CC BY
40Copyright © 2016 by Academic Publishing House Researcher
W TT
I
Published in the Russian Federation
International Journal of Media and Information Literacy
Has been issued since 2016.
E-ISSN: 2500-1051
Vol. 1, Is. (2), pp. 75-107, 2016
DOI: 10.13187/ijmil.2016.2.75 www.ejournal46.com
Western Cinema in the Mirror of the Soviet Film Criticism *
Alexander Fedorov a > *
a Rostov State University of Economics, Russian Federation
Abstract
Film criticism was prestigious job in the USSR. At that time there was no Internet and critic can be published only on paper. And this was due to: 1) a professional status of the author (in this case it had to be, as a rule, a graduate film critic, art historian, journalist, or have higher education in the humanitarian field); 2) with a rigid selection and censorship of texts and themes.
The author analyzes how western cinema was reflected in the mirror of the Soviet critics (for example, thematic books' collection of Myths and Reality: 1966-1989). This, in particular, problems of ideological struggle, and the political censorship in the socio-cultural context of the 196os-198os and on how Soviet critics, specializing in foreign films, to respond to these factors. The author concludes that were characteristic of the official Soviet cinema studies, facing the material foreign movie: 1) sympathetic support "progressive western filmmakers", 2) sharp criticism of "bourgeois tendencies and perversions", 3) criticism of bourgeois society.
The eleventh edition of the collection Myths and Reality showed, finally, that the Soviet film studies of the late 1980s was ready for deprived ideological bias in analysis of foreign cinema. This line was continued in the post-Soviet years, no longer in the Myths and Reality, but on the pages of scientific journals Film Criticism Notes and Cinema Art, in the film encyclopedia devoted to the western screen, in numerous monographs, the authors of which have become and authors of Myths and Reality.
Keywords: film criticism, USSR, USA, France, Italy, cinema, movie, cold war.
1. Introduction
Status of Soviet critics who wrote about the western movies
Film criticism was prestigious job in the USSR. At that time there was no Internet and critic can be published only on paper. And this was due to: 1) a professional status of the author (in this case it had to be, as a rule, a graduate film critic, art historian, journalist, or have higher education in the humanitarian field); 2) with a rigid selection and censorship of texts and themes.
But if even all journalists (including from regional newspapers) could write (and willingly wrote) about the western movies on the Soviet screen, only the selected Russian film critics could write about western films not purchased for the Soviet film distribution. Here criteria are much stricter because before the era of video (i.e., almost to 1980) only very few Soviet film critics could watch USA or French films not purchased for the Soviet film distribution, for example, at foreign film festivals. And these were those few Soviet film critics who belonged to a particular elite caste:
* Corresponding author
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. Fedorov)
government film officials, as a rule, members of the Communist Party, "morally and ideologically stable persons."
From this point of view is very significant architectural structure of Soviet film critics, for nearly a quarter of a century (1966 to 1989) to publish their articles in the special subject books' collection about western movie called Myths and Realities (11 issues: 1966; 1971; 1972; 1974; 1976; 1978; 1981; 1983; 1985; 1988; 1989).
2. Materials and methods
The main materials were: the books, articles of Russian film critics about Western cinema. The methods of theoretical research: classification, comparison, analogy, induction and deduction, abstraction and concretization, theoretical analysis and synthesis; methods of empirical research: collecting information related to the research subjects.
The effectiveness of such methods has been proven as the Western (R. Taylor, D. Youngblood, A. Lawton et al.), and Russian (N. Zorkaya, A. Kolesnikova, M. Turovskaya) researchers. I used also the method of hermeneutic analysis of the cultural context of media texts (Eco, 1976; Silverblatt, 2001).
3. Discussion
'Myths and Reality': Issue 1 (1966, put in a set in October 1965)
The first issue of Myths and Reality collection has been put in a set in October 1965 (already in power times of L. Brezhnev). The appearance of this collection seems to have been the result of not only the regular sharpening confrontation between the USSR and the West (the Cuban missile crisis, the Vietnam War), and the current regulations of the Communist Party Central Committee "On measures to improve the management of the development of artistic cinema" (July 1962) and "Immediate Tasks of party's ideological work" (June 1963). It was clearly stated that "the party will continue to wage an uncompromising struggle against any ideological vacillation, preaching peaceful coexistence of ideologies, anti-formalist trickery, dullness and craftsmanship in art, for the Party and the People's Soviet art - the art of socialist realism" (Immediate..., 1963).
Table 1. Main political events in the world (1961-1965 years), important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West, including cinema
1961 USSR sent a note of protest related to the anti-Castro landing in Cuba: April, 8. USSR successfully launched the world's first spacecraft with a man on board: April, 12. The construction of the Berlin Wall, August, 13. XXII Congress of the Soviet Communist Party: October, 17-31.
1962 Resolution of the Communist Party Central Committee "On measures to improve the management of the development of artistic cinema": July, 19. Cuban Missile Crisis ended with evacuation of Soviet missiles from Cuba in exchange for a US promise to abandon its occupation: Oct.-Nov.
1963 Treaty between the USSR and the USA on the establishment of a "hot" telephone line between Moscow and Washington: June, 20. Resolution of the Plenum of the Communist Party Central Committee "Immediate Tasks in Party's ideological work": June. USSR temporarily (1963-1968) weakened jamming broadcasts Voice of America, BBC and Deutsche Welle in Russia. The murder of US President John F. Kennedy in Dallas: November, 24.
1964 US entry into the war in Vietnam: August, 2. N. Khrushchev lost of power at the plenum of the Communist Party Central Committee. L. Brezhnev elected (on the same plenum) the first secretary of the Soviet Communist Party: October, 14.
1965 Soviet Union in the framework of a confrontation with the United States put North Vietnam Missiles: April, 5.
The first issue of Myths and Reality was a response to the appeals of the Communist Party for "uncompromising fight against any ideological vacillation, preaching peaceful coexistence of ideologies" and "corrupting influence of the bourgeois cinema". The article by the then first deputy chairman of USSR State Committee for Cinematography V. Baskakov had the eloquent title "Battle of ideas". The text of this article gives many quotations from the works of Western film critics and directors, but without reference to the source. And further (already without any quotes) he quite radically stated that "bourgeois theorists put equal signs between cowardice and heroism, between truth and falsehood, between revolutionary activity and philistinism, between nobility and baseness. No one can prove the absoluteness of moral criteria: everything is relative, everything is conditional, all unstable and shaky, they claim, denying, in essence, humanism art. Many films are made in accordance with the views of these theorists. ... We can see an interesting cinematic solutions, achieve virtuosity in the shooting, the depth and subtlety of acting performance. But the search itself, the purpose of it, the true content of the film is very far from the serious social and purely human problems that exist in everyday life, in reality. ... It's a shame that the great potential of artists aimed primarily at autopsy and investigation of the strange particulars of human anomalies and psychological abysses, not social and moral conflicts of the society in which the characters live. ... That's the idea of running these movies: "Every evil brings a new evil, and in vain to deal with it." "Human nature is flawed, is low-lying and is incurable." "Progress and civilization bring people only suffering. Any public act of senseless" (Baskakov, 1966: 17-18).
Accused Western cinema on the "theoretical level", V. Baskakov have tried to confirm the analysis of his reflections on examples of movies such masters as M. Antonioni, I. Bergman, J.-L. Godard, C. Chabrol, A. Varda. And here he has not stinted on the critical charge: "Antonioni fails to understand phenomena and social contradictions of life, which he is likely to see. Fragmentation of vital relationships, rigorous analysis and gravitas in the depiction of small, minor, and maintenance of an important, significant: that is, perhaps, more characteristic for the entire work of this talented director" (Baskakov, 1966: 21). "Carefully, with cruel naturalistic pressure Bergman depicts sex scenes, and seeking to link with the overall mood of the film: everything is bad in this life, all the ugly, and above all the ugly and disgusting man himself, his nature. Bergman uses the whole arsenal of graphic tools of cinema, which he owns, for purposes not great. To illustrate the idea of leading the modern decadence of baseness, vulgarity and insignificance of human nature, this is hardly needed such a thin and highly professional agents"(Baskakov, 1966: 25).
Reserved praised Umbrellas of Cherbourg by Jacques Demy, Married Life by André Cayatte, Tom Jones by Tony Richardson, Room at the Top by Jack Clayton, films of Stanley Kramer (Baskakov, 1966: 9-11, 29), Baskakov found the Western countries, where it was possible to detect not only the bourgeois but also a progressive movie: "The progressive Italian art still lives and develops, although some of the artists who put movies about Italian people living in the surroundings of the boycott of progressive art in an atmosphere of hype about "economic miracle" has moved to the rails of bourgeois cinematography (with its pseudo-historical movies, dramas and contemporary sex films). The most fundamental artists associated with the life and struggle of the people, continue to strengthen the tradition of realistic cinema. Best picture "old men": Zavatinni and De Sica, Visconti and De Santis, Castellani and Rossellini, Germi and Comencini; young directors: Rosi and Loy are vivid evidence. ... And if the pictures of decadent directors raised by bourgeois criticism on a pedestal as the prophets and new roads in art, permeates the thought of the futility of any action, any manifestation of activity, the futility of the struggle for the happiness of man, the beating pulse of life in the films of progressive directors and in some cases, the pulse of the struggle for a better future of man and society" (Baskakov, 1966: 5-6).
This reliance on the "progressive cinema in Italy" let V. Baskakov do quite standard for the Soviet press of that time concluded that "the development of world cinema still more clearly confirms the decisive role for the prospects for its art of socialist as well as art of the artists of the capitalist countries, who cast their lot with the most advanced ideas of the century, involved in the struggle for social transformation of the world, believe in the person who let another do not always consistently and consciously, but claim the ideals of peace and humanity and denounce the morality of a society based on oppression and suppression of human" (Baskakov, 1966: 31).
Being on the Soviet cinema's top leadership, V. Baskakov, undeniably brilliant oriented in the ideological conjuncture of time. His article can probably be regarded as a reference for
understanding the official Soviet cinema studies, facing the material foreign cinema: 1) sharp criticism of "bourgeois tendencies and perversions", 2) sympathetic support "progressive western filmmakers," that is, those in whose work can be it was observed that the criticism of bourgeois society, which does not contain at the same time anti-Soviet, naturalism, sex and "formalist trickery."
In a similar vein, an article written of the Secretary of the Board of the Soviet Union of Cinematographers A. Karaganov, who condemning western movies with scenes of violence and sex (Karaganov, 1966: 32-33), criticizing the complexity of shapes and pessimism Last year at Marienbad by Alain Robbe-Grillet and Alain Resnais (Karaganov, 1966: 46-47), supporting Italian Neorealism (Karaganov, 1966: 49) and Stanley Kramer movies On the Beach and Judgment at Nuremberg (Karaganov, 1966: 70-72).
Here are concrete examples of the ideological position of A. Karaganov: "In contrast to the neo-realists Antonioni withdraws person from the historical flow of the real social environment. Movies of Antonioni (Scream, Adventure, Night, Eclipse) made expertly, this is the product of a strong and soulful talent. But their life is narrowed to study the content of the soul from the disunion of human society. Fellini ... is more social in Dolce Vita and Nights of Cabiria" (Karaganov, 1966: 50, 60).
A similar opinion is held the other author of the first issue of Myths and Reality -philosopher E. Weizman (1918-1977). Accusing bourgeois cinema in repelling harmful ideas of existentialism, Freudianism and surrealism, he argued that "the myth of the miserable human nature obscured reality" (Weitzman, 1966: 88).
A recognized expert in the field of French cinema A. Braginsky very strongly presented to Soviet readers the results of the French "new wave" cinema, exposing a particularly severe criticism movies of J.-L. Godard and C. Chabrol. So, in the paragraph dedicated to Cousins, stated that "ambiguity, inaccuracy of the author's position, manifested in this Chabrol's film" is general characteristic of the directors of "new wave" (Braginsky, 1966: 129) and "sadism and cruelty which allegedly wants to condemn Chabrol, the truth of life, which he allegedly looking through subjects of his movies, it turns against Chabrol. ... Chabrol's "true" private observation becomes a lie due to lack of a clear attitude towards life. The pseudo-philosophers and anarchic attitude replaced the credibility of the individual parts and the initial position"(Braginsky, 1966: 130).
Since thousands of Soviet readers of the book Myths and Reality, as a rule, had no chance to see the movies of "new wave", many of them were probably quite easy to convince that "characters of Godard's film are only obedient puppets in the hands of its creator. They are infected with the same nihilism and anarchism, as their creator, and "new wave" is in a severe ideological crisis network" (Braginsky, 1966: 131, 133)
R. Sobolev wrote about the fashionable in the West cinéma vérité movement more critical. Based on the analysis of the films "fascist and cynic Gualtiero Jacopetti", he argued that it was cinéma vérité is a mask for liars, as a sort of sabotage against realism under the guise of realism"(Sobolev, 1966: 143).
Against the backdrop of all these revelations and accusations of bourgeois cinema article of V. Nedelin entirely dedicated to the analysis of "complex and contradictory" Fellini 8 V2 looked serious and contrast (Nedelin, 1966: 205-226).
In the era of socialism, there are not only approved the scheme of ideological approaches to Western cinema as a whole, but also to write finals relevant books and articles. The degree of ideological accusations of Western film production can be arbitrarily high, but the ending was sure to contain at least a paragraph optimistic pathos reminds the reader of the "progressive trends in world cinema": "Hopefully, the democratic traditions of the French cinematography will prevail, and we will see films in which the young masters of French cinema truly reflect the lives, hopes, anxieties, dreams of the people" (Braginsky, 1966: 133). "A progressive cinema bourgeois has a vivid example of service to high humanistic ideals, the realistic traditions and needs of our time" (Parsadanov, 1966: 124).
'Myths and Reality': Issue 2 (1971, put in a set in September 1970)
Between the output of the first and second editions of Myths and Reality collection took five long years. During this time many important political events have been in the world (the war in
Vietnam and the Middle East, May Revolution in France, the suppression of the "Prague Spring", the landing Americans on the moon and so forth.).
Table 2. Key political events in the world of 1966-1970, important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West. Events in the USSR, which had relevance to the cinema
1966 France's withdrawal from NATO's military organization: February, 21. XXIII Congress of the Soviet Communist Party: March, 29 - April, 8. French President Charles de Gaulle's visit to the USSR: June, 20 - July, 1. Start of the "cultural revolution" (1966-1976) in China: August, 8.
1967 War in the Middle East, the Soviet Union break diplomatic relations with Israel: July, 5-10. Soviet Communist Party Central Committee Resolution "On measures for further development of the social sciences and enhance their role in the building of communism": August, 14.
1968 Mass unrest in France (the reason: the dismissal of the director of the Paris Cinematheque): May. Renewed Soviet jamming broadcasts Voice of America and other Western radio stations in USSR: August, 20. Begin of the Soviet invasion in Czechoslovakia, August, 21.
1969 Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On increasing the responsibility of the heads of the press, radio and television, film, culture and art institutions for the ideological and political level of the published materials and repertoire": January, 7. The armed conflict between the Soviet Union and China on the Sino-Soviet border: March. The landing of American astronauts on the moon: July, 20. Start of the Soviet-American talks on limiting strategic nuclear weapons: November, 17.
1970 Solemnly-pathetic celebration of the 100th anniversary of the birth of V. Lenin, April, 22. The signing of the Treaties of the USSR and Germany, Germany and Poland on the recognition of post-war borders in Europe, August. Distribution of the Vietnam War on the territory of Cambodia. Dissident A. Solzhenitsyn was awarding of the Nobel Prize for Literature.
As for the movie, here a significant impact on the development of Soviet critics had a Soviet Communist Party Central Committee Resolution "On measures for further development of the social sciences and enhance their role in the building of communism" (1967, August, 14).
However, I believe that Czechoslovakia's events of 1968-1969 were the most serious impacts on the situation in the cinema and film studies in the Soviet Union. The attempt of democratization of social life, the abolition of censorship taken by the Czechoslovak leadership in 1968, representing a serious danger to the ideological foundations of the Soviet Union and established strict canons of "socialist realism", in particular.
Of course, the introduction of Soviet troops (or rather, the Warsaw Pact troops) on the territory of Czechoslovakia and its subsequent "Brezhnevization" socialism seems to be stabilized in this small country. However, the ideological leadership of the USSR was well aware that "Prague Spring" is a kind of "thaw", passed in this spring, which with great difficulty managed to freeze. That is why the events of the "Prague Spring" brought an end to the flow of thaw in the USSR: the censorship has become even more severe, and the fight against "bourgeois ideology" has become even more intensively.
Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee (1969, January, 7) "On increasing the responsibility of the heads of the press, radio and television, film, culture and art institutions for the ideological and political level of the published materials and repertoire" was another step of censorship. If figuratively keep this resolution in one sentence, you get something like this: "Now none of the bourgeois mouse does not slip past the implacable Soviet censorship." A movie where "embellished orders in the modern capitalist world, idealized capitalist way of life preached by the bourgeois idea of class peace" (Resolution..., 1969) have been entirely banned in the Soviet Union. Interestingly enough, this embellishment was not just the direct promotion of the
"bourgeois lifestyle", but any artistic liberties, including experiments with cinematic form (see more info: Fedorov, 2012), nudity or coarse mot. The Resolution wrote also about the activities of "wrong" Soviet artists who "depart from the class criteria in assessing and highlighting the complex social and political problems, facts and events, and sometimes become carriers of the views that are alien to the ideology of socialist society" (Resolution..., 1969). The Resolution says that it is necessary "more acute, with the class and party positions to oppose all manifestations of bourgeois ideology to actively and efficiently promote communist ideals, the advantages of socialism, the Soviet way of life, deeply analyze and expose the different kind of petty and revisionist currents." (Resolution... , 1969).
So, the ideological leaders of Soviet cinema decided that the second issue of Myths and reality must have more harsh criticism of the bourgeois cinema, and the active support of the foreign progressive films must be in opposition.
The article of V. Baskakov in this case can be considered as the answer for the Resolution. He argued that "true art does not compromise with decadence, does not avoid direct and clear judgments about the phenomena of reality, does not go away from the problems of its people living in the mystical world of signs, premonitions and associations. ... And if the picture directors-decadents raised by bourgeois criticism on the podium as models and examples of "innovation", filled with doubts in favor of any action, any manifestation of activity and preach the futility of the struggle for the happiness of man, the beating pulse of life in the films of progressive directors and in some cases, the pulse of the struggle for a better future of man and society" (Baskakov, 1971: 9-10).
And V. Baskakov gave the examples of "socially clear positions" in the western movies: social drama Battle of Algiers by G. Pontecorvo and Sitting Right by V. Dzurlini (Baskakov, 1971: 29-31).
However, despite the support of a progressive cinema (i.e, close to the Socialist Realism), the main content of the article was, of course, passages criticizing the bourgeois cinema. First, V. Baskakov sincerely regretted that "the whole picture of European Screen has transformed in recent years. Films, which put the real social problems, it becomes smaller. But there were an abundance of pseudo-realistic movies: they present the appearance of life surroundings, ... but authentic truth is not in these films" (Baskakov, 1971: 6).
Then film critic gave more specific examples, and even the theoretical generalizations. Thus he rightly pointed out that "the on-screen world occurred a phenomenon that can be simplistically called diffusion: the interpenetration of different stylistic techniques, thematic and ideological and philosophical currents. Diffusion phenomenon takes many different shades: modernist techniques of cinema penetrate the style of entertainment, the so-called commercial cinema" (Baskakov, 1971: 17-18).
But then he unleashes his anger on the western masters of the first row, accusing them of compromises for the sake of the needs and interests of the bourgeois public (Baskakov, 1971: 18). The analysis of L. Bunuel, P.-P. Pasolini, F. Fellini, M. Antonioni films was the illustration for this thesis (Baskakov, 1971: 18-28).
V. Baskakov sought to convince readers that "capitalism rots, the whole system is built on lies and oppression, and the artist, with his microscope, the lens of which fall into a stirring ciliates, it seems that mankind is rotting" (Baskakov, 1971: 16).
As always V. Baskakov strongly criticized J.-L. Godard, one of the most politicized Western directors of those years: "In a society that draws Godard, no classes, no social contradictions. There is a mad world, consisting of patients, distraught individuals. ... This is impressive picture of deformities, abnormalities bourgeois world, but Godard as crazy gunner, shooting in all directions, without looking into the essence of phenomena that affect his bullet" (Baskakov, 1971: 12-13).
Of course, many Western authors were accused in "ideological sabotage": "Unique phenomenon of cinema politicization can be observed along with the boom of sex... It is true that many of these films are made from the standpoint of the bourgeois. ... Many of the so-called "political" films contain direct or indirect criticism of socialism from the "right" and sometimes from the "left" (Baskakov, 1971: 8). For official Soviet film criticism the communist foundations is the worst in the Western political cinema (for example, Confessions by Costa-Gavras).
G. Kapralov accused M. Antonioni, R. Bresson, M. Bellocchio and S. Samperi in the absence of social analysis: Blow Up "Antonioni consistently asocial. But precisely because of its asocial it turns into an image of a certain universal absurdity of human existence in general, reflected a certain mystification of a comprehensive law on which supposedly lives a modern world"
(Kapralov, 1971: 44). G. Kapralov accused of ambiguity and the loss of the social significance of the drama Fists in the Pocket by M. Bellocchio and Thank You, Aunt by S. Samperi (Kapralov, 1971: 5156), and further noted with regret of I. Bergman "complexity of the construction of Persona, deliberate obscurity, encoding its language" (Kapralov, 1971: 68).
G. Kapralov arguing, without any citation of primary sources, that "the invasion of schizophrenic characters has a consequence of the objective conditions of life of the modern bourgeois world, where, according to medical statistics, almost every second or third suffers from a serious mental disorder" (Kapralov, 1971: 55).
Another well-known Soviet film critic - G. Bohemsky wrote more rigid definitions about many Italian movies: sadism and pathology (Bohemsky, 1971: 87-90). And therefore "the urgent task of Marxist criticism is to repulse this wave of Italian screen: pathological cruelty, sadism, penetration of commercial cinema in the "ideology" (Bohemsky, 1971: 91).
Of course, along the way G. Bohemsky did not forget to praise the "progressive Italian cinema", for example, Battle of Algiers by G. Pontecorvo Sitting Right by V. Dzurlini and Martyrs of the Earth by V. Orsini (Bohemsky, 1971: 82). However, the main thesis of his article was the statement that "the most obvious new trends in Italian cinema are polarization: striking a sharp division in the frankly commercial, primitive and thoughtless film production, designed for the most undemanding audience, and on the other hand - the so-called "biased" or "recruited", cinema, i.e. films that serve certain ideas that carry a certain charge and now have a predominantly political overtones" (Bohemsky, 1971: 71).
After articles of film critics generals the book Myths and Reality gave the place for the article of another film critic (and co-author of M. Turovskaya and M. Romm in the documentary script "Ordinary Fascism") Y. Khanutin (1929-1978). Responding to V. Baskakov and G. Kapralov, Y. Khanutin boldly expressed his opinion about the "asocial Swedish cinema": "Yes, it records more often than analyze, yes, its artists just do not see the positive social decision-making, as well as their characters; a criticism limited in scope, does not rise to the radical revolutionary conclusions. But this criticism, this revelation is the truth" (Khanutin, 1971: 149).
The article of film critic V. Turitsyn also was without Soviet ideological stereotypes. This is very positively analysis of the works of British director T. Richardson (Turitsyn, 1971: 175-198).
But really very stranger in this book (as a kingdom of "celebration of the ideological struggle") was the text of I. Janushevskaya and V. Demin called "Formula adventure" (Janushevskaya, Demin, 1971: 199-228), mainly devoted to French actor Alain Delon. This was brilliantly written article which is palpable vivid imagery style of one of the most prominent soviet film critic Victor Demin (1937-1993). No words about "Resolutions" and "Ideology"... That is why there is nothing surprising in the fact that this Demin's publication was only one in the all 11 issues of Myths and Reality...
'Myths and Reality': Issue 3 (1972, put in a set in February 1972)
The third issue was released about a year after the second. However, during that time, there were two important events for the Soviet Union in the political life: the XXIV Congress of the Soviet Communist Party and the Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On Literary Criticism", directly related to the film criticism.
Table 3. The main political events of 1971-1972 years in the world that are important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West. Events in the USSR, which had relevance to the cinema
1971 105 Soviet diplomats accused of spying in United Kingdom. XXIV Congress of the Soviet Communist Party March, 30 - April, 9.
1972 Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On Literary Criticism": January, 21.
The Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On Literary Criticism" (1972) stated that "the level of the criticism is not fully meets the requirements, which are
determined by the increasing role of artistic culture in communist construction. ... Criticism debt it is depth analysis of the phenomenon, trends and patterns of contemporary art process in every possible way promote the strengthening of Leninist principles of nationality and party membership, to fight for the highest ideological and art levels of Soviet art, consistently oppose bourgeois ideologies" (Resolution ... , 1972).
Even the appearance of such Resolution indirectly talked about the fact that the effects of previous Resolutions of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee, relating to culture and ideology, were not recognized by the authorities fully effective. It took more time to indicate the professional critics (including film critics), they are still not sufficiently follow the "party line" strictly criticized inadequate cinema "decadent West."
Well, the Communist party said: "You must!" And Soviet film criticism official leaders said: "Yes, We will do!" Most texts of the third issue of Myths and Reality were about the ideological struggles with Western cinema. No texts V. Demin and Y. Khanutin in the book. The main authors were the film critics, proven in the ideological battles.
A. Karaganov claimed with directness of ideological front soldier that "now there literature and press is not a single policy, a single front of the ideological struggle: American bourgeois cinema directly serving the foreign policy and the US propaganda department. ... Hollywood is working on a well-defined theses of anti-Soviet propaganda: President by Lee Thompson, Topaz by A. Hitchcock, The Kremlin Letter by J. Huston. The "characteristic of modern art of the American bourgeoisie is commercially fair and salon-use entertainment cruelty motives" (Karaganov, 1972: 6-7, 15).
A. Karaganov made it clear that not everything is so simple even authorized to the Moscow Film Festival fiction movie 2001: A Space Odyssey: "Kubrick created a work fancifully combines features of Hollywood commercial thriller and philosophical works, in which the criticism of bourgeois reality becomes decadent character" (Karaganov, 1972: 21). In my opinion, this Karaganov's phrase gave a clear answer to the puzzled questions of some naive viewers do not understand why the film adaptation of the novel of A. Clarke never reached the Soviet screens...
However, A. Karaganov did not forget to praise the "progressive realistic films": They Shoot Horses, Don't They? by S. Pollack and The Liberation of L.B. Jones by W. Wyler (Karaganov, 1972: 7).
A. Karaganov went from the American movie to the French cinema. First, according to the established in the Soviet elite film studies tradition, he sharply reminded that "schismatic position, throwing Godard from one position to another, the substitution of revolutionary consciousness conglomerate anarchist, Maoist and Trotskyist ideas lead to the devaluation of the opposition to the bourgeois system, which proclaims Godard, to the emasculation of the revolutionary arguments about "proletarian cinema" (Karaganov, 1972: 25). And then Karaganov moved on to a much more dangerous trend of open and consistent anti-communism, which became the core of the famous film Confession (1970) by Costa Gavras, because it "helps bourgeois slander communism. It should be added that Yves Montand and Simone Signoret play the main role in the Confession. But they recently come to the Moscow film festivals with words of friendship and love for the Soviet Union, and now carefully trampling their past statements" (Karaganov, 1972: 30).
Moreover, when Moscow publishing house "Rainbow" released in 1984 a translation of the book French Cinema. Fifth Republic (1958-1978) by J.-P. Jancolas, which contained an impressive volume of the filmography of famous French film directors (1950s - 1970s), the names of Yves Montand and Simone Signoret were simply blacked out of the lists of films, where they played (as a rule, the main roles). It is clear that the Confession was not in the filmography also.
A. Karaganov made far-reaching conclusions that the "bourgeois propaganda in every way diminishes the accomplishments and inflates shortcomings in practical builders of socialism: the tends are to deprive the workers of hope and faith, to make their growing disillusionment with the bourgeois lifestyle disappointing total, turn it into a disbelief in the position drooping hands" (Karaganov, 1972: 29). And the "sexual revolution" of the bourgeoisie is the result of their aspirations and attempts to "underclass" the consciousness of the working people, to devalue human" (Karaganov, 1972: 27), the "mass culture in the hands of bourgeois often, very often turns out to be a dangerous and dark force. It shapes man model bourgeois philistine: it makes being spiritless, obedient slave of capital" (Karaganov, 1972: 4).
V. Baskakov wrote: "The silver screen has opposing forces and trends. The best films of the socialist countries, marked a vital truth, a high and effective humanism, product of progressive artists of the capitalist West, scourging capitalism ugliness and full of sympathy for the working people,
their needs, and aspirations of the young cinematography of developing countries confront a wide and muddy stream of poison bourgeois film production... With regard to the Western cinematography would be more correct to speak not of "commercial" and "non-commercial" cinema, but about the different types of the same bourgeois cinematography" (Baskakov, 1972: 75, 81).
As A. Karaganov, V. Baskakov devoted several paragraphs of his article to the anti-Soviet subject, arguing that the "anti-Soviet films produced more than before. ... It should be noted here that influential directors and actors of the bourgeois cinema trapped in the anti-Soviet orbit, ... the films with reactionary, anti-communist content" (Baskakov, 1972: 76-77).
Next V. Baskakov in his typical manner wrote that "the departure of many artists of the bourgeois world of the urgent problems of public life, the subordination of the political and commercial interests of the propertied classes have not been to the Western Film Arts in vain: Western cinema began to turn away from the mass audience" (Baskakov, 1972: 78).
And here the desired explicitly passed for real: the causes of falling box-office in the West in 1970s, of course, were different: not "waste of many artists of the bourgeois world from the pressing social problems of life" and their commercialization, but the rapid development of multichannel color television and the entertainment industry generally have reduced cinema attendance. A high films' box-office in the USSR in 1960s - 1970s was caused by precisely the relative underdevelopment of both entertainment, and television (the maximum number of Soviet television channels in 1970s was three, and Western films were shown there extremely rare). And that shortage of fun directs the flow of Soviet viewers in cinemas. As soon as the second half of the 1980s, video has come to the USSR, and expanded opportunities for recreation, cinema attendance began to fall...
V. Baskakov turned to his usual business: he accused eminent foreign cinema masters (Fellini, Pasolini, Bergman, etc.) of "biologism" and detachment from social problems: "Seeing in the surrounding life moral ugliness, vulgarity, hypocrisy, senseless cruelty, but without being able to see the social roots of all evil, they begin to ascribe to vices inherent in bourgeois society, the biological nature of man, thus declaring them unavoidable, eternal. ... Of course, Bergman's work reflects some real processes occurring in the modern bourgeois world. But his cinematic gaze turned to the man of estrangement, break away from the world in which he lives. Vicious, unconscious, strange becomes the main and for this director with a great artistic potentialities. A similar fate befell many other figures of the western movie, began his artistic life with severe, progressive films, but found themselves captive to bourgeois ideas" (Baskakov, 1972: 82, 84).
V. Baskakov was unhappy with the interpretation of anti-Nazi themes proposed in the films The Damned by L. Visconti and The Conformist by B. Bertolucci as "brutality and arbitrariness of Nazi leaders, or submission to the ordinary person of the state machine are supplied in terms of research subconscious complexes, overwhelmed by individuals belonging to a particular situation. It is often a pretext for actions and deeds (murder, betrayal, blackmail) are traumatized, homosexuality, schizophrenia, masochism. There is a substitution of concepts and objects. There is a consistent care from attempts to stigmatize Fascism past and present as a degradation product of the capitalist system" (Baskakov, 1972: 88).
Yes, Western filmmakers used the "personal and physiological factors" in social and political processes, and as a rule, the official Soviet cinema critics considered it a negative factor. Although, again, not always. For example, the sarcastic Italian detective Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion not only received a positive assessment from V. Baskakov, but also came out (albeit in a cropped version) on the Soviet screens. Although, if desired, Investigation... could be accused of "substitution of concepts", as the main hero of the film inherent in schizophrenia, and masochism, and "sexual licentiousness".
The line between permissible and impermissible was with nuances in the Soviet screens. For example (particularly in relation to the Italian filmmakers) Soviet censorship considered the authors' affiliation with the Communist Party, their attitude toward the Soviet Union, critical thinking about the state system of Western countries, etc. Thus, the lead actor in the movie Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion Volonte was a member of the Communist Party of Italy, he had anti-bourgeois attitudes, etc. And Soviet censorship encouraged many of his films for distribution on Soviet screens.
Praising the "progressive works by Italian filmmakers" (Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion, Metello, People Against) V. Baskakov in search of "progress" appealed to the American
cinema, noting that "the movie Arthur Penn (The Chase, Bonnie and Clyde) and John Schlesinger (Midnight Cowboy) not very deep, but still quite clearly reflected the crisis of the social system that spawned the cult of violence, mass crime, militant racism, arbitrariness of the authorities and the indifference of the inhabitants" (Baskakov, 1972: 92-93, 95).
In the end of his article V. Baskakov came to triumphantly optimistic conclusions, worthy to be a part of any Resolution of the Communist Party Central Committee: "The crisis, which is going through western cinema is ultimately a crisis of bourgeois ideology, evidence of its bankruptcy, failure to nurture the development of a genuine, realistic art, the art great truth of life. ... Class battles are in all continents. All the more clearly reveals the historical doom of capitalism with its inevitable companions: the exploitation of workers, national oppression, wars of conquest. Every people can see the clear perspective of the social and spiritual renewal of the world, which will bring a victory of communism" (Baskakov, 1972: 102, 108).
The article of G. Kapralov was concentrated around "progressive tendencies" of the Western screen. He sincerely praised films Sacco and Vanzetti and God with Us by G. Montaldo, Keymada by G. Pontecorvo (1919-2006), People Against by F. Rosie (1922-2015), Recognition of police Commissioner to the prosecutor of the republic by D. Damiani (1922-2013), Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion by E. Petri (1929-1982), Joe Hill by B. Widerberg, Bless the Beasts & Children by S. Kramer (1913-2001), Little Big Man by A. Penn (1922-2010) (Kapralov, 1972: 174200): "If not all the films, which were discussed above, can be attributed to the elements of socialist culture, they are all, of course, are the elements of a democratic culture" (Kapralov, 1972: 201).
The final of Kapralov's article was no less pathetic than that Baskakov's conclusion: "In recent years, the progressive democratic cinema from capitalist countries intensified, gained new strength, expanded its front, resolutely denounces dilapidated bourgeois myths and everything closer to the truth that in this age: all roads lead to communism" (Kapralov, 1972: 201).
Yes, A. Karaganov, V. Baskakov and G. Kapralov were masters of ideological fight! Their articles were perhaps the best practical implementations of the urgent recommendations of the Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On Literary Criticism".
That is why the article of E. Gromov (1931-2005) seems to be less ideological. On the one hand, he wrote that "the Western screens leads and dominates the cinema of mass culture, the upper floors which fill pseudo philosophical speculative movies. The aesthetics of these films has a corrupting effect on both mind wide audience, and, alas, bourgeois cinema crisis continues unabated on the work of other great artists" (Gromov, 1972: 74). "Godard's characters can talk on any topic, to listen to all sorts of philosophical speech, but in reality they are interested in the life of one thing: at the maximum or minimum comfort sex with a pathology or not. Religious, Marxist, Maoist, Gaullist ideas are just phantoms allusions for Godard" (Gromov, 1972: 37).
But on the other hand, "even audience, the highly educated, intelligent, but brought up in the spirit of classical art traditions, has difficulties for deeply understand the aesthetics of Antonioni because of his inner secret, the mediation complex philosophical categories and concepts" (Gromov, 1972: 46). "Zabriskie Point is a fundamental phenomenon in the work of Michelangelo Antonioni. This film has a sharp social character; in their aesthetics he focused not on a narrow elite, but the masses audience: the language of on-screen images of Antonioni has now become more clear, simple and accessible... Along with Satyricon by F. Fellini, Zabriskie Point is the biggest film internally significant for Western cinematography late 1960's - early 1970's" (Gromov,
1972: 52).
On the one hand, E. Gromov habitually claimed that "Hitchcock, as well as other authors pseudo psychoanalytic films, simplifies and vulgarized Freud" (Gromov, 1972: 62), and "Tarzan movies, Fantomas, even James Bond, are drug although strong action" (Gromov, 1972: 63).
But on the other hand, he soundly reminded that "we have often written about the cult of violence, which is preached bourgeois cinema, primarily American. This cult is evident. However, it is not always expressed in roughly a straight line. Moreover, practically difficult, if not impossible, to name a relatively significant film, which openly called for burning, torture, kill. The directors do not forget to punish the criminals and condemn their evil deeds, even in those gangster movies where blood flows like a river and almost every frame shot or cut" (Gromov, 1972: 64).
The rest of the books' articles "fought with a bad bourgeois ideology" with "local sections of the front." G. Bohemsky, for example, thinking about the Italian commercial cinema, arguing that "if we analyze the Italian cinema production for the past year or two, you see that the 90 % are just
pictures of mass consumption... Neorealism expelled the falsity, vulgarity, rhetoric, banal ready samples and phrases from Italian cinema for some time, but in less than ten years, bourgeois cinema took revenge on the screen" (Bohemsky, 1972: 108-111). G. Bohemsky sharply criticized the erotic genre, the movies "about rogues and thugs" and "homegrown westerns". At the same time readers receive a warning: "Italian Westerns are dangerous for the audience. ... because cruelty and violence ... In addition to the inhumanity also obvious taint of racism and plenty of naturalistic detail" (Bohemsky, 1972: 114-122).
O. Teneyshvili wrote about French cinema, unsubstantiated arguing that "sexuality and pathology prevails in recent films Chabrol and Truffaut" (Teneyshvili, 1972: 146), and that Second Wind by J.-P. Melville is "a magnificent example of excellence, aimed at the end just to satisfy the most questionable instincts and tastes" (Teneyshvili, 1972: 151). O. Teneyshvili also scolded film Rider on the Rain by R. Clément: "It is clear that this is a product not only free from bad influences, but also deliberately inhumane or degrading" (Teneyshvili, 1972: 152).
Thus, instead of analyzing the flow of ordinary French commercial cinema, O. Teneyshvili somehow chose the main target of his critical arrows the talented works of French screen classics...
J. Markulan (1920-1978) criticized another famous French film director - Claude Lelouch. In the second half of 1960s C. Lelouch, director of melodrama Man and Woman, crowned Palme d'Or at Cannes and Oscar, was known as the undisputed favorite of the Soviet audience and film critics. But the Soviet press began to reconsider their attitude to Lelouch in 1970s. And J. Markulan hurried to convince the Soviet readers that the Man and Woman "is not a work of art, but the mechanism: a cunning, clever, well made up as an art form. This is a typical product of modern bourgeois mass culture, with its extensive system of moral speculation, the ideological effects of emotional stimulus. ... Creativity of Claude Lelouch, especially the on-screen trilogy, is a dangerous phenomenon, because it contains not only the aesthetic demagoguery, but also simplified, conformist view of life. It is an art reduced to the commerce" (Markulan, 1972: 218, 233).
Thank God, Claude Lelouch not able to read these angry lines...
Only V. Dmitriev (1940-2013) and V. Mikhalkovich (1937-2006) wrote their article on B. Bardot early career without any heavy critical artillery (Dmitriev, Mikhalkovich 1972: 234-249).
The book, of course, included a very friendly articles about progressive cinema from "developing countries": Africa (Chertok, 1972: 278-299), India (Sobolev, 1972: 300-324) and Latin America (Melamed, 1972: 325-342)...
'Myths and Reality': Issue 4 (1974, put in a set in February 1973)
The next issue of Myths and Reality was published in 1974: during this time there was a significant improvement in relations between the USSR and the United States, gave rise to the so-called "discharge" that lasted until the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the Resolutions of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On the Literary Criticism" (01.21.1972) and "On measures for further development of Soviet cinema" (08.02.1972).
Communist Party once again reminds that "cinema is expected to actively contribute to the formation in the broadest masses of the Marxist-Leninist ideology, the education of people in the spirit of selfless dedication of our multinational socialist motherland, the Soviet patriotism and socialist internationalism, the approval of the Communist moral principles, uncompromising attitude to bourgeois ideology and morality, petty-bourgeois remnants, everything that hinders our progress" (Resolution... On measures... , 1972).
Of course, the Soviet film studies was obliged to respond to these two Resolutions. And the complete removal of images (frames from foreign films) from the books Myths and Reality № 4 (1974) and № 5 (1976) was the simplest and most intuitive reaction to them.
Table 4. Key political events 1972 in the world, important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West. Events in the USSR, which had relevance to the cinema
1972 Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On Literary Criticism": January, 21.
US President R. Nixon's visit to the USSR. An agreement between the USSR and the United States on the limitation of anti-missile defense and joint space program "Soyuz" -"Apollo": May, 22-30.
Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On measures for further development of Soviet cinema": August, 2.
The trade agreement between the USSR and the US: October, 18._
The fact that Soviet readers are no longer able to see not only "harmful" Western movies, but even photos of them was (of course, from the point of view of increased censorship), is commendable, but it was necessary to show also more "uncompromising attitude" to the bourgeois screen. That is why (sincere or not) V. Baskakov decided to condemn Federico Fellini. According to V. Baskakov, Fellini "deprives viewers of any hope for the possibility of any radical decisions" (Baskakov, 1974: 113).
Further, he certainly kept for the "progressive balance" and gave the compliments to the films Sacco and Vanzetti, Keymada, Recognition of police Commissioner to the prosecutor of the republic (Baskakov, 1974: 115-118), since "these films are openly opposed not only commercial cinema, mass bourgeois culture. They oppose decadence, for offering a very different conception of man: the man is not a grain of sand in the whirl of life, not being possessed by a subconscious complexes; man is social, it can and must fight for their future, for the future of mankind"(Baskakov, 1974: 115).
And then followed the stereotypes V. Baskakov wrote the article's final: "The facts say that the progressive tendencies will inevitably strengthen the cinema world... and many talented artists who are still looking for a way out of the spiritual the crisis finally freed from the captivity of the reactionary bourgeois ideas... And in this new proof of the inexhaustible strength and energy realism" (Baskakov, 1974: 118).
However, I would like to draw readers' attention that the pathos of this final was not so bravura and super optimistic as in the book in 1972. In any case, "the prospect of social and spiritual renewal of the world, which will bring him a victory of communism", apparently lost the clarity for V. Baskakov, and he decided not to mention it...
But G. Kapralov was more ideologically strong (Kapralov, 1974: 188). Deeply confident that "a truly progressive democratic filmmakers oppose anarchic, Gauchists and snobbery intellectual modernism" (Kapralov, 1974: 206), Kapralov praised the political drama The Mattei Affair by F. Rosie, however, adding that "the class nature of the activities of Mattei remains as it braces for the film, and the fore its alleged common humanistic character" (Kapralov, 1974: 187).
But he obviously did not like bitingly satirical A Clockwork Orange by S. Kubrick. According to the critic, "the author of this film exposes satirically modern bourgeois civilization, its manners, morals, and at the same time leaning helplessly before her passing lunging against the whole of humanity" (Kapralov, 1974: 200).
The article of E. Kartseva (1928-2002) also was in the concept of "ideological struggle": "Many researchers wrote about mass culture as preaches complex ideological and moral values inherent townsfolk... Workers, the poor, ethnic minorities and other "unpleasant" man of social groups there is almost does not happen, and if they appear, in the roles of negative characters. ... Mass culture also produces ideological and artistic stereotypes dulls spoils the taste, it eliminates human experiences. All this taken together does not contribute to the development of bourgeois society as the human personality" (Kartseva, 1974: 81, 99). However, E. Kartseva while rightly emphasized that popular culture often serves as a guide not only to "low-brow art crafts, but original works of art" (Kartseva, 1974: 72).
Another Soviet film critic of those years - V. Golovanov - also contributed to the fight against "the corrupting influence of the West": "A massive invasion of pornography in the modern bourgeois cinema is not accidental. Sex has become a social special effects tool" (Golovanov, 1974: 32).
G. Bohemsky, analyzing the political cinema of Italy, surprisingly entered into an explicit discussion with V. Baskakov and G. Kapralov. He gave the positive opinion about "progressive films" (Sacco and Vanzetti, Recognition of the Police Commissioner to the prosecutor of the Republic, People Against, Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion), and praised Zabriskie Point by M. Antonioni and even (!) The Conformist by B. Bertolucci (Bohemsky, 1974: 254-270).
G. Bohemsky analyzed a bright bouquet of Italian political films, and came to the brisk conclusion that "new political films are evidence that luxuriantly overgrown weeds commercial cinema could not drown out the germination of those seeds that were once thrown to the ground of the Italian cinematography Neorealism ... In place of the passive character of neo-realist films, where the rebel ... brooked quite natural defeat, gradually comes the active character linked with the masses, more or less conscious fighter who wants to build a new, just society" (Bohemsky, 1974: 270).
Film critic S. Chertok (1931-2006) also wrote with great sympathy to all progressive French films with a strong social issues and characters of working professions (Time to Live, Beau masque, Elise, or Real Life).
Interesting, that R. Sobolev avoided the sharp ideological overrun. For example, he wrote about D. Hoffmann that his screen image is "character of middle America", and this is perhaps the most simple explanation for his acting successes" (Sobolev, 1974: 56). R. Sobolev wrote about Jane Fonda: "I want to say only one thing: she became one of the greatest actresses of the American Psychological movie after the film They Shoot Horses, Don't They?" (Sobolev, 1974: 69). And about Faye Dunaway: "She is the actress; perhaps one of the most outstanding actresses of the Hollywood history" (Sobolev, 1974: 64).
Apparently, this article of R. Sobolev became evident official Soviet cinema criticism reaction to "detente" between USA and USSR.
'Myths and Reality': Issue 5 (1976, put in set in December 1975)
The fifth book of Myths and Reality was released in 1976. The political "detente" between the West and the Soviet Union is still going on. Moreover, in August 1975, the Soviet Union, along with 35 other countries, signed Helsinki Agreements. However, the ideological front has not been canceled (this is evidenced, for example, Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov is widely supported by West).
Table 5. Major political events in 1973 - 1975 years in the world that are important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West. Events in the USSR, which had relevance to the cinema
1973 Armed revolt in Chile. Chilean President Salvador Allende was killed. General A. Pinochet came to power in Chile: September. The war in the Middle East: October. Increase in world oil prices. Paris edition house published the first volume of the anti-Soviet / anti-communist book of A. Solzhenitsyn - The Gulag Archipelago: December.
1974 A. Solzhenitsyn expelled from the USSR: February, 13. US President Richard Nixon's visit to the USSR. He signed an agreement on the limitation of underground nuclear tests: July, 3. The impeachment of US president Richard Nixon: August, 8. The visit of new US President Ford in the USSR: November, 23-24.
1975 USSR renounced trade agreement with the United States in protest against the statements of the American Congress about Jewish emigration: January, 15. The end of the Vietnam War: April, 30. USSR, together with 35 countries signed the Helsinki Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe: August, 1. USSR again stop jamming Western radio stations (except for Radio Liberty): this is a result of the signing of the Helsinki Final Act. The joint Soviet-American space flight: July. Academician A. Sakharov was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize: October, 9.
So the elite of the Soviet cinema criticism, although with undoubted into account the "detente", continued the ideological fight.
G. Kapralov scolded for pessimism and gloom punctuated by show of aggression and violence in Leo the Lasts, Deliverance, Zardoz by J. Boorman and Straw Dogs by S. Peckinpah (Kapralov, 1976: 9-16). Once again he reproached the author of the drama Cries and Whispers I. Bergman because he "does not come from the social characteristics, but from the biological or psychological essence of person" (Kapralov, 1976: 22).
But the most difficult critical KapraloVs hit reserved for the sensational melodrama The Night Porter by L. Cavani. He accused Cavani of consideration "the history of the Nazi criminals murderers and their sacrifices in the light of "erotic impulses" and "research hangman-sacrificial systems"(Kapralov, 1976: 28).
G. Kapralov traditionally praised for a "democratic and progressive social orientation" movies (We loved Each Other, The MatteiAffair, Giordano Bruno, Beau masque) (Kapralov, 1976: 30-32) and passed to the final pathos: "Social film is increasingly attracting the attention of leading Western cinema artists today. It is expanding and its viewership. Historical optimism that distinguishes these works, finds its support in the actual development of the world revolutionary process, unbeatable driving forward the progressive forces of the world" (Kapralov, 1976: 32).
V. Baskakov was in full agreement with the categorical opinion of G. Kapralov about The Night Porter: "The philosophical message of this film avoids the very essence of the concept of fascism, because the phenomenon of social class and it turns into a psychological phenomenon" (Baskakov, 1976: 89).
V. Baskakov criticized The Exorcist by William Friedkin for mysticism (Baskakov, 1976: 7071). He insisted that in The Godfather by F.F. Coppola "intricately intertwined different streams: the naturalistic image of cruelty and violence, and poetic image for mafia and at the same criticism of a society based on corruption and blackmail" (Baskakov, 1976: 82).
But V. Baskakov praised another film of F.F. Coppola - Conversation. He implicitly acknowledged "progressive phenomenon of American Art. ... Films like Conversation, is now being done in Hollywood are not so many, but they are: The Last Detail, with his relentless criticism of militarism, and Alice Does not Live Here Anymore, realistically showing the life of the American province" (Baskakov, 1976: 82-83).
Not only The Night Porter by L. Cavani, but the Last Tango in Paris by B. Bertolucci was at the center of film critics' discussions. This explains why A. Karaganov has given a special place in his article for Bertolucci's movie. He believed that "by the author's intention, Last Tango in Paris is a fight & rebellious film, designed to ensure that shock the bourgeois audience, expose bourgeois morality, to show that the putrefaction of capitalist society and its immorality manifested primarily in the rot and immorality of human generated by this society. But the actual content of the film, so to speak, "texture" screen action can not withstand such a load of ideological and philosophical. It comes down to showing the sexual life of the hero and heroine. The sex scenes are extraordinarily detailed, show the variety of techniques, some of them are playful, while others are just disgusting, and everything is very naturalistic. In the film there is a certain thrill of sex, frankness, which is characteristic of pornographic films bourgeois "commercial cinema" (Karaganov, 1976: 51).
It is clear that such "ideological machinations" had necessarily to oppose something "progressive." And here again the titles of "progressive" foreign films: Sacco and Vanzetti, Recognition of the Police Commissioner to the prosecutor of the Republic, People Against, Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion, The Mattei Affair, Tverico-Torino, We want the colonels (Karaganov, 1976: 42-48).
Moreover, the earlier some Soviet film critics scolded of film The Working Class Goes to Heaven, but A. Karaganov found positive significance in this film, noting that there is a "dramatic tension, the sharpness, is the image and narrative motifs, very succinct in its life content and social meaning. This film has a lot of truth, and the Italian working life is shown in real difficulties, unvarnished" (Karaganov, 1976: 40).
And therefore the end of this article was quite logical: "The progressive cinema in Italy is gaining momentum, despite the harassment by the authorities... And a very important part of this process is the development of modern neo-realism tradition" (Karaganov, 1976: 66).
A. Braginsky's article about French political cinema was built by a similar scheme. It was again anti-Godard: "He has deeply flawed tactics of struggle against the bourgeoisie, the criticism of the Communist Party, the General Confederation of Labour... The political chatter and juggling "Marxist-Leninist" phraseology is only the cover" (Braginsky, 1976: 96). After that A. Braginsky highlighted the "realistic progressiveness" of movies The most tender confessions, Crime in the name of order, Assassination, Elise, or Real Life, Time to live, Beau masque (Braginsky, 1976: 101, 111-112).
G. Bohemsky built his article in a similar spirit: "Despite the fact that the Italian screen is still more sweeping avalanche of vulgar and empty shows constituting 90 % of the Italian film production, another films have the general shift to the left in the political and cultural life of the country" (Bohemsky, 1976: 151). These findings were supported by favorable analysis of films Sacco and Vanzetti, Metello, Tverico-Torino, Short Breaks, Bread and Chocolate (Bohemsky, 1976: 114, 133, 139-150).
"Metello is a broad canvas of national life the beginning of our century, which bears many specific features of the Italian. This film, like the novel, lyrical, permeated with the spirit of a kind of populism, the naive and sentimental" (Bohemsky, 1976: 133). "Most important of all Italian films about workers is the film Sacco and Vanzetti by Giuliano Montaldo. Firstly, it is one of the few films in the world from the history about the international labor movement; Secondly (and this is important), this film is deeply internationalist in spirit, with real image of the worker leader, conscious revolutionary. Sacco and Vanzetti are the characters, which has long experienced a need for progressive Italian cinema" (Bohemsky, 1976: 144).
I. Belenky, once again returning to the critical analysis of S. Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange and violence topic (Belenky, 1976: 186). And O. Surkova did not give a glowing assessment of I. Bergman: "That is why his best films, no matter how they were burdened by lack of faith in the person and the hyper individualism... Of course, this opposition to mass culture is not productive because, although on a different level altogether, Bergman's cinema also suppresses the desire in people to see something approaching its real problems, something which helps to understand and overcome the structure of the consumer society" (Surkova, 1976: 168).
V. Mikhalkovich's academic text What is a thriller? was very different to all articles of the fifth edition of the book Myths and Reality. A thoughtful film critic, contrary to stamps well-established in the Soviet film criticism, argued that "if the director or the writer uses the thriller is not just, and not exclusively to shake the nerves or to promote to the masses next bourgeois myth, and for conscious suggestion socially meaningful thought, this genre can be (and is in some cases) a progressive phenomenon" (Mikhalkovich, 1976: 214).
'Myths and Reality": Issue 6 (1978, put in a set in March 1978)
Table 6. Major political events in 1976 - 1977 years in the world that are important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West. Events in the USSR, which had relevance to the cinema
1976 XXV Congress of the Soviet Communist Party: February, 24 - March, 5. The USSR and the United States signed a treaty banning underground nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes capacity of over 150 kilotons: May, 28.
1977 Opening of the Belgrade Conference to monitor the implementation of decisions of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe: October, 4.
Any special Resolutions of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee about the cinema and (film) criticism did not go over the past between the fifth and sixth editions of collection of Myths and Reality. The detente process continue in the international arena, however, the ideological confrontation, of course, has not been canceled. Therefore, V. Nesterov & A. Kamshalov quite reasonably wrote: "Western films dedicated to European battles, silenced the heroic struggle of the Soviet Army. It seems that Europe was liberated only by American and British troops" (Kamshalov, Nesterov, 1978: 7).
Berated the previous decade, F. Fellini unexpectedly received good evaluation from V. Nesterov & A. Kamshalovs: Amarcord was included in the list of "progressive democracy" films, like Sacco and Vanzetti, The MatteiAffair, Murder of Matteotti (Kamshalov, Nesterov, 1978: 16-17).
But R. Yurenev, alas, could not see the talent and irony of Woody Allen, and (in my opinion, unjustly) accused parody comedy Love and Death in all conceivable sins: "It was unbearable to hear patriotic music by Prokofiev for Alexander Nevsky superimposed on pornographic scenes. And in some scenes ... I can see not just anti-Russian, but also anti-Soviet notes" (Yurenev, 1978: 35).
He also sharply criticized the film Marriage by Claude Lelouch, "which seemed a mockery of criticism by the French anti-Nazi resistance movement" (Yurenev, 1978: 41).
G. Bohemsky was very critical to the current Western cinematic process (for example, Italy). In particular, he talked about the wrong political orientation of Paolo and Vittorio Taviani: "Ambivalence Taviani brothers' film, in particular its results leftist and ideological impasse". Alonsanfan "is back to the vagueness of the general philosophical position of generously gifted film directors" (Bohemsky, 1978: 88). But we must pay tribute to Bohemsk/s film studies instinct: he noticed that "It exists the danger of mystification spectators in the Italian cinema, when some movies do not help to understand the political issues, but falsifying it and misinformed under the guise of political cinema" (Bohemsky, 1978: 69).
V. Shestakov wrote rather not film studies, but sociological article about Hollywood. He praised such outstanding films as Three Days of the Condor, The Way We Were, Network, The Last Detail, Shampoo, Day of the Locust, Alice does not live here anymore, Taxi Driver, Badlands, MASH, The Long Goodbye, Thieves Like Us, Nashville, Conversation (Shestakov, 1978: 104, 110111, 115-121). In particular, V. Shestakov rightly pointed out that Taxi Driver is "sad and tragic film about violence in America and on the consequences that has left in the life and psychology of the Americans during the Vietnam War" (Shestakov, 1978: 116).
It is clear that the article by V. Shestakov could not be composed of only one positive opinion about American cinema. Therefore, he noted that "modern Hollywood movies attempting to adapt and use, mainly for commercial purposes, a number of ideas borrowed from fashionable currents of Western philosophy. A particularly Freudianism has a strong influence on American cinema" (Shestakov, 1978: 105), and the "New Hollywood" is nothing more than a common term, a kind of metaphor, does not reflect reality, as the ideological nature and social role of Hollywood are still the same: regardless of the changes occurring in it Hollywood, as before, is a phenomenon of bourgeois culture" (Shestakov, 1978: 132).
V. Kolodyazhnaya (1911-2003) wrote more tightly about American cinema, focusing on themes of occultism. After analyzing the Rosemary's Baby by R. Polanski and Exorcist by W. Friedkin, she concluded that "the devil was never shown on the screen in such a formidable and powerful. Current trends is a special phenomenon, reflecting the growing interest in the occult and turned inside out religion - to Satanism" (Kolodyazhnaya, 1978: 172).
G. Kapralov, in keeping the spirit of the "detente", refused inherent passages previously optimistic about the inevitable collapse of the bourgeois system and a soon triumph of communist ideas. But a detailed analysis of the Jaws by S. Spielberg became occasion for a conclusion that "it is reasonable to assert once again that the film itself without the whole system more impact on the Western audience ... might not be such a total resounding" (Kapralov, 1978: 51).
The rest of the collection of articles dedicated to the works of great masters of Western screen: Volonte (1933-1994) (E. Victorova wrote about this actor-communist in a very positive way) and P.-P. Pasolini (1922-1975).
V. Baskakov wrote about the famous film director, screenwriter and writer P.-P. Pasolini (who was killed November 1, 1975): "The Italian cinema has lost a great artist, whose work is inconsistent reflect and burning rejection of the bourgeois way of life, bourgeois morality, and the search for alternatives to this bourgeois... Pasolini was an analyst, accuser, and at the same time a victim of bourgeois consciousness" (Baskakov, 1978: 152).
'Myths and Reality': Issue 7 (1981, put in a set in August 1980)
International events 1979-1980, preceding the birth of the seventh edition of Myths and Reality collection were turbulent: the "detente" died after the intervention of Soviet troops in
Afghanistan, the confrontation between the USSR and the West back to cold war peak. And then the fire of the Polish anti-Communist rebellion movement "Solidarity"...
Table 7. Key political events 1978 - 1980 in the world that are important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West. Events in the USSR, which had relevance to the cinema
1978 The coup d'etat in 1978 in Afghanistan, supported by the Soviet Union: April, 17.
1979 Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On further improve the ideological and political education work": April, 26. Conclusion of the agreement between the USSR and the USA on the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms: June, 18. The second coup d'etat in Afghanistan, again supported by the Soviet Union: September, 16. Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the beginning of the Afghan war - December.
1980 In response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the United States suspended the ratification of the Strategic Arms Reduction. USA declared a boycott of the Olympic Games in Moscow and an embargo on the Soviet Union in modern technologies and grains: January, 4. Academician Sakharov was exiled to Gorky. He was deprived of the title three times Hero of Socialist Labor, and Stalin (1953) & Lenin (1956) Awards: January, 22. The Olympic Games in Moscow: July, 19 - August, 3. USSR resumed jamming Russian language broadcasts "Voice of America" and other Western radio stations in the Soviet Union: August, 20-21. "Solidarity" movement in Poland was gaining strength.
Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On further improve the ideological and political education work" (April, 1979) was before the start of a new phase of the "cold war". As in similar documents of previous years, Resolution was emphasized that "imperialist propaganda ... continuously conducts a fierce attack on the minds of the Soviet people, it is committed to using the most sophisticated techniques and advanced technical means to poison the minds of their slander Soviet reality, denigrate socialism, embellish imperialism and its predatory, inhuman policies and practices. All set in motion: perverted information and biased coverage of the facts, silence, half-truths and lies just shameless. Therefore, one of the most important tasks of ideological education and outreach is to help the Soviet people to recognize the utter falsity of the defamatory propaganda, in a clear, specific and convincing manner to expose its devious methods, to give people the ground truth about the world's first country of victorious socialism. This should always be remembered that the weakening of attention to the coverage of the actual problems, lack of efficiency, the questions left unanswered, the only benefit our class enemy" (Resolution ..., 1979).
K. Razlogov's article "New Conservatism and Cinema of the West in this context was a natural reaction to the worsening of the "cold war": "In 70s years ... came the era of "Counter-Reformation", ... "counter-culture." This ideological trend - new conservatism - was a product of the ideological and political crisis of capitalism. ... "New conservatism" to some extent paved the way for the deployment of another anti-communist and anti-Soviet companies and return the forces of imperialism to a policy of "cold war". ... It was the result of the desire of the bourgeois ideologists turn back the course of history, to set new obstacles in the way of socialism, the national liberation movement, the workers' struggle for their rights in the capitalist countries. But the positive developments in the international arena, the struggle for peace, social progress and freedom of the peoples continue to define the forward movement of history" (Razlogov, 1981: 41-42).
K. Razlogov argued that "the problem of violence is certainly one of the most pressing in the bourgeois world. In contrast to the typical trend of the previous period to identify the social roots of crime, "new conservatism" considers crime as an anomaly of inferiority of individuals or of human nature in general" (Razlogov, 1981: 49-50). As an example, K. Razlogov used the film Death Wish (Razlogov, 1981: 55). However, the article final was more optimistic: Julia, The China Syndrome, "as well as a number of other films, shows the constancy of democratic tradition in the US film industry, successfully resisting the "new conservative wave" (Razlogov, 1981: 61).
M. Shaternikova in search of positive developments in the American cinema, wrote that "a certain part of the Afro-American filmmakers chose a path of truth and realism, all the way to a deeper and more accurate picture of life, suffering and hopes of its people" (Shaterinikova, 1981: 161).
G. Kapralov wrote that the number of Western films (Sacco and Vanzetti, Recognition of the Police Commissioner to the prosecutor of the republic, Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion, Zabriskie Point, Keymada, Little Big Man, They Shoot Horses, Don't They?, Easy Rider and others) criticized the wars of conquest, colonial expansion and extermination of Native Americans, the persecution of trade unionists, racist intolerance, anti-labor policy lies justice, and police terror" (Kapralov, 1981: 25). But G. Kapralov also had not optimistic positions for the future: "It can be expected that the coming years will give a new rise and further development of this critical combat cinema. However, the collapse of a 'lefts' illusions of 1968 led to the spread among the intelligentsia of the decadent moods, and even in the United States to strengthen the conservative or, as they call them, the "new" conservative tendencies. This affected the cinema. His political activity, though, and continued for some time to be quite high, soon began to wane" (Kapralov, 1981: 25).
G. Kapralov was convinced that Hollywood began to appear such "vicious anti-Soviet" films as The Deer Hunter, whose "imaginative, emotional structure ... expresses extreme dislike to Vietnamese" (Kapralov, 1981: 37). Moreover, The Deer Hunter, "not only slandered the heroic people of Vietnam, but also trying to revive the very same illusions about US exceptionalism" (Kapralov, 1981: 40).
As always, G. Kapralov did not forget to criticize the European screen masters. He wrote About Casanova that "undoubtedly the critical charge of the film can not hide the fact that the new work of Fellini bears the imprint of painful fatigue, some psychological collapse, whose vice spectacle of decay, rotting and disgusting and the same time has a certain charisma" (Kapralov, 1981: 9). The films Bye Bye Monkey by M. Ferreri and Truck by M. Duras were rated more strictly: "the characters of Ferreri's film have flesh and blood, while the characters of Duras's are the phantoms" (Kapralov, 1981: 19).
Two articles were devoted to French cinema. The leading Soviet specialist in the field of French cinematography - A. Braginsky, began his article with the condemnation of sexual and porn cinema revolution (Braginsky, 1981: 180-183). And after that he made a more detailed critical analysis of films by C. Lelouch, C. Zidi, J. Derey, J. Jaeckin, F. Labro, A. Verneuil, A. Corneau (Braginsky, 1981: 183-191). Some Braginsk/s opinions manifestly unreasonable: "Zidi is a reliable bulwark of commercial cinema "digestive-wing" ... "Zidizm" as a specific phenomenon is a direct threat to French cinema comedy, reducing its level, its credibility" (Braginsky, 1981: 186).
A. Braginsky retain to his strict attitude about F. Truffaut and C. Chabrol: "Truffaut's recently films, unwittingly reflect the mood of the French artistic intelligentsia, more precisely, the part that often looks back and rarely looks forward" (Braginsky, 1981: 193); "Chabrol's films ... deeply pessimistic, with efforts to disclose only the dark side of the human soul" (Braginsky, 1981: 193-194).
The article was written by N. Dyachenko in a similar vein. She criticized for the wrong political stance The Chinese in Paris by J. Yann, Nada by C. Chabrol, Lacombe Lucien by L. Malle, Good and Evil by C. Lelouch. For example, the film Good and Evil was accused of mixing "actions of the Resistance fighters and collaborators, traitors and honest people" (Dyachenko, 1981: 69).
The finals of both articles were, however, optimistic. A. Braginsky praised for the acute social films of A. Cayatte, I. Boisset, B. Tavernier (Braginsky, 1981: 195-199). He was confident that "the dialectic of social development is relentless. The future of French cinema, where are taken into account the interests of the nation and the people, for those filmmakers who put their art at the service of the people" (Braginsky, 1981: 203). N. Dyachenko's conclusions was a little less pretentious: "We can watch in the French cinema the phenomenon of commercialization, speculative use of political themes. At the same time, we can see the cinema, expressing a critical attitude toward capitalist reality, an attempt to expose the bourgeois apparatus of power" (Dyachenko, 1981: 68).
G. Bohemsky dedicated his article to political detectives and thrillers. He reviewed the films of D. Damiani, E. Petri, F. Rosi in a positive context, pointing out that "the very notion of "political film" should be considered differentiated. On the one hand, it means the really progressive trend in bourgeois cinema today; on the other hand - political film is only used as a disguise for fight against the Lefts" (Bohemsky, 1981: 115).
G. Krasnova's article of about German cinema was in the "detente" key. She very friendly analyzed the movies of Fassbinder, Schlondorf and Herzog. Article's conclusion was also major: "Youth cinema in West Germany had known dark days, periods of frustration, depression and decline. However, recent works of these filmmakers give reason to hope that the "young cinema" will continue to be the main bulwark of progressive cinematography"(Krasnova, 1981: 114).
R. Sobolev's paper Cinema and Comics got entertainment mission in this film studies collection. And ardent fans of comics culture certainly can not agree with the abrupt withdrawal of a film critic that "comics are the production not for the man with intelligence, but a baby" (Sobolev, 1981: 178).
'Myths and Reality': Issue 8 (1983, put in a set in September 1982)
Events 1981-1982 years preceding the publication of the eighth book Myths and Reality in general (despite the economic cooperation between the USSR and the Federal Republic of Germany and France, connected with gas supply) developed at the height of the "cold war."
Table 8. The main political events of 1981-1982 period in the world that are important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West. Events in the USSR, which had relevance to the cinema
1981 XXVI Congress of the Soviet Communist Party: February, 23 - March, 3. Cancel the US embargo on grain shipments to the Soviet Union: April, 24. Start of neutron weapons production in the United States. The signing of the contract between the USSR and the Federal Republic of Germany to supply Siberian gas to West Germany: November, 20. The introduction of martial law in Poland: December, 13. Statement by US President Ronald Reagan against the USSR interference in the affairs of Poland, new sanctions against the USSR: December, 29.
1982 Signing of the contract between the USSR and France to supply Siberian gas: January, 23. British-Argentine armed conflict in the Falklands: March-April. Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On the creative connections literary magazines with the practice of communist construction": July, 30.
So it is not surprising that the last year of the L. Brezhnev power was marked by the release of the Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On the creative connections literary magazines with the practice of communist construction" (1982). In it, in particular, stated that "appear on the pages of magazines of literary history and literary-critical works, the authors of which ... show ideological confusion, inability to consider social phenomena historically, with a clear class positions" (Resolution ... , 1982).
I do not think that this criticism directly was to the author's collections of Myths and Reality (although the lack of "clear class positions" can be detected, if desired, for example, in the "free" articles of V. Demin and Y. Khanutin). But the conclusions were made: ideologically outdated "detente" approaches were rejected. And V. Baskakov wrote: "Anti-humanism of bourgeois culture and art, and an attack on humanity, leading and the right and left: all these shows the urgent need to create a united front of real Marxist humanism" (Baskakov, 1983: 36-37).
Such a flow of "real humanism" V. Baskakov attributed movie Man on his Knees by D. Damiani, Christ stopped at Eboli and Three Brothers by F. Rosi, Seven Days in January by H.A. Bardem (Baskakov, 1983: 12-19). Moreover, he claimed: "Movies Christ stopped at Eboli and Three Brothers proves a mighty force and the prospects of social art, exploring issues of national life, the arts great truth and mighty power of realism" (Baskakov, 1983: 17).
G. Kapralov echoed of V. Baskakov, assuring his readers that "we cannot see in the frames of bourgeois consciousness the road in the real future" (Kapralov, 1983: 64).
G. Kapralov analyzed such outstanding films as Leap into the Void, Terrace, Please Asylum, My American Uncle, All That Jazz, City of Women and regretted that the main motive of most of
them is "fatigue, bewilderment, frustration, despair" (Kapralov, 1983: 38). G. Kapralov saw in the City of Women "traditionally bourgeois approach ... and again, with a noticeable shade of biologism, which in this case takes the form of sexual complexes and phantasmagoria" (Kapralov, 1983: 54). He had mixed feelings about All That Jazz: "On the one hand, the director makes admire Gideon's irrepressible, violent fantasy, feel it as a strong, powerful creative personality. And on the other hand - the creative act is reduced to a simple physiological origin" (Kapralov, 1983: 63).
E. Victorova wrote that "Ferreri is not so much as a critic of modern bourgeois vices of civilization, but as a man who does not bear responsibility for the fate of the world. He does not believe in the possibility of change, in the possibility of a better, more just order of society" (Victorova, 1983: 167).
The same film criticism melody towards Western cinema sounded in the E. Kartseva's article, which stated that "the 1970s are characterized by not only the continuity of anti-bourgeois ideals and values of 1960s, but also strengthening of conservative sentiment. ... And myths manufacturers, sensing the growing discontent, seeking to convince people mythological, not based on the analysis of the social interpretation of the events. The growing politicization of social consciousness leads to the politicization of the mythology" (Kartseva, 1983: 86). In this context, she scolded American films Rocky, Telephone and praised China Syndrome, Three Days of the Condor and Network (Kartseva, 1983: 90-101).
Film critic L. Melville, noting that "actually increased role of women in bourgeois society is in sharp contradiction with the various forms of discrimination and oppression of Western woman" (Melville, 1983: 136), suggested that "feminism is (on the screen and in the life of the modern West) a phenomenon very difficult, ambiguous. ... Tomorrow we will see what will happen to this remarkable phenomenon of Western political and cultural life. One thing is clear: the prospects for it are associated with the opening of a socialist alternative, with the rejection of the excesses of the feminist ideology and appeal to a realistic understanding of women's issues. Meeting with the political and cultural experience of real socialism can play a crucial role" (Melville, 1983: 159).
As we can see now, the first part of this thesis (about the complexity and ambiguity film feminism) it was correct, which can not be said about "socialist alternative"...
M. Shaternikova, as film critic fighter for the rights of the American working class, pleased the movie Norma Rae by M. Ritt because this film returned to the US shield forgotten "character -a man of labor, collectivist, in the fight against defending themselves and others their human rights. It proves its viability progressive tradition of cinematography USA. ... The true meaning of the word "humanism" return the honest artist, who expresses in his work the aspirations of the working class, who takes his side in the fight. These artists were in the American movie ever. They will come with each new generation" (Shaternikova, 1983: 134).
One article is entirely dedicated to the Spanish cinema (for the first time in Myths and Reality): O. Reisen rightly praised End Time and Seven Days in January, National Gun and Trout (Reisen, 1983: 186-192), although she noted that C. Saura cinema has "some confusion of images. Mixing fantasy, dreams and reality, endless flipped in time and space, repetition, associative montage are methods by which he reproduces a stream of consciousness" (Reisen, 1983: 195).
"Myths and Reality": Issue 9 (1985, put in a set in May 1984)
World events that occurred between the release of the publication of the eighth and the ninth series, Myths and Reality were stormy. L. Brezhnev's death did not impact on the degree of boiling the "cold war." Moreover, with the advent of the Y. Andropov (1914-1984) attention to the issues of ideological struggle only intensified. Y. Andropov's death and the equally short power of K. Chernenko (1911-1985) not made the significant changes in the situation.
Table 9. The main political events of 1982-1984 years in the world that are important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West. Events in the USSR, which had relevance to the cinema
1982 Death of L. Brezhnev: November, 10 The coming of short power of Yuri Andropov (1914-1984). US lifting of sanctions imposed against the Soviet Union in connection with the events in Poland: November, 13.
1983 France expelling 47 Soviet diplomats accused of spying: April, 5. Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "Topical issues of ideological and mass political work of the Party": June. German Chancellor H. Kohl visited Soviet Union: July 4-6. Soviet Union shot down a South Korean civilian aircraft: September, 1. Y. Andropov made a statement directed against the deployment of missiles "Persching- 2" in Europe, and lifted a moratorium on the deployment of medium-range nuclear missiles: November, 24.
1984 The opening of the Stockholm Conference on Disarmament in Europe: January, 17. The death of Y. Andropov. K. Chernenko's rise to the short power: February, 9. Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On measures to further improve the ideological and artistic quality of films and strengthen the material and technical basis of cinematography": April, 19. Statement by the Soviet Union to boycott the Olympic Games in Los Angeles: May, 8.
Y. Andropov, speaking at the plenary session of the Soviet communist Party Central Committee (dedicated to topical issues of ideological and mass political work), stressed that "there is a struggle for the hearts and minds of billions of people on the planet. And the future depends largely on the outcome of this ideological struggle. This explains how it is vital to be able to communicate in a simple and convincing manner the truth about socialist society, its advantages, its peaceful politics to the broad masses of the people all over the world. Equally important skill: to expose the false, subversive imperialist propaganda" (Andropov, 1983).
The resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "Topical issues of ideological and mass political work of the Party" (1983) signaled that, in the opinion of the Soviet leadership, the previous decisions of a similar nature have been found to be ineffective in the new "cold war" acute outbreak between the USSR and the West.
This is also evidenced by the Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On measures to further improve the ideological and artistic quality of films and strengthen the material and technical basis of cinematography" (1984). In 1983-1984 the Soviet press and the official film critics increasingly began to use the word "counter-propaganda".
Flag bearer of ideological struggle with bourgeois cinema V. Baskakov answered for political party calls in the article Screen Aggression (Baskakov, 1985: 3-26). He expressed his indignation at the fact that the West "seeks to instill an audience of millions of television movies and cult of violence, cruelty, sophisticated sensuality. The strategic direction setting of this screen aggression is an effort to impress the mass consciousness of irresponsibility for the fate of humanity and a sense of apathy in the face of actions of the imperialist circles. Publishers, writers, film makers and television, using a variety of, often masking agents, readers and viewers impose the cult of force, romanticizing of cruelty, perverse amorality. Militant anti-humanism has become the heart of the vast majority of films produced by the capitalist movie monopoly from US and several European countries" (Baskakov, 1985: 18).
As always this kind of theses supported striking examples: from the movies The Night Porter and Skin by L. Cavani, Nicholas and Alexandra by F. Schaffner, The Deer Hunter by M. Cimino, Fire Fox by C. Eastwood (Baskakov, 1985: 20-24). He said the most negative about S. Peckinpah's film Cross of Iron, "openly celebrating the Wehrmacht. In the center of the plot is charming, "humane" and fearless Nazi" (Baskakov, 1985: 22).
However, contrary to all previous negativity, V. Baskakov found the strength to make a radically positive conclusion: "Anti-communism and anti-Sovietism on the screen are feverish,
hysterical and hopeless attempts to slow down the steady process of development of the revolutionary forces, oppose the realization of the masses (including the intelligentsia) the futility of the capitalist system" (Baskakov, 1985: 23).
The article of G. Kapralov has been sustained around the same spirit. He accused for the promotion of violence and the anti-Soviet many movies: Class of 1984 by M. Lester, Conan the Barbarian by J. Milius, The Deer Hunter by M. Cimino, Fire Fox by C. Eastwood, Superman by R. Donner (Kapralov, 1985: 30-44) and made a sad conclusion that Western cinema has "the desire for psychological and ideological influence to the masses audience, showing the madness, crime and wildest violence" (Kapralov, 1985: 44).
L. Melville, noting that "the bourgeois media, deciding under obvious pressure from the Reagan administration to divert the attention of the Western public from the real causes of the rampant terrorism, unleashed an anti-Soviet group about the "involvement" of the Soviet Union to "international terrorism" (Melville, 1985: 70).
The young (at that time) film critic A. Plakhov warning readers that "the movie and television can ... go on about the most primitive tastes cultivated reactionary ideas, amorality, sow harmful illusions and destroy the person, as it often happens in practice bourgeois mass communications" (Plakhov, 1985: 135). Turning to the analysis of German cinema, G. Krasnova expressed something similar to the recommendations for the "progressive German filmmakers": "The struggle against the Hollywood expansion should be done from the standpoint of humanity, acute social criticism. Otherwise it loses its high ideological and artistic meaning and the place of the American commercial cinema takes more conformist, more miserable products West cultural industries" (Krasnova, 1985: 180).
G. Bohemsk/s article was also in the sad tone. He wrote about Italian mass culture cinema ("red-light movie", horrors and comedies) and gave angry passage: Caligula is a typical product of "supranational" commercial cinema, "mass culture" in a consumer society. The film is inextricably merged unheard of cruelty and unbridled sex" (Bohemsky, 1985: 92). However, as film critic noted, "the impression that the recession, stagnation, the crisis in Italian cinema in general, are universal, would be incorrect. ... Let a few, but bright and bold works strongly suggest that as the commercialization of Italian cinema and the mood of despair and escapism covered not all" (Bohemsky, 1985: 111).
E. Kartseva (Kartseva, 1985: 46-66) and K. Razlogov (Razlogov 1985: 181-202) wrote in a neutral and academic manner. E. Kartseva, for example, is quite appreciated Cabaret by B. Fosse, Julia by F. Zinnemann, Parallax by A. Pakula, and Domino Principle by S. Kramer (Kartseva,
1985: 50-65).
T. Tsarapkina quite in the spirit of the recent "detente" gave a very positive assessment of the development of cinema in Canada, because "unlike the dream world the Canadian screen appeared the real life, sometimes full of drama, despair, inhabited by people who are generally unhappy that rarely overcome depressing their circumstances, but find the strength to defy destiny" (Tsarapkina,
1985: 229).
A. Braginsk/s article about French cinema was also quite low-key tone. Analyzing films of B. Blier, A. Techine, K. Miller and other directors, Braginsky (Braginsky, 1985: 137-156) came to the conclusion that "the general Western crisis (ideological, economic) is reflected in the current film industry all the major capitalist countries. French filmmakers find him in these circumstances, turn the power wheel, to change the course of events to remember the glorious tradition - time will tell..." (Braginsky, 1985: 160).
Well, time really showed, and A. Braginsky in the 1990s has published a series of remarkable books about the masters of French cinema, where already was not "ideologically" lines...
"Myths and Reality": Issue 10 (1988, put in a set in November 1987)
The tenth edition of the book Myths and Reality was put into the set and went out of print in a very substantially changed the world and intra situation. The coming to power of M. Gorbachev in 1985 and soon declaration of new Soviet policy of "perestroika and glasnost", the subsequent rapid warming of relations between the USSR and the West, led to a significant revision of the existing over decades of "ideological struggle."
Table 10. The main political events of 1984-1987 years in the world that are important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West. Events in the USSR, which had relevance to the cinema
1984 The visit to the Soviet Union of French President F. Mitterrand: June, 21-23. USSR expressed protest against the American military program "Star Wars": June, 29. M. Gorbachev visited the UK and met with UK Prime Minister M. Techer: December, 15-21.
1985 The death of K. Chernenko, M. Gorbachev's rise to power: March. The resumption of negotiations on arms limitation in Geneva: March, 12. Meeting of M. Gorbachev and R. Reagan in Geneva: November, 19-21.
1986 XXVII Congress of the Soviet Communist Party: February, 25 - March, 6. The accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant: April-May. Film director E. Klimov elected the leader of the Union of Cinematographers: May. Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On the shortcomings in the practice of the acquisition or rental of foreign films": 4 June. Three-fold drop in world oil prices (from 29 to 10 dollars per barrel), increased sharply the economic crisis in the USSR: June. M. Gorbachev began of "perestroika" in the Soviet Union: June. Visit to the USSR of French President F. Mitterrand: July, 7-10. Meeting of M. Gorbachev and R. Reagan in Reykjavik: October, 11-12. Opening of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in Vienna: November, 4. Return of Academician A. Sakharov from exile to Moscow: December.
1987 M. Thatcher's visit to the USSR: March, 28 - April, 1. Cancel Soviet jamming of most Western radio stations on its territory: May, 23. German amateur pilot M. Rust committed illegal flight from Hamburg (via Helsinki) to Moscow (with landing almost on Red Square): May, 27. Low world oil prices, contributing to a further decline of the Soviet economy and the living standards of its population.
The analysis of the content of the tenth issue of Myths and Reality collection (1988) shows that the Soviet film criticism was the example of the ideological inertia: the texts were without real responds to the radical changes occurring in the world and in the USSR...
Here are just some of the final conclusions from the articles of leading Soviet film critics in the tenth edition of the collection:
- "Illusory nature of attempts to restore justice in the framework of an antagonistic society... They do not open before the audience really revolutionary perspective of overthrowing the system of exploitation: the historical mission of the proletariat" (Razlogov, 1988: 93)
- "Different incarnation of the bourgeois intellectual consciousness, dwelling in a state of deep internal crisis. Ways out of it are outside of this consciousness: they are actively participating in the actual social processes on the side of democratic forces of progress" (Melville, 1988: 38).
The article of L. Mamatova (Mamatova, 1988: 94-121) and N. Savitsky (Savitsky, 1988: 122142) are quite traditional for the Soviet cinema studies 1970s - 1980s reviews of the films festivals 1983. But the mere fact that the collection, released in print in 1988, included articles written in 1983, spoke not only about the slowness of the publishing house "Art", but also the sheer inertia of the Soviet official film criticism.
So do not be surprised that the rest of the article at this tenth collection of ideological pathos is not so very different from the ninth collection.
V. Baskakov habitually abused anti-Soviet Hollywood films Fire Fox, Red Dawn, Gorky Park and others (Baskakov, 1988: 7-9). He was also very unhappy with the fact that L. Cavani in the The Berlin Affair connected in a complex knot "pathology, sexy and outrageous policies, even signs of anti-fascist topic" (Baskakov, 1988: 16).
G. Bohemsky regretted that Italian political cinema "failed the test, fell under the blows of the crisis" (Bohemsky, 1988: 61), and L. Cavani's Skin, "might have sounded condemnation of the war, but has become a series of scary rides; show the horrors of war became an end in itself" (Bohemsky, 1988: 67).
N. Dyachenko once again reminded that "the notorious commercial boom of French cinema and its current focus on traditional forms of cinema show deal a blow to the progressive, social-critical towards cinema. The most actively operating force of the national film industry remains entertaining pseudo-realistic cinema, which is trying to attract viewers to take subjects and topical phenomena of social and political life" (Dyachenko, 1988: 145).
Analyzing the movie Moon, Twentieth Century, The Conformist by B. Bertolucci and The Damned by L. Visconti, A. Plakhov (Plakhov, 1988: 162-168) melancholy stated that Freudianism captures even artists in general realistic warehouse (Plakhov, 1988: 168).
Referring to the plot of the film A. Verneuil Thousand billion dollars, K. Razlogov quite in the spirit of "stagnation era" claimed that "in this and other similar films, there is no word about the class forces do oppose the bourgeoisie, and ... life and struggle of the proletariat" (Razlogov, 1988: 85). But here's another Razlogov's phrase, unless, of course, for greater generality and universality remove from it the word "imperialism" and "bourgeois", in my opinion, is still very relevant: "No doubt, the independence of the media under imperialism is illusory and relative, and this is also evidenced by cinema screens. ... Magic irrational belief in "free speech", daily and hourly refuted the practice of the bourgeois media, is especially weighty support a unilateral interpretation of events" (Razlogov, 1988: 82).
And only E. Kartseva's article about American cinema looked quite "perestroika stream." She wrote that S. Lumet's Serpico, "demanded by their creators a huge civic courage. To its credit, it should be noted: in this highly realistic narrative they allowed themselves to any action to diversify fights or chases, usually inherent police movie, no hitting in the obvious melodrama" (Kartseva, 1988: 46). French Connection by W. Friedkin was ranked as "semi-documentary story told by the director with a great sense of humor, and the dynamics of the art", although it "skillfully avoided or veil the fundamental shortcomings of the work of the American police," (Kartseva, 1988: 53).
'Myths and Reality': Issue 11 (1989, put in set in December 1988)
The eleventh book Myths and Reality, which was released in print in 1989, alas, was the last. Perestroika reached its peak, the Soviet Union and the West's relations continued to improve, and low world oil prices continue to quenched the Soviet economy, which inevitably resulted in a drop in the standard of living of the population and the desire of the most active part of it to emigrate to the West...
Table 11. The main political events of 1987 - 1988 in the world that are important for the development of relations between the USSR and the West. Events in the USSR, which had relevance to the cinema
1987 Mikhail Gorbachev's visit to Washington. Signing the agreement on the elimination of intermediate-range nuclear missiles: December, 1-10. Western world announces M. Gorbachev "Man of the Year". Low world oil prices, contributing to a further decline of the Soviet economy and the living standards of its population.
1988 Start of the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan: May, 15. Meeting M. Gorbachev and R. Reagan in Moscow: May, 29 - June, 2. German Chancellor H. Kohl visited to the USSR: November, 25-26. Cancel Soviet jamming of radio station "Free Europe" on its territory: November, 30. M. Gorbachev visited New York (United Nations). His statement on the reduction of the Soviet armed forces and the beginning of the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Eastern Europe. December, 6-8. Low world oil prices, contributing to a further decline of the Soviet economy and the living standards of the population and the desire of the most active part of it to emigrate to the West.
Only now, in the year of preparation of last issue of the collection Myths and Reality (December 1988) the Soviet elite film critics decided to join perestroika trends.
G. Kapralov rightly scolded the low artistic qualities and cold war ideology of American Adventure Rambo 2, Fire Fox, Red Dawn, Invasion U.SA. (Kapralov, 1989: 4-14) admitted that "already after this article was written, from the Soviet country sounded a bold voice, proclaimed the new thinking. And no matter how difficult it is the development of modern social and political situation, encouraging occur, sometimes almost fantastic changes in the world. The sense of the new reality take on not only the president but also entire nations. As with all democratic forces, US filmmakers, and other capitalist countries destroy "karma" of false images and encourage people to take action in defense of human rights in a peaceful future for the preservation of peace in the unique planet called Earth" (Kapralov, 1989: 27).
Saving the World in a situation of "new thinking" was the key topic of the L. Melville's article. She wrote that "the images of scary and "unthinkable" that threatens humanity, appears in different ways on modern screens. But more often than not here sound sincere concern for the fate of the world" (Melville, 1989: 46).
Solid analysis of film history without ideological pinch contained in the articles by L. Alova (Alova, 1989: 110-129), E. Gromov (Gromov, 1989: 130-147), N. Nusinova (Nusinova, 1989: 263282) and E. Kartseva.
E. Kartseva reasonably recalling that "American cinema has many faces ... Throughout the history of its development appeared and continue to appear ... great critical works using Hollywood topic for serious reflection" (Kartseva, 1989: 65). G. Krasnova wrote in a similar vein about the female subject in American cinema (Krasnov, 1989: 86). The article of G. Bohemsky was also away from exposing pathos: "The creative treatment of the classics, to the great literature and its national traditions gives Italian cinema the new forces, reveals yet unused opportunities" (Bohemsky, 1989: 262). A. Braginsky correctly observed that in the French films "on the one hand there are entertainment. On the other - the cinema of thought and heart, which meets great difficulties" (Braginsky, 1989: 108).
Thus N. Sawicki, in my opinion, is absolutely true reminded readers that "commercial cinema" is generally not a synonym for film production of the lower class and the epithet of "entertainment" is not an exhaustive description of the picture, and stereotypes definitions such as "entertaining commercial movie" are a substantially zero information" (Savitsky, 1989: 148-149).
A. Plakhov made a deep analysis of L. Visconti art, noting that "the mythological beginning, increases in the work of Visconti ... and sometimes comes into very conflicting relationship with the realistic direction of his art, reaches its climax in The Damned, and in this film the history of interaction and the myth is the most productive. Later mythology continues to function in the structure of Visconti's movies, identifying some of their formal features. However, the nature of the life of the material, and a method of treatment of late Visconti suggest above all the profound and all strengthens the sense of history" (Plakhov, 1989: 213).
Contrary to previous reproaches addressed to Federico Fellini, printed in Myths and Reality, E. Victorova wrote that "today it is so important for us and for Fellini, that this artist is still true to himself: true humanistic pathos of his work, his transforming power that can change a lot in our complex than ever the world" (Victorova, 1989: 233).
Myths and Reality finally drew attention to the relatively new phenomenon for the time: video. M. Yampolsky wrote: "The main feature of this new media can be considered unstable, unformed bodies, tending to constant change and renewal. For artists who are concerned with the fate of the world, it would be an unforgivable mistake to stand aside, arrogantly ignoring the complex processes taking place in this area. Stop video development is impossible. That's why you should take an active part in the unfolding struggle for its destiny" (Yampolsky, 1989: 187).
4. Results
So, 125 articles (an average of 11 articles in each of the 11 books) published in Myths and Reality from 1966 to 1989. The authors of these texts (in most cases) were film critics relating to the above-mentioned elite category:
1. Prof. Dr. Vladimir Baskakov (1921-1999) was a member of the Communist party. In 19631973 he held the post of first deputy chairman of the Soviet State Committee for Cinematography, and in the years 1973-1987 he was the director of the Research Institute for History and Theory of
Cinema. This high status enabled V.E. Baskakov regularly travel to the largest film festivals in the world. His articles published in Myths and Reality, became the basis of his books: Dispute Continues (1968), Cinema and Time (1974), The struggle of ideas in world cinema (1974), The contradictory screen (1980), In the rhythm of time (1983), Aggressive screen of the West (1986).
2. Dr. Georgy Bohemsky (1920-1995) was a member of the Communist party. He was in the staff of Institute of History and Theory of Cinema. His articles published in Myths and Reality, became the basis of his book Cinema of Italy today (1977).
3. Dr. Georgy Kapralov (1921-2010) was a member of the Communist party. He held the prestigious post of deputy head of Department of Literature and Art in the main Soviet newspaper Pravda. As the correspondent of Pravda, he also regularly visited the major international film festivals. In addition, G. Kapralov from 1962 to 1986 headed the Moscow section of the film critics of the Soviet Union of Cinematographers, and he held the post of vice-president International Federation of Film Critics (FIPRESCI) in 1967-1974. From 1976 to 1979 he was the anchorman of the popular soviet TV show Cinema Panorama. His articles published in Myths and Reality, became the basis of his books: The game with the devil and the dawn at the appointed hour
(1975), The Man and the Myth. The evolution of the hero of the Western movie (1984), Western cinema: supermen and People (1987). He was editor of the books' collection Myths and Reality from the first to the fifth edition (1966-1976).
4. Dr. Romil Sobolev (1926-1991) was a member of the Communist party. His articles published in Myths and Reality, became the basis of his books: The West. Cinema and Youth (1971), Hollywood. 60s (1975).
5. Alexander Braginsky (1920-2016) was a member of the Communist party. His articles published in Myths and Reality, partly formed the basis of his series of books about the French cinema. He was the laureate of the Prize of Russian Film Critics Guild (for a series of books about the masters of French cinema) (1999).
6. Dr. Elena Kartseva (1928-2002) was a member of the Communist party. She worked in the State Film Fund, the Institute of Philosophy. From 1979 to 2002, he was a research fellow and head of Department of Research Institute for History and Theory of Cinema. Her articles published in Myths and Reality, became the basis of her books: Popular culture in the United States and the problem of identity (1974), The ideological and aesthetic foundations of bourgeois 'mass culture'
(1976), Kitsch, or celebration vulgarity (1977), Hollywood: contrast 70s (1987).
7. Dr. Ludmila Melville (born in 1948) was a member of the Communist party. She worked at the Institute of cinematography. Her articles published in the books Myths and Reality, became the basis of her monograph Cinema and the aesthetics of destruction (1984).
8. Dr. Marianna Shaternikova (born in 1934) was a member of the Communist party. She worked at the Institute of Art History, Research Institute for History and Theory of Cinema and the Institute of Cinematography. Her articles published in Myths and Reality, became the basis of her monograph Blue Collar on US screens (Working man in American cinema) (1985). She was the editor of Myths and Reality from 5 to 11 issues (1976-1989). M. Shaternikova emigrated to the United States in 1990, a year after the publication of the last book Myths and Reality.
9. Elena Victorova worked at the Research Institute for History and Theory of Cinema. Her articles published in Myths and Reality, became the basis of her book Gian Maria Volonte. Love and Fury (1990).
10. Prof. Dr. Alexander Karaganov (1915-2007) was a member of the Communist party. From 1965 to 1986 he was secretary of the Soviet Union of Cinematographers. He was the professor at the Academy of Social Sciences. His articles published in the books Myths and Reality, became the basis of his monograph Cinematography in the struggle of ideas (1974).
11. Dr. Garena Krasnova (born in 1945) worked at the Research Institute for History and Theory of Cinema. Her articles published in Myths and Reality, became the basis of her monograph German Cinema (1987).
12. Dr. Andrei Plakhov (born 1950) was a member of the Communist party. He was a journalist in Pravda newspaper in the years 1977-1988. His articles published in Myths and Reality, partly included in his book The struggle of ideas in modern Western cinema (1984) and
Northwest screen: the destruction of the personality. Characters and concepts of Western art
(1985)-
13. Prof. Dr. Kirill Razlogov (born in 1946) was a member of the Communist party. From 1969 to 1976 he worked in the State Film Fund. From 1977 to 1988 he was the adviser to the Chairman of State Committee for Soviet Cinematography. Since 1972 he taught at the Higher Courses for Scriptwriters and directors, from 1988 - in the film studies faculty of Institute of Cinematography. His articles published in the books Myths and Reality, partly included in his book The conveyor of dreams and psychological war: the cinema and the social and political struggle in the West, 1970s-1980s (1986).
14. Dr. Nikolay Savitsky (born in 1939) was a member of the Communist party. He worked as a head of department in the journal Cinema Art.
Initially, some foreign film critics (K.T. Toeplitz, E. Plazewski, A. Werner, et al.), mostly from socialist countries, published from the first to the fourth Myths and Reality books' collection. But since the fifth edition (1976) publication of the articles of foreign authors stopped once and for all. Apparently, the Soviet censors decided to completely protect readers from foreign opinions-
Table 12. The main authors of thematic books' collection 'Myths and Reality' (1966-1989)
№ Names of film critics, The number of The number of Frequency of
most often published articles published articles published presence of articles of
in books' collection by these film critics by these film critics these film critics in
Myths and Reality in books' collection in books' collection each of the books
Myths and Reality Myths and Reality (%) Myths and Reality (%)
1 V. Baskakov 9 7,2 81,8
2 G. Bohemsky 9 7,2 81,8
.3 G. Kapralov 9 7,2 81,8
4 R. Sobolev 6 4,8 54,5
5 A. Braginsky 5 4,0 45,4
6 E. Kartseva 5 4,0 45,4
7 L. Melville 4 3,2 45,4
8 M. Shaternikova 4 3,2 45,4
9 E. Victorova 3 2,4 27,3
10 A. Karaganov 3 2,4 27,3
11 G. Krasnova 3 2,4 27,3
12 A. Plakhov 3 2,4 27,3
13 K. Razlogov 3 2,4 27,3
14 N. Savitsky 3 2,4 27,3
Circulation and photos in 'Myths and Reality' collection
In the Soviet era of the books' deficit even film critics' books had large circulations: a collection of Myths and Reality was launched in 1966 with a circulation of 10 thousand copies. From 1971 to 1974 printed edition of this collection had 30 thousand, and from 1976 to 1988 -25 thousand copies. Copies of the last book, released in 1989, had 28 thousand.
The illustrations (they were mainly shots from foreign films in black and white) did the articles more interesting for readers. The first issue of the collection, which had the full name of Myths and reality: the bourgeois cinema today (1966) had 47 photos, 11 (23.4 %) of them was with the frivolous for the Soviet-Puritan times scenes (kisses, half-dressed women) from films Seduced and Abandoned, Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow, Divorce Italian, Dolce vita, Tom Jones, Rocco and his brothers, Night. Plus two frames (4.2 %), depicting scenes of violence (Hands over the City, Rocco and his Brothers).
However, such freedom is apparently not passed censorship and vigilant citizens (including the top of the Communist party apparatus). The editor of the collection G. Kapralov could not
ignore the directives contained in the resolution of the Communist Party Central Committee "On measures for further development of the social sciences and enhance their role in the building of communism" (14.08.1967) and "On increasing the responsibility of the heads of the press, radio and television, film, culture and art institutions for the ideological and political level of the published materials and repertoire" (07.01.1969), as well as the struggle of the USSR leadership with liberalism of "Prague spring".
Hence it is clear that in the second issue of Myths and reality: the bourgeois cinema today (1971) had 38 pictures, and frivolous (kisses, half-dressed heroine) photos could be considered already only 6 (15.8 %): from the films Blow up, Thank you, Auntie, Oh, damn watermelon!, Masculine, feminine, Belle de Jour and Satyricon. Three photos (7.9 %) were the illustrations of footage from the film depicting scenes of violence (Salvatore Giuliano, Bonnie and Clyde, Weekend).
In this five-year interval between the release of the first and the second issue of the collection eloquently that the respective governing authorities felt the need to clear doubts about the release of such publications, telling Soviet readers about the bourgeois films, not purchased to showcase in the USSR.
It seems that everything has been taken into account: the level of frivolous illustrations in 1971 was significantly reduced in 1971. But strict tone Resolution of the Communist Party Central Committee "On Literary Criticism" (21.01.1972), calling for even greater vigilance in relation to the capitalist West, led to a radical change in the situation illustrated in further editions of collection: in the issue 3 (1972) was only 19 pictures (with zero of frivolous pictures and only one frame (5.3 %) depicting scenes of violence (Weekend). And the issues 4 (1974) and 5 (1976) have been printed without any illustrations...
In the third edition of the collection was another significant change: the word "bourgeois" was replaced with "foreign". This is explained by the fact that it is now part of the collection were included articles about cinema of "developing countries" (in Africa, Asia and Latin America), of course, not revelatory, but sympathetically and approving. This name has remained unchanged until the end of completion in 1989.
M. Shaternikova became co-editor of G. Kapralov in 1976. And since 1978 she edited Myths and Reality until his last, 11th edition. She re-emerged the illustrations. But everything was under control: up to the beginning of perestroika (1985) was not any pictures a frivolous frame, and each of the 9, 10 and 11 issues had only a couple of such illustrations (The Taming of the Shrew, Saxophone, The Marriage of Maria Braun, Love in Germany, The Name is Carmen, An Unmarried woman). Photos, which contain scenes of violence, distributed as follows: in the sixth issue were four of them, i.e. 6.2 % (Taxi Driver, Chinatown, Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion, Oedipus Rex). In the seventh - only one, that is, 1.7% (Investigator Nicknamed Sheriff), in the eighth - three, i.e. 5.4 % (Canoe, Get out of Here, Telephone), in the ninth - five, 9.8 % (Zombie Horror, The King of Comedy, Investigator Nicknamed Sheriff, Nosferatu the Vampire, Knife in the Head), in the tenth - three, 3.9% (Gandhi, Dirty Harry, Gunfire), in the eleventh -zero.
Table 13. Distribution of illustrations with frivolous content and scenes of violence in thematic collection of 'Myths and Reality' (1966-1989)
Collection's Year of Number of photos in Number of photos Number of photos
issue issue the issue (total) with frivolous with scenes of
content (%) violence (%)
1 1966 47 23,4 4,2
2 1971 38 15,8 7,9
3 1972 19 0,0 5,3
4 1974 0 0,0 0,0
5 1976 0 0,0 0,0
6 1978 64 0,0 6,2
7 1981 60 0,0 1,7
8 1983 55 0,0 5,4
9 1985 51 3,9 9,8
10 1988 76 2,6 3,9
11 1989 59 3,4 0,0
5. Conclusion
Problems of ideological struggle, and the political censorship in the socio-cultural context of the 1960s - 1980s were reflected of Soviet critics, specializing in foreign films, in the many factors context. The main characteristic of the official Soviet cinema studies, facing the material foreign movie: 1) sympathetic support "progressive western filmmakers", 2) sharp criticism of "bourgeois tendencies and perversions", 3) criticism of bourgeois society.
The eleventh edition of the collection Myths and Reality showed, finally, that the Soviet film studies of the late 1980s was ready for deprived ideological bias in analysis of foreign cinema. This line was continued in the post-Soviet years, no longer in the Myths and Reality, but on the pages of scientific journals Film Criticism Notes and Cinema Art, in the film encyclopedia devoted to the western screen, in numerous monographs, the authors of which have become and authors of Myths and Reality (A. Braginsky, E. Kartseva, A. Plakhov, K. Razlogov, and other well-known Russian film critics).
6. Acknowledgements
Article was written as part of research with the financial support of the grant of the Russian Scientific Foundation. Project № 14-18-00014 «Synthesis of media education and media criticism in the process of preparing future teachers," performed at the Taganrog Institute of Management and Economics.
References
Alova, 1989 - Alova, L. (1989). The image of Sicily in contemporary Italian cinema. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 110-129.
Baskakov, 1966 - Baskakov, V. (1966). The battle of ideas. Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 1. Moscow: Art, pp. 3-31.
Baskakov, 1971 - Baskakov, V. (1971). The complex world and its commentators. Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 2. Moscow: Art, pp. 5-36.
Baskakov, 1972 - Baskakov, V. (1972). The crisis of bourgeois ideology and the fate of cinematography. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 75-106.
Baskakov, 1974 - Baskakov, V. (1974). Destiny of Neorealism. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 4. Moscow: Art, pp. 100-118.
Baskakov, 1976 - Baskakov, V. (1976). Cinematic America. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 5. Moscow: Art, pp. 67-91.
Baskakov, 1978 - Baskakov, V. (1978). Exposer and sacrifice. Myths and reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 6. Moscow: Art, pp. 152-168.
Baskakov, 1983 - Baskakov, V. (1983). Moscow International... Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 8. Moscow: Art, pp. 3-37.
Baskakov, 1985 - Baskakov, V. (1985). Screen aggression. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Mosocw: Art, pp. 3-26.
Baskakov, 1988 - Baskakov, V. (1988). Yesterday and today. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 10. Moscow: Art, pp. 3-22.
Belenky, 1976 - Belenky, I. (1976). Violence and responsibility. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 5. Moscow: Art, pp. 169-186.
Bohemsky, 1971 - Bohemsky, G. (1971). Italian cinema: Light and shadow. Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 2. Moscow: Art, pp. 71-91.
Bohemsky, 1972 - Bohemsky, G. (1972). Cinema of "consumer society" (Reflections on the Italian commercial film). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 107-137.
Bohemsky, 1974 - Bohemsky, G. (1974). A political film in Italy. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 4. Moscow: Art, pp. 252-270.
Bohemsky, 1976 - Bohemsky, G. (1976). The working class goes on the screen. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 5. Moscow: Art, pp. 114-151.
Bohemsky, 1978 - Bohemsky, G. (1978). Political cinema: the threat of a hoax. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 6. Moscow: Art, pp. 66-89.
Bohemsky, 1981 - Bohemsky, G. (1981). Italian political thriller. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 7. Moscow: Art, pp. 115-139.
Bohemsky, 1985 - Bohemsky, G. (1985). Cinema show takes revenge (Italian commercial cinema). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Moscow: Art, pp. 87-111.
Bohemsky, 1988 - Bohemsky, G. (1988). The most exciting theme (Italian films about the war). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 10. Moscow: Art, pp. 59-79.
Bohemsky, 1989 - Bohemsky, G. (1989). World Pirandello in the screen mirror. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 234-262.
Braginsky, 1966 - Braginsky, A. (1966). Yesterday and today, the "new wave". Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 1. Moscow: Art, 1966. pp. 125-138.
Braginsky, 1976 - Braginsky, A. (1976). French political cinema. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 5. Moscow: Art, pp. 92-113.
Braginsky, 1981 - Braginsky, A. (1981). Two points of reference. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 7. Mocow: Art, pp. 179-203.
Braginsky, 1985 - Braginsky, A. (1985). Changing of the Guard: New names, old problems (French cinema 1970s). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Moscow: Art, pp. 136-160.
Braginsky, 1989 - Braginsky, A. (1989). Two streams in a "system." Notes on the modern French cinema. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 87-109.
Chertok, 1974 - Chertok, S. (1974), French cinema about working class. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 4. Moscow: Art, pp. 144-155.
Dmitriev, Mikhalkovich, 1972 - Dmitriev, V., Mikhalkovich, V. (1972). The birth of the myth. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 234-249.
Dyachenko, 1981 - Dyachenko, N. (1981). Before choosing (Political trends in modern cinema France). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 7. Moscow: Art, pp. 62-80.
Dyachenko, 1988 - Dyachenko, N. (1988). The police film. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 10. Moscow: Art, pp.143-161.
Eco, 1976 - Eco, U. (1976). A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Fedorov, 2012 - Fedorov, A. (2012). "The Little School Orchestra'': A Sample of the Hermeneutic Analysis of Media Texts in Student Audience. European Researcher. 2012. Vol. 32, № 10-2, pp. 1804-1810.
Galanov, 1966 - Galanov, B. (1966). What does the "cinema-eye"? Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 1. Moscow: Art, pp. 151-158.
Galanov, 1972 - Galanov, B. (1972). When gods die (Note about Cannes film festival, 1971). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 202-215.
Galanov, 1974 - Golovanov, V. (1974). Hollywood: Economics and Politics. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 4. Moscow: Art, pp. 5-33.
Gromov, 1972 - Gromov, E. (1972). At the end of the sixties. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 36-74.
Gromov, 1989 - Gromov, E. (1989). The range of possibilities. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 130-147.
Jancolas, 1984 - Jancolas, J.-P. (1984). French Cinema. Fifth Republic (1958-1978). Moscow: Rainbow, 406 p.
Janushevkaya, Demin, 1971 - Janushevkaya, I., Demin, V. (1971). Formula of adventure. Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 2. Moscow: Art, pp. 199-228.
Kamshalov, Nesterov, 1978 - Kamshalov, A., Nesterov, V. (1978). World Cinematography against fascism. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 6. Moscow: Art, pp. 3-22.
Kapralov, 1971 - Kapralov, G. (1971). Hoax widescreen. Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 2. Moscow: Art, pp. 37-70.
Kapralov, 1972 - Kapralov, G. (1972). The destruction of the myth, the truth. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 173-201.
Kapralov, 1974 - Kapralov, G. (1974). Screen, politics and Clockwork Orange. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 4. Moscow.: Art, pp. 175-206.
Kapralov, 1976 - Kapralov, G. (1976). Social film with variations. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 5. Mosocw: Art, pp. 3-32.
Kapralov, 1978 - Kapralov, G. (1978). "Jaws": myth, politics, business. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 6. Moscow: Art, pp. 47-65.
Kapralov, 1981 - Kapralov, G. (1981). Deadlocks desperate maze of illusions and hopes of the road. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 7. Moscow: Art, pp. 3- 40.
Kapralov, 1983 - Kapralov, G. (1983). By spiral leading down. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 8. Moscow: Art, pp. 38-64.
Kapralov, 1985 - Kapralov, G. (1985). Cinema Demons of violence and virtue in American. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Mosocow: Art, pp. 27-45.
Kapralov, 1989 - Kapralov, G. (1989). "Loss" and the acquisition of real. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 3-27.
Kapralov, 1966 - Kapralov, G. (Ed.) (1966). Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 1. Moscow: Art, 228 p.
Kapralov, 1971 - Kapralov, G. (Ed.) (1971). Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol.
2. Moscow: Art, 264 p.
Kapralov, 1972 - Kapralov, G. (Ed.) (1972). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol.
3. Moscow: Art, 342 p.
Kapralov, 1974 - Kapralov, G. (Ed.) (1974). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol.
4. Moscow: Art, 272 p.
Kapralov, Shaternikova, 1976 - Kapralov, G., Shaternikova, M. (Eds.) (1976). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 5. Moscow: Art, 232 p.
Karaganov, 1966 - Karaganov, A. (1966). Between truth and falsehood. Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 1. Moscow: Art, pp. 32-73.
Karaganov, 1972 - Karaganov, A. (1972). Commerce, politics, the arts. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 3-35.
Karaganov, 1976 - Karaganov, A. (1976). Italian filmmakers. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 5. Moscow: Art, pp. 33-66.
Kartseva, 1974 - Kartseva, E. (1974). Cinema of the "mass culture", system. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 4. Moscow: Art, pp. 71-99.
Kartseva, 1983 - Kartseva, E. (1983). Under the sign of the politicization. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 8. Moscow: Art, pp. 84-102.
Kartseva, 1985 - Kartseva, E. (1985). From Nazi to ultra. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Moscow: Art, pp.46-66.
Kartseva, 1988 - Kartseva, E. (1988). People in blue. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 10. Moscow: Art, pp. 39-58.
Kartseva, 1989 - Kartseva, E. (1989). Hollywood on Hollywood. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 47-65.
Khanutin, 1971 - Khanutin, Y. (1971). Behind the facade of the "universal well-being" (Notes of a young Swedish film). Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 2. Moscow: Art,
pp. 124-149.
Kolodyazhnaya, 1978 - Kolodyazhnaya, V. (1978). Occult, fideism and modern American cinema. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 6. Moscow: Art, pp. 169-191.
Krasnova, 1985 - Krasnova, G. (1985). The search for alternatives: German Cinema against the expansion of Hollywood. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Moscow: Art, pp. 161-180.
Krasnova, 1989 - Krasnova, G. (1989). Challenging ... Women theme in American cinema 70s-80s. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 66-86.
Krasnova, 1991 - Krasnova, G. (1991). Social problems in the German "young cinema". Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 7. Moscow: Art, pp. 81-114.
Makarov, 1972 - Makarov, G. (1972). Ups and downs of a musical. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 250-267.
Mamatova, 1988 - Mamatova, L. (1988). "Parade of Stars" in Venice. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 10. Moscow: Art, pp. 94-121.
Markulan, 1972 - Markulan, J. (1972). Love, life, death for Lelouche. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 216-233.
Materials of the Plenum, 1983 - Materials of the Plenum of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee. 14-15 June 1983, Moscow, 1983, pp 7.
Melamed, 1972 - Melamed, L. (1972). New Latin America cinema. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 325-342.
Melville, 1983 - Melville, L. (1983). Feminism on the screen. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 8. Moscow: Art, pp. 135-159.
Melville, 1985 - Melville, L. (1985). Terrorism in the Western screens. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Moscow: Art, pp. 67-86.
Melville, 1988 - Melville, L. (1988). "Discreet Charm" of intellectual. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 10. Moscow: Art, pp. 23-38.
Melville, 1989 - Melville, L. (1989). Movies about the "unthinkable". Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 28-46.
Mikhalkovich, 1976 - Mikhalkovich, V. (1976). What is a thriller? Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 5. Moscow: Art, pp. 187-214.
Nedelin, 1966 - Nedelin, V. (1966). A Confessions of an artist in a terrible world. Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 1. Moscow: Art, pp. 205-226.
Nusinova, 1989 - Nusinova, N. (1989). Francois Truffaut: the history of cinema as an autobiography. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 263-282.
Parasadanov, 1966 - Parasadanov, N. (1966). Movies and bourgeois aesthetics. Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 1. Moscow: Art, pp. 104-124.
Plakhov, 1985 - Plakhov, A. (1985). Caution: TV! Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Moscow: Art, pp. 112-135.
Plakhov, 1989 - Plakhov, A. (1989). In the side of myth and history in depth. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 188-213.
Razlogov, 1981 - Razlogov, K. (1981). The "new" conservatism and Western cinema. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 7. Moscow: Art, pp. 41-61.
Razlogov, 1985 - Razlogov, K. (1985). The Church and the cinema in the West: the conflicts and interactions. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Moscow: Art, pp. 181-202.
Razlogov, 1988 - Razlogov, K. (1988). Outsider or demiurge? (The image of the journalist in modern western movie). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 10. Moscow: Art, pp. 80-93.
Reisen, 1983 - Reisen, O. (1983). Light at the end of the tunnel (about some tendencies of contemporary Spanish cinema). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 8. Moscow: Art, pp. 183-203.
Resolution of the Soviet, 1972 - Resolution of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee "On Literary Criticism" (1972). The Soviet Communist Party in Resolutions and Decisions of Congresses, Conferences and Central Committee plenums. Moscow: Politizdat, 1986. Vol. 12, pp. 170-173.
Savitsky, 1988 - Savitsky, N. (1988). Movies in the flow of time (from the program "Fest-83"). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 10. Moscow: Art, pp.122-142.
Savitsky, 1989 - Savitsky, N. (1989). "All genres ... except boring." On the problem of "commercial cinema". Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 148-168.
Shaternikova, 1981 - Shaternikova, M. (1981). The black shadows on the silver screen. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 7. Moscow: Art, pp. 140-161.
Shaternikova, 1983 - Shaternikova, M. (1983). Return of the Forgotten Hero. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 8. Moscow: Art, pp. 103-134.
Shaternikova, Ed. 1978 - Shaternikova, M. (Ed.) (1978). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 6. Mosocw: Art, 238 p.
Shaternikova, Ed. 1981 - Shaternikova, M. (Ed.) (1981). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 7. Moscow: Art, 247 p.
Shaternikova, Ed. 1983 - Shaternikova, M. (Ed.) (1983). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 8. Moscow: Art, 287 p.
Shaternikova, Ed. 1985 - Shaternikova, M. (Ed.) (1985). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Moscow: Art, 287 p.
Shaternikova, Ed. 1988 - Shaternikova, M. (Ed.) (1988). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. Moscow: Art 10, 240 p.
Shaternikova, Ed. 1989 - Shaternikova, M. (Ed.) (1989). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, 288 p.
Shestakov, 1978 - Shestakov, V. (1978). "New Hollywood": tactics and strategy. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 6. Moscow: Art, pp. 90-132.
Silverblatt, 2001 - Silverblatt, A. (2001). Media Literacy. Westport, Connecticut - London: Praeger,
Sobolev, 1966 - Sobolev, R. (1966). Two face of "verite". Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 1. Moscow: Art, pp. 139-150.
Sobolev, 1974 - Sobolev, R. (1974). Metamorphoses of "star system". Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 4. Moscow: Art, pp. 34-70.
Sobolev, 1981 - Sobolev, R. (1981). Movies and Comics. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 7. Moscow: Art, pp. 162-178.
Sobolev, 1983 - Sobolev, R. (1983). In the style of "disco" (notes about the movie "B" category). Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 8. Moscow: Art, pp. 226-244.
Soviet Communist Party, 1969 - Soviet Communist Party Central Committee Resolution "On increasing the responsibility of the heads of the press, radio and television, film, culture and art institutions for the ideological and political level of the published materials and repertoire" (1969). Moscow, 1969.
Soviet Communist Party, 1986 - Soviet Communist Party Central Committee Resolution "On measures for further development of the social sciences and enhance their role in the building of communism" (1967). The Soviet Communist Party in Resolutions. Moscow, 1986. Vol. 11, pp. 237-251.
Soviet Communist Party, 1972 - Soviet Communist Party Central Committee Resolution "On measures for further development of Soviet cinema." (1972). The Soviet Communist Party in Resolutions. Moscow, 1986. Vol. 12, pp. 263-268.
Surkova, 1976 - Surkova, O. (1976). Metamorphosis of Swedish cinema. Bergman and Wideberg. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 5. Moscow: Art, pp. 152-168.
Teneyshvili, 1972 - Teneyshvili, O. (1972). Everyday French commercial cinema. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 3. Moscow: Art, pp. 138-172.
Tsarapkina, 1985 - Tsarapkina, T. (1985). Canada Cinema: First Steps. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 9. Moscow: Art, pp. 223-240.
Tsyrkun, 1988 - Tsyrkun, N. (1988). "New Right" in Hollywood. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 10. Moscow: Art, pp. 182-200.
Turitsyn, 1971 - Turitsyn, V. (1971). Modern England in films Tony Richardson. Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 2. Moscow: Art, pp. 175-198.
Victorova, 1978 - Victorova, E. (1978). Phenomenon Volonte. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 6. Moscow: Art, pp. 133-151.
Victorova, 1983 - Victorova, E. (1983). Man and civilization: two views of reality. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 8. Moscow: Art, pp. 160-182.
Victorova, 1989 - Victorova, E. (1989). Memories of the Future! Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 214-233.
Weizmann, 1966 - Weizmann, E. (1966). The Myth of the person. Myths and Reality. Bourgeois cinema today. Vol. 1. Moscow: Art, pp. 74-103.
Yampolsky, 1989 - Yampolsky, M. (1989). Video: commerce, aesthetics and ideology. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 11. Moscow: Art, pp. 169-187.
Yurenev, 1978 - Yurenev, R. (1978). The past, present and future. Myths and Reality. Foreign cinema today. Vol. 6. Moscow: Art, pp. 23-46.
