I was speaking about this to a friend (this is neither here nor there, but he's a rather well-known artist who recently had an exhibition in England and just got back from Panama, where he was working for Russian TV). He's about 45. His view is "WEll, what do you prefer? Do you want a lot of choices in goods, or do you want cheap stuff and lots of leisure time? It's all a matter of viewpoint." His stuff was all shown in the USSR in secret underground exhibitions probably secretly observed by the KGB, but says that it is worse being an artist now, "because you have to be a whore."
I was never there, but I get the impression that the post-Stalin pre-glasnost USSR was considerably less repressive than it was depicted in the West. For instance, while technically jazz and rock music were banned, nobody actually enforced those laws. You used to have guys walking through music stores selling people Beatles and Black Sabbath records out of bags. A friend of mine used to go to university dances around 1980, and they would play disco and Yaz.
On another note, anybody who talks about "ugly Stalinist architecture" has obviously never seen any. They're probably thinking of Brezhnev or Khruschev-era buildings, which are crap. In Moscow, anyway, the Stalin-era stuff is amazing. The metro is like a friggin' cathedral -- candelbrae, mosaics, stained glass everywhere, paintings, sculpture. The Seven Towers that dominate the Moscow skyline are all Stalin-era and they are impressive to say the least, big hammer and sickles notwithstanding. The House of Socialism, which to this day houses the descendents of old Bolsheviks, is modeled after Le Corbusier. Stalin did not fuck around when it came to building stuff.
Chris Doss The Russia Journal --------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 11:59:27 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Seay <entheogens at yahoo.com> Subject: Soviet Union Better Than Yeltsin WAS Lenin
It is not hard for me to believe that the Soviet Union was preferable to Yeltsinite Russia.
However, I have spoken to too many Russian coworkers who have described the SU in dismal terms to believe that the SU was a wonderful place to live.
So, I take it that the SU was just the lesser of two evils; not that the SU is something that revolutionaries would hope to return to.
For that matter, I can remember progressive Iranian students telling me that they were better off under the Shah than under Khomeini. At least, they could have some semblance of a life under the Shah. Yet, that does not mean Iranians should fight for the return of the Shah. It just means that the Shah was the lesser of two evils, as it turned out.
Thomas