In Soviet times, there certainly does seem to be a tension between the natural world and human existence which was less apparent in pre-soviet literature and poetry. I first noticed this in the Mayakovsky Poem “Great Big Hell of a City,” where liquid is described as “oozing” from the “Sun’s hurt eye.” There is something terribly perverse about this image. The poet is applying a sense of illness, and therefore, imperfection to the natural world.

This is taken to a whole new level in the Kolyama tales. Here, the season of spring and the advent of natural life are described in beautiful, yet similarly visceral terms at certain point. The description of how “The slender fingers of the larch with their green fingernails seemed to grope everywhere” and how “the omnipresent, oily freweed carpeted the scenes of former forest blazes” both invoke intensely lively images with strangely sinister imagery. Nature is “omnipresent,” and “gropes.” It reaches about, glutting itself on the carnage of “former forest blazes.” In a sense life is being painted as a scavenger in the way it persists in the wake of a changing landscape, or worse, as being something cannibalistic.

Weirdly enough, the way nature is described here in subtly unnerving ways is actually reflected by the human characters in In The Night. They pull a dead body out from a pile of rock after dining of “breadcrumbs” which are described as being coated “greedily in thick layers of saliva.” They eat a meal which is described in dehumanizing, animal terms, and proceed to scavenge off of a dead human being. They, like the natural world, are being ensnared by the writer in a state of devolution.

I’m not sure what exactly these artistic choices mean. However, I did some research on Shalamov, and found that he spent time in the Gulag and was a supporter of Trotsky. Considering his political leanings, he couldn’t have been a fan of Stalin. Perhaps then that the way he depicts mother nature and human nature as being degraded into a state of scavenging could be a metaphor for the Stalanist regime reduces human beings to the state of frightened animals desperate to survive.

Despite its short length, “In the Night”, is an immensely powerful and unsettling story.  Throughout the story’s narration, Shalamov’s attention to detail, use of sensory, and tone causes the story to deeply impact and resonate with the reader.

The first image in the story, that of “Glebov lick[ing] the bowl and brush[ing] the bread crumbs.. into his left left palm…Without swallowing, he felt each miniature fragment of bread in his mouth coated greedily with a thick layer of saliva” is explained in such methodic detail, that the image Shalamov describes can be easily imagined by the reader.  Moreover, the comment that “taste was an entirely different thing” further inserts the reader into the narrative  by activating both senses of sight and taste.  This use of sensory through Shalamov’s detailed narration creates and intimate experience for the reader, drawing him or her in, allowing the remainder of the story to further impact the reader.

As the story progresses, Shalamov uses a rather dry, “matter of the fact” tone which is particularly haunting given the circumstances that the characters currently face.  This tone highlights the ‘new normal’ of the gulag and the alarming way in which prisoners become accustomed/indifferent to their way of life.  In particular, Glebov questioning his own past and commenting “not only the habit of judgement was lost, but even the habit of observation” demonstrates how the prison has stripped the characters of their individualism and that they are now consumed by their new reality.

The matter-of-factness that Shalamov projects is most haunting then the corpse is introduced to which Bagretsov simply remarks “he’s a young one”.  It is almost has if the scenario, finding and essentially pickpocketing and robbing a corpse is a mundane, everyday aspect of life in the story.  The feeling of normalcy is most obvious when Glebov is carrying the dead man’s underwear in an attempt to sell it in order to smoke.  The fact that an act as mundane as smoking is juxtaposed to an image as drastic as taking a corpse’s underwear demonstrates to the reader the dire circumstances being experienced.

As the ending credits of Burnt by the Sun rolled onto the screen, a single tear also rolled down my right cheek. This film really pulled at my heart strings. By the end, I had forgotten that it was based on historical figures, but the ending reminded me just how pervasive and cruel Stalin’s rule over the Soviet Union. The characters in the film were not just fabricated for the plot but real people that suffered. Like a hot sun in the sky, the revolution did not discriminate when it came to persecution, all victims of its constant siege. The scene with Colonel Kotov and his young daughter, Nadya, stood out to me.

The director uses feet to illustrate the emphasis and need for youth in Stalinist Russia. While caressing his daughter’s soft foot in his own calloused hands and with a hint of sadness in his eyes, Kotov says, “Because we’re building up Soviet power for that… so, that all their lives… people will have feet like yours”. The phrase ‘all their lives’ demonstrates that real Soviet potential can only be attained by young people untainted by the hardships of the revolution and hard life. Those that know only the joys and fruits of the revolution can survive. ‘Building up power for that’ reveals that even the general knows his work and the efforts of other revolutionaries are not meant to celebrate in the country that helped create. They simply serve as steps for those with soft feet to walk on to reach Soviet greatness. Nadya’s young foot at the center of the frame amplifies these sentiments.

In “Burnt by the Sun,” there were many calm, peaceful scenes that juxtaposed the theme of terror in the film. The first scene where this appears was on of the first scenes in the film. The scene of the child singing an elegant song is roughly cut to a child running from tanks of the soviet army. This scene displayed foreshadowing of this theme in the rest of the film. Furthermore, the urgency of the gas drill with everyone frantically running to put gas masks on is contrasted by the peaceful image of Sergei and Nadya floating on a river in silence and peace.  The contrast in these scenes related to the overall theme of the film. The calm, peaceful life of the great General Kotov, a well respected and powerful general in the army, seems to be protected from the terror that has been created by Stalin. After all, Sergei can stop many tanks with strict orders from driving across wheat fields. He is ultimately not safe from the Secret police. The Final calm scene is Sergei in his dressing room staring at a picture of him and Stalin, a trusted companion. Sergei even has Stalin’s direct line. Overall, theses scenes show that no one is safe from the terror of Stalin and his rule. 

I found it ironic that the first line of text seen in the short propagandistic cartoon is how fascism leads to the mass destruction, starvation, and death of millions of people. I far more closely link starvation to the Soviet Union and the Russia before it than I do to Nazi Germany. The actual creature that is symbolizing the fascists is a pig/wolf hybrid. I thought of this as an interesting choice as it is supposed to be menacing but the connotations associated with pigs are far more related to greed and how disgusting they are. I also find the fact that the Soviets are represented as horsemen and tanks as an interesting choice. The first thing I think of is the Bronze Horseman of St. Petersburg/Leningrad. This is most likely the reason why, however horsemen don’t seem to be an intimidating/futuristic force and I don’t feel match the Soviet Union’s theme of industry and development like the tanks. The fact that the tanks are breaking down trees can be seen as a symbol that Russia is urbanizing and making economic capital from its natural resources. The ending of the short cartoon sees some soviet airplanes flying into the sky into what seems to be like heaven. This is a interesting choice as religion was ridiculed in the Soviet Union. If I’m not mistaken I think this same song was featured in the Russian film “Wings” from 1966 which would definitely be an interesting development to the meaning/ending of that film!

I had several questions and notably moments while watching the film. Firstly it is important to note that Mitya’s introduction into the movie is a very unique but also very revealing of his role. The character is ushered into the movie with a costume while traveling with the propagandist group “the pioneers.” The band is carrying images of Stalin: signifying Mitya’s connection to the Soviet Ruler through his work as the secret police. The fact that he is costumed is ironic as throughout the movie he is “in a costume” in a sense, hiding his true identity. Another scene I found interesting is the one with Mitya and the wife playing piano with the gas masks. Mitya doesn’t remove his mask still developing the disguised motif. However it’s a shocking scene with the happy music and the scary/off-putting masks. I think this speaks to the reality of the times and this is seen consistently though-out the film. although this movie is set in a time of great fear due to the Stalin purges there are constant funny and lighthearted moments throughout the film. Specifically Mitya’s entrance scene. the large lady on the stretcher, and how Kotov thought he walked in to his wife having sex with Mitya but it was instead some wacky music being played. Overall I think the contrast of the lighthearted film with the eminent doom awaiting is a unique contrast in the film. I was wondering if the pioneers were a real group. I was also wondering if the gas attack drills actually happened. There seems to be a sense of satire similar to what is seen in “Jojo Rabbit,” and I constantly thought of that film while watching this one.

Anna Akhmatova’s last poem in her selected works, “Epilogue,” is very powerful in its resounding solemn and heartfelt remembrance for her experiences. Particularly,  with the secret police and other terrors of the Stalin era, as well as serving as a remembrance for the people who lived through it alongside her.

In the first lines of the poem, Akhmatova describes the response of the body to fear. This is her way of delving into her self- awareness. She notes that suffering begins to show on the face, “how faces droop, how terror looks out from under the eyelids, how suffering carves on cheeks…how curls ash-blonde and black turn silver overnight”(287). This physical change caused by the collective pain notes the immortality of people. This also shows the inevitability of death and the passing of time. She also notes the tension of that time, which is present in her description of smiles on submissive lips and the presence of fear in a dry laugh. She highlights the feeling of empty existence in this time in her life, along with those who experienced this with her. She continues her awareness of her physical body to a psychological one, where she immerses herself in her memories. This alludes back to the beginning of the collection, with this  poem serving as a type of requiem.

I also think that Akhmatova uses imagery to her advantage, where she subtly alludes to important details of Stalinist rule. Her conclusion to the poem, ending with “let the melting snow stream, like tears from my bronze eyelids, let the prison dove call in the distance and the boats go quietly on the Neva” (288), juxtaposes her desire to keep the memories of the time and the people alive. Additionally, her description of bronze eyelids evoke warmth and a tinge of hope, which greatly opposes the cold and bitter steel, which alludes to Stalin. Her way of expressing her persistence in keeping these places untouched by her presence shows her disdain in staining them with her memories. These contrasting ideas of  wanting her experiences to be eternal and not wanting to disturb the presence of the places she mentioned  illuminates the tension she feels for her memories. Overall, her poem encapsulates emotions that are haunting and beautiful.

Coming fresh off the heels of the discussion about the transformation of Soviet Propaganda, the harsh criticisms of Stalin and the regime that was abducting and dispatching political prisoners left and right stood in stark contrast to the glorification of that same regime we observed in the posters. While writing may not seem to be propagandistic at first glance, the vivid imagery used in Mandelstam’s We Live Without Feeling evokes a negative impression of the forces in power.

We Live Without Feeling is a devastating poem that highlights the terrors that were enacted in order to maintain a political status quo, eliminating anyone who spoke out and disagreed with the party. The purpose was to cut at the notion of a morally superior leader, which Stalin relied on in order to maintain the admiration and respect of his people. By portraying the Stalin and his hitmen in an explicitly negative light, Mandelstam thus delegitimized Stalin’s position as a morally sound leader.

The explicit criticism of the party and thus Stalin were the depictions of him as a worm-fingered, cockroach-eyed jackbooted despot. This was meant as a counter to the standard imagery that was usually shown of Stalin, like that one picture of him with the girl whose parents he sent to the gulags that we spoke about in class. Another explicit criticism of Stalin and his regime was the line “every execution is a feast for him,” which was meant to expose and denounce his penchant for the execution of his political prisoners, as well as cast doubts on his portrayal as a loving, caring figurehead of the party. Again, this portrayal as a bloodthirsty maniac was meant to run counter to the state media’s portrayal of Stalin as a father-like figure that everybody should look up to.

Finally, Mandelstam’s use of the phrase “semi-humans” was meant as criticism of the guards who carried out Stalin’s actions, but it also reflected poorly on Stalin, for how could a man of the people associate himself with semi-humans and acts that were so violent and cruel.

Overall, We Live Without Feeling was a strong, piercing piece of propaganda that opposed the positive portrayals of Stalin and his regime, instead hitting on the cruelty and hypocrisy of appearance that was rampant under Stalin

In Anna Akhmatova’s poems, the simplicity of her writing style and the raw details convey with great clarity and powerful emotion the grief and suffering she and many others faced during the terror of Stalinist rule. To Death is Akhmatova’s address to death itself; she uses direct language to invite death to come and convey her despair and submission to her fate. The motifs of poison, disease, and nausea to symbolize death, the pole star to symbolize destiny, and eyes to communicate fear make the poem extremely accessible and display the raw emotions and inevitability of death. Akhmatova also uses a simple writing style to create a clear contrast between defeated and lifeless nature and material. In Dedication, Akhmatova writes about the dichotomy between nature and the strength of the negative material aspects of society, such as prisons. She writes that the “mountains bend before this grief, the great river does not flow”; nature becomes a clear parallel for the people living through the Stalinist terror who are more “lifeless than the dead”. The oppressiveness of Stalinist rule is symbolized through the theme of prisons in this poem. The use of locks, keys, and captivity strongly communicate how people felt trapped and condemned to a miserable fate. I though it was very interesting how Akhmatova used clearly defined symbols and simple language to create sophisticated and nuances poems that are deeply evocative of separation and grief of the time period. The accessibility, simplicity, and raw emotion in  Akhmatova’s poems creates a sense of solidarity between herself and the audience and conveys the universality of the suffering during this time.