Mikhail Larionov And The Cultural Politics Of Late Imperial Russia

In the turbulent atmosphere of early twentieth-century Tsarist Russia, avant-garde artists took advantage of a newly pluralistic culture in order to challenge orthodoxies of form as well as social prohibitions. Very few did this as effectively, or to as broad an audience, as Mikhail Larionov. This groundbreaking study examines the complete range of his work (painting, book illustration, performance, and curatorial work), and demonstrates that Larionov was taking part in a broader cultural conversation that arose out of fundamental challenges to autocratic rule. Sarah Warren brings the culture of late Imperial Russia out of obscurity, highlighting Larionov's specific interventions into conversations about nationality and empire, democracy and autocracy, and people and intelligentsia that colonized all areas of cultural production. Rather than analyzing Larionov's works within the same interpretive frameworks as those of his contemporaries in France or Germany-such as Matisse or Kirchner-Warren explores the Russian's negotiations with both nationalism and modernism. Further, this study shows that Larionov's group exhibitions, public debates, and face-painting performances were more than a derivative repetition of the techniques of the Italian Futurists. Rather, these activities were the culmination of his attempt to create a radical primitivism, one that exploited the widespread Russian desire for an authentic collective identity, while resisting imperial efforts to appropriate this revivalism to its own ends.

Russia’s country estates were fulcrums of culture, learning and socio-administration under the imperial state. Only a fraction of the original numbers of these structures survives today, and yet even today several of the most famous of these buildings have uncertain futures. At risk is the survival of this fascinating remnant of Russia’s cultural history. This matter is especially salient as post-Soviet Russia has participated in a struggle over means of its own self-representation. Historic landmarks enter the political arena during periods of drastic change. The struggle over monuments reveals notable adjustments and continuities over a nation’s historical narrative; the study of the treatment of certain monuments provides insight to the language, symbols and memory of a people in transition. This book examines links between two seemingly divergent spheres of human interaction, those of politics and culture. The aim of this book is not to analyse the artistic and architectural merits of Russia’s country estates, as a plethora of works already address this subject. Rather, the objective is to look at the underlying attitudes and circumstances which affect the survival of this integral feature of Russia’s pre-revolutionary secular past. A variety of factors come into play in estate preservation, such as: privatization, restitution, taxation, legislation, actions of governmental and non-government organizations, tourism, and others. This book analyzes Russia’s institutions and actors that continually compete for shifting and scarce resources in the sphere of culture, often to the detriment of physical cultural artefacts themselves. More than just Russia’s estates are subject to these forces although estates serve as an excellent lens with which to view these destructive processes at work.

Russian Modernity places Imperial and Soviet Russia in a European context. Russia shared in a larger European modernity marked by increased overlap and sometimes merger of realms that had previously been treated as discrete entities: the social and the political, state and society, government and economy, and private and public. These were attributes of Soviet dictatorship, but their origins can be located in a larger European context and in the emergence of modern forms of government in Imperial Russia.

In modernizing Russia, obshchestvennost', an indigenous Russian word, began functioning as a term to illuminate newly emerging active parts of society and their public identities. This volume approaches various phenomena associated with the term throughout the revolution, examining it in the context of the press, public opinion, and activists.

How the last years of Stalin’s rule led to the formation ofan imperial Soviet consciousness In this nuanced historical analysis of late Stalinism organized chronologically around the main events of the period—beginning with Victory in May 1945 and concluding with the death of Stalin in March 1953—Evgeny Dobrenko analyzes key cultural texts to trace the emergence of an imperial Soviet consciousness that, he argues, still defines the political and cultural profile of modern Russia.

Twentieth-century Russia, in all its political incarnations, lacked the basic features of the Western liberal model: the rule of law, civil society, and an uncensored public sphere. In Slavophile Empire, the leading historian Laura Engelstein pays particular attention to the Slavophiles and their heirs, whose aversion to the secular individualism of the West and embrace of an idealized version of the native past established a pattern of thinking that had an enduring impact on Russian political life. Imperial Russia did not lack for partisans of Western-style liberalism, but they were outnumbered, to the right and to the left, by those who favored illiberal options. In the book's rigorously argued chapters, Engelstein asks how Russia's identity as a cultural nation at the core of an imperial state came to be defined in terms of this antiliberal consensus. She examines debates on religion and secularism, on the role of culture and the law under a traditional regime presiding over a modernizing society, on the status of the empire's ethnic peripheries, and on the spirit needed to mobilize a multinational empire in times of war. These debates, she argues, did not predetermine the kind of system that emerged after 1917, but they foreshadowed elements of a political culture that are still in evidence today.

The Imperial Russian Project is a collection of Rieber's lifetime of work, focusing on three interconnected themes of this time period: the role of reform in the process of state building, the interaction of state and social movements, and alternative visions of economic development.