I think you're mixing things up. Simon's talking about avant-garde modernism in particular, not high culture in general. Soviet society was big on the classics, not on radical artistic innovation, with some exceptions.
--- Wojtek Sokolowski <sokol at jhu.edu> wrote:
>
> I think there was much more in it that you give it a
> credit for. The Soviet
> cultural policy was decidedly against western
> commercial culture, but in
> favor of classical culture, both domestic and
> foreign. I recall, for
> example, a HS textbook on the history of music that
> went into great depth
> discussing classical composers and music traditions
> all over the world, and
> had one (sic!) brief section on rock'n'roll which
> described it as a rather
> amateurish form of music whose main value was "self
> satisfaction of those
> who play it." Most cities had theaters, operas or
> concert halls, the
> tickets were dirt cheap because of state subsidies,
> and factories often
> distributed them for free to their employees. I
> agree that there was an
> unmistakable 19th century "nation-building" effort
> in it, but there was also
> a great deal of international classics in it. So
> saying that was about
> "hygiene" and "great works" is misleading - there
> was a genuine effort to
> introduce "high culture" to the masses.
>
> I may add that these efforts were for the most part
> throwing pearls before
> swine, because all that the masses cared about was a
> bottle of vodka,
> mega-kitschy "soap operas" imported from Latin
> America and the US, and the
> "amateurish" rock'n'roll - but that is a different
> story.
>
> Wojtek
>
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
Nu, zayats, pogodi!
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com