anybody can meet others, casting out a wider net to inspire more people to work, and possibly find friendship and unification.
In addition to the friendships gained by building the house, the group of friends manages to turn an ill-mannered, cruel woman into a person who is remorseful of their actions, sparking growth in those with more malicious intents through their work. The character growth was seemingly only brought on by the completion of the project and the unity she saw it bring to all those involved. I read into this as an allusion to the toxic environment that was pervasive in socialist realist stories. In those stories, the hero overcame the negativity and all that was weighing them down to achieve something great, and the apology from the woman at the end signified Gena the crocodile’s defeat of evil.
In the end, it’s a fun kids story about friendship, but there are some hidden layers that harken back to the older days of story telling. I’m not sure when socialist realism was un-codified, but this story shares many similarities, so I imagine that this was at least somewhat intentional. Do you guys think that’s the message the filmmakers were sending?
I think that there were definitely some influences from socialist-realism in this stop-motion. I agree that the events involve themes of unity and friendship. After our discussion in class, I think the emphasis on companionship to combat loneliness is important because it backs up the emphasis on finding friends and building community. I also think that Cheburashka’s unknown identity brings a stronger focus to Cheburashka’s actions and personality, where he is viewed as sincere and kind. I think this is also a similar case for Shapoklyak. There is little known about where she comes from, but she immediately starts to cause trouble when she is introduced in the story. As you have mentioned, she becomes remorseful and joins Gena, the girl, and Cheburashka in friendship.
I think that these themes of unity and friendship are made especially powerful by the anonymity of characters such as Cheburashka and and Shapoklyak. It conveys an important moral message that everyone regardless of their background, they can be kind to and connect with each other. The lion character was also very interesting, as he represented a Jewish person, and initially claimed to have no friends. But the other character’s instant embracement of this character who was perceived as an “outsider”. Cheburashka has become a symbol for national pride and sends an incredibly powerful moral message of acceptance and tolerance.
Gabe, I love how you start this post. And I want to respond this is exactly what we should be watching! The morals and meaning that you point out in your post are all important and really astute analysis, but something that is great in Chuberashka and something that you just have to enjoy is all the subtleties of soviet culture that the cartoon contains! The moments like waiting in line for oranges (a very sought-after food in the soviet days) really provide small cultural insights! So although all these sweeping morals and meanings are important, I challenge everyone to re-watch this and just revel in the cultural undertones!
Challenge accepted. Cultural undertone (maybe?) found.
There is this weird anthropomorphizing that goes on with the animals. Gena is described as a crocodile working in a zoo… as a crocodile. He is a animal who is simultaneously a responsible, productive member of society. He goes about his duties as a “working man” smoking a pipe and occasionally reading the paper, just like a typical human being.
At the start of his story, the canine protagonist of Heat of a Dog is analogous to a downtrodden but all the same human street Urchin. He thinks like a person and of course becomes an actual human as the story goes on.
Animals can be humanized in Russian culture because of a strong inclination towards transgression. Russian art LOVES it. It depicts the violation of boundaries between human and animal, and the destruction of distinction between social classes. It romanticizes the obliteration of societal divisions which keep people alone and friendless.
I discussed some of these ideas with Professor Gillispie yesterday and she mentioned that Cheburashka really sums up these themes. His species fits into no scientific categorization, and he is therefore a catalyst for unification. He plays an integral role in bringing people together, because, like them, he doesn’t fit in with the standard order.
Ethan, this is terrific! Such interesting and perceptive comments on the way the human-animal boundary is transgressed in so many works of Russian culture–often for the purpose of subtle (or not so subtle) social or political critique! So interesting!
To your final question, I think that the answer is yes, and your blog post did a very nice job of convincing me of such. The unity and the friendship which you point out were not only integral parts of the film’s message, but were, in fact, directly placed as being the ONLY parts of consequence. I think this is demonstrated in one of the final moments of the film, in which the builders admit that the actual product of their work has little purpose, since it was their work which had brought them together. In a sense, work itself is painted as the loot upon which friendship and unity is spun, and value is taken entirely from the practical fruits of labor, in this case, the house.
It is striking how the film was obviously intended for children, yet it carries influences of social realism, which is quite interesting. There was a lack of trust and compassion, a convoluted consequence of the Stalin era. That being said, the children’s characters focusing on working together and subtly forcing the idea that work is the best thing to do is a result of social realism.
I like your acknowledgement of the older Soviet influences upon the work. To supplement your analysis, I find the cartoon contains a wishful justification for the disconnect between Soviet state values and methods used to realize them. Take the construction of the friendless asylum. From a pure narrative perspective, the structure is ubiquitous: a group of heroes sets off on a quest (build a house to end friendlessness), encounters setbacks en route (Shapoklyak’s antics), and grow more from the journey than the final destination (everyone made friends during construction, rendering the house unnecessary for its original purpose). A message conveyed by this plot is that hard work and persistence can lead to desirable outcomes, even when the efforts superficially advance a simplistic, arbitrary, or pointless endeavor. In the context of the Brezhnev era, it had become apparent that the state system had failed to realize its promises of equality and prosperity for the working class. Under such circumstances, it was easy to be skeptical of where the fruits of one’s labor lay and what was even the point of working in the first place. In this context, Cheburashka stands as a call for faith in well-intended projects and a warning that apathy might sabotage the benefits of good labor.
Oooh, Zach, I am so excited about the way you align the plot of Cheburashka with the master plot of the socialist realist novel–yet, this time, somehow distorted and diminished for the era of stagnation! And indeed, we have not a positive hero here, but an strangely indeterminate Cheburashka creature with large ears at the plot’s center! Your deeper analysis about the dangers of apathy is also truly insightful. Great stuff!
Gabe, an excellent and thoughtful post that definitely led to a fascinating discussion! Thank you for the great conversation starter!