Customer Reviews

Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I've read several dozen works on the Soviet era between the October revolution and the Second World War, from Pipes to Conquest and including Solzeynitsin's "Gulag" trilogy. While Solzeynitsin focused on the impact of those who were swept up in the great terror of the '30s, "Everyday Stalinism" looks at the impact on the average individual's daily life in the cities of the USSR.

Unlike the Pipes/Conquest terror-as-a-psychopathic-spasm-and-if-you-don't-believe-that-you're-a-revisionist school, Fitzpatrick is more focused on Stalinism at the common level. How it was maintained and what its effects were.

And, surprisingly, many people supported or benefited from it by filling the spaces of those "liquidated" or informing and denouncing rivals in love or work. The real fear wasn't always the KGB at 4am but a neighbor or acquaintance at work. The sad truth is that many were co-opted by the system and worked within it to support the party.

Addressed is the commonly held belief then that no matter what you may have done since the revolution, if you had been born into an "enemy class" then you were in a sense marked for life. The commoness of this view is highlighted in Fitzpatricks account. the irony of this is that those who rose up to replace the liquidated were themselves given bourgeois rewards.

Fitzpatrick does excellent work in guiding the reader throught the beauracratic, social and economic difficulties of the average Soviet citizen. Well researched and well written this can be read as an introduction to the era or especially as a valuable look at Stalinism from the perspective of the urban "masses".

Fitzpatrick, unlike the Conquest/Pipes school, does better at facing the sad and bitter truth that the system- while terryifing for some- was held together and supported by many who benefited. Even today walking the streets of St Petersburg, you will see many in the older generation holding pictures of Stalin in a sort of reverence. The co-opting of the culture and population is, to me, the most troubling aspect and legacy of Stalinism. Everyday Stalinism could function as an interesting companion piece to Orwell's 1984.

Well done.

Written by one of the most respected scholars of the USSR in the 1930's, Everyday Stalinism is outstanding. Fitzpatrick has exhaustively scoured recently opened Soviet archives for material in this book, and it shows. There is an abundance of new information here. Fitzpatrick details urban life in 1930's Soviet Union - the daily struggles of common men and women in extraordinary circumstances are vividly portrayed: the shortages of food and clothing, the ubiquitous presence of the government, the almost feudal arrangements between social strata (party members and others who hold "blat" - influence) and the competition for housing as the USSR began to urbanize. Only one chapter is devoted exclusively to the Great Purges of the late 1930's, although its silent presence is tangible just beneath the surface in much of the books subject matter. As one would expect from a professional historian, the books primary purpose is scholarship. But a strength is Fitzpatrick's writing style which is fluid and never dull. Be forewarned, this is not light reading. With that said, I highly recommend it to anyone who has more than a passing interest in the Soviet Union or Russia. If you want a deeper understanding of why the USSR socially and econcomically rotted from within, this is an excellent starting place.

Life in Stalin's Russia must have been extremely hard for all concerned, yet Sheila Fitzpatrick has managed to create a fascinating and readable book. There is a great deal of detail based on meticulous research, but at the same time there is an awareness of ordinary people, and some humour: if you needed to invent a new life for yourself, it was best to claim that you had been born in Kiev, since their records were destroyed in the Civil War. The strongest message comes at the end, that with everything "homo sovieticus" had to endure, he/she was a survivor. As a teacher of 20th century history I can totally recommend this book to anyone, student or general reader, who wants to understand this period and these remarkable people.

A well-written book, by a leading professor in the field!! Fitzpatrick has taken many different documents and worked them together to describe what city-life was like in the Soviet 1930's. This is the companion to her book "Stalin's Peasants", which describes peasant life during this same time period. Fitzpatrick describes what the average life of a Russian city-dweller was like, using many different stories. She ends the book by comparing life during this time to three different things. I will let you read the book to see what they are!!

Fitzpatrick has produced an intriguing book about the miseries of everyday life in Stalin's Russia during the 1930s, when people had to struggle with a world which had been turned upside down by both the revolution and the turmoil of the collectivisation and industrialisation policies of the late 1920s and early 1930s. Using a wealth of sources, she shows with particular clarity the great incompetence of the bureaucracy, where everyone seemed more interested in fighting for influence than in serving the people. She also puts the focus on crime, hooliganism and how the lot of women was slowly improved through the chance to get a decent education. Fitzpatrick also does not disappoint with the crushing effect of the nightmare years of 1936-1938, when millions were executed or imprisoned during the Great Purge. A vital read for all those fascinated by the topic of Stalinism

If you have an interest in Stalin and the 1930's, which include the purges, this book is a must for you. For the most part I study the Military and Political history of the early Soviet Union and I had this book on my shelf for years before I finally decided to read it. But once I began I was amazed at myself that I had waited so long to finally dive into this book! The author has really done her research and it shows!

The reader will get a much better and broader understanding of what life was like in the 1930's and how a new state was coming into its own. Why certain groups or 'classes' were being targeted by the state and what happened to them. How some changed their entire lives just to get away from the OGPU and later NKVD. And interestingly enough the policies implemented by the state worked against making it a safer place. As they aggravated one group after another through trials and forced movements they made enemies where in the past there might not have been any. It began to dawn on the government that these people would only seek vengeance once they were freed from punishment and it also created the idea that these people would be enemies for life. This, to a certain extent, explains why during the "Great Purge" which started in 1937 those released from GULag camps or special settlements, etc, were once again picked up and tried and sent to either prison or were executed.

The examples the author draws upon are an excellent representation of the time period and people's thoughts recount what they felt and desired while living through this turbulent, to say the least, decade. The one aspect of the Stalinist period that should be kept in mind, and appears throughout the book, is that no one was really safe in this time. From Communist officials who were being denounced by the hundreds to the regular man on the street who could be denounced because his apartment was bigger than his neighbors, or NKVD officials, one of whom a week before committing suicide visited and drank with the families of people who were denounced and he had to arrest and lastly even to Stalin's inner circle which witnessed the likes of Kaganovich losing his brother and Molotov his wife. A great contribution to the literature on Soviet Union under Stalin!

Sheila Fitzpatrick, specialist in the Stalin period of the USSR, has written a counterpart to her history of peasants and their lives in this era (Stalin's Peasants: Resistance and Survival in the Russian Village after Collectivization). Here, in "Everyday Stalinism", she chronicles the urban experience of life under Stalin during the 1930s, with all its paranoia, hardship and oddities.

The book is focused in particular on the relationship of daily life and the state, with relatively little attention for cultural history. However, making much use of the Harvard Project interviews with Soviet citizens from this period, she offers a compelling and fascinating view into the attitude of Soviet citizens towards the state, towards Stalin, and towards each other. Much more than just a tale of survival under threat of secret police, Fitzpatrick shows how people got by in terms of getting consumer goods, getting ahead, and getting even. Of course the Great Purges are given due attention, but what is particularly interesting is that in this book we see those events, as well as the earlier show trials, from the bottom up: not the political history of Stalin eliminating his enemies, but a struggle for power between the Party elites (largely received with disinterest by the general populace), and subsequently a series of rapid repressive maneouvres that descend onto the unsuspecting middle level.

Fitzpatrick pays excellent attention also to social policy and what effect this had on women, social and ethnic minorities, and so on. The USSR as an "affirmative action empire" has been well chronicled: The Affirmative Action Empire: Nations and Nationalism in the Soviet Union, 1923-1939 (Wilder House Series in Politics, History, and Culture). Nevertheless, Fitzpatrick's overview is clear and cogent, and we get also get a good idea of the immense advances in literacy, cultural knowledge and general outlook that were made in roughly the period 1927-1937. Whereas in 1926 only 57% of those aged between 9 and 49 were literate, in 1939 81% of the whole population was literate. Similarly, the entire mass of the population learned basic culture such as appreciating poetry, washing regularly, using soap and towels, not leaving cigarette butts everywhere and not spitting on the floor, etc.

Striking is the amount of critical letters and appeals that people kept sending to Party and Politburo leaders in the (often, but not always vain) hope of redress of grievances or changes in policy. This was already a set tradition dating back to Czarist times, but was maintained during the Revolution and post-Revolutionary period in the form of public debate in leftist papers and letters to Lenin (see Voices of Revolution, 1917). This gives us a good indication however of the public opinion in the Stalinist days, to which Fitzpatrick usefully adds the NKVD reports of overheard conversations and the like. This surprisingly indicates that skepticism towards Stalin himself as well as the general system was reasonably widespread, despite the "cult of the personality".

Overall, this is a well written and interesting history of urban life in the Soviet Union during the 1930s. It must be emphasized though (as this is not directly apparent from the book description) that it only deals with urban life, and only the 1930s. Neither WWII nor the post-War Stalinist period is discussed.

After years of reading about Stalin and the repressive, impoverished terror state he created, I was always baffled how any society could survive such upheaval, repression and suffering, and even meet its greatest test, the German invasion of the USSR, and triumph over it.
Sheila Fitzpatrick answers my question, in this fine book, showing how the average urban citizen of the USSR confronted the almost unbelievable difficulties of life in that country under its megalomaniacal dictator.

It first must be understood that Stalin was a genius in knowing how to crush a country's population without leading to a revolt or total collapse into apathy. For example, it is mistakenly believed that all expressions of dissatisfaction with the regime were ruthless punished. While it is true that any criticism of Stalin was dealt with in a most harsh manner, the citizenry was actually encouraged to complain about corrupt or inefficient minor officials and functionaries. Satirical publications like Krokodil would print cartoons lampooning corruption and inefficiency in Soviet society. Citizens could write letters to high officials with complaints about bad treatment they had received from bureacrats and officials (this doesn't mean, however, that anything would be done about the complaint). Fitzpatrick includes examples of these cartoons in the book. The government realized that this was a good way to have the population let off steam without pushing them towards revolt.
Another important point Fitzpatrick makes is that the regime saw to it that a few members of the peasantry or working class would be given rewards for being super-productive (the Stakhanovites) and would become entitled to receive extra food or consumer goods not available to the general public. This made everyone else think that may, they too, might some day have the chance to move up in society. Fitzpatrick also describes at length how "blat" (connections) gave some average people who had contact with priviledged members of society the ability to get extra "goodies" such as consumer goods, entrance to good schools, etc. Thus, many people felt that they were somehow "benefitting" from the system and it was in their interest to support it. Massive propaganda campaigns were also mounted showing statistics claiming that things were supposedly getting better and that in the near future, there would be a marked improvement in the standard of living ("just a little more sacrifice and paradise will be just around the corner"). Fitzpatrick points out that the regime generally opposed implementing a system of rationing, because rationing is an open admission that an item is in short supply, whereas abolishing rationing and instead having everyone stand in long lines to obtain the item leads people to think that the shortage is local or temporary.
Of course, the question still remains how millions of people could be carted off to the GULAG in Siberia or shot without the people rising up against this. The answer is that people in different social groups in society had little contact with those outside the group and there was a general indifference about what happened to people in those other groups. Stalin was careful not to purge all sectors of society at one time. First he started with the peasants during the collectivization campaign in the early 1930's, where he eliminated millions of "Kulaks". He also went after the urban workers in the "Five Year" Plan campaign that started in 1929. By the mid-1930's, he had eased up on them, and then turned on the intelligentsia and Communist Party members. After them, he went after the military. Fitzpatrick quotes people from that period who actually thought the purge of the intelligentsia was a good thing because workers saw that arrogant bosses and managers were being elminated. Alexander Solzhenitsyn was a student at the time and he commented that most students didn't care what happened to their professors...it might mean they wouldn't have to take a difficult exam if their teacher disappeared one day. After purging the intelligentsia, Stalin turned back on the workers and instituted draconian punishments on people who were more than 20 minutes late to work (too bad if there wasn't room on the streetcar-that is no excuse!).

One colorful point Fitzpatrick makes is that during Stalin's time, people stopped giving their children traditional Russian names which were associated with the Church and peasantry such as Trofim and Marfa, and instead tended to give "higher-class" names often taken from 19th century Russian literature such as Anatoly, Gennadi, Yevgeny, Svetlana and the such. Enthusiastic Communist Party members would invent names such as MELSOR (for "Marx, Engels,Lenin, Stalin, October Revolution"), Ninel ("Lenin" spelled backwards), or Vladlen (contraction of "Vladimir Lenin"
- a friend of mine born in the USSR has a brother-in-law with that name).

This book is highly recommended for anyone interested in this horrific part of history. The most important thing to remember is the final line of the book - the Soviet citizen under Stalin is best understood as a survivor.

Clearly it is well researched and (notwithstanding the author's Introduction) cuts through a lot of the politicised waffle that tends to accompany other books dealing with this period. You get an idea of the human and personal dynamics that were operating at the time. In short, the insight gained is sometimes surprising even when you think you know a lot about this period of history, i.e. the October Revolution and socialist construction. Only half way through the book as a matter of fact but you can tell from the outset that what you're reading is a study of substance that genuinely serves to inform the reader. I would say the author is one who is prepared to let facts speak for themselves.

Dr. Fitzpatrick has produced a marvel - a detailed scholarly work that reads like, oh well, a detailed scholarly work (but much more interesting to the lay reader than the usual specimen of that genre), and an account of life under a monstrous regime that manages to sparkle with humor. The book's subtitle is "Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times," and the extraordinariness of those times shines through.

This book is liberally sprinkled with personal accounts from people who lived that ordinary life. These accounts create a tapestry that leaves a stronger impression than any collection of numbers. Numbers she includes, but they're relegated to a supporting role. Laws, edicts, and bits of newspaper articles flesh out the story. We learn that in the 1930s the average Muscovite had 5.5 square meters of living space, that childrens' shoes couldn't be found before school started, that the cultured Soviet citizen was expected to not spit indoors and to use a handkerchief rather than a sleeve to blow his nose. We read about life in communal apartments (each of which had its resident lunatic), the deportation of the Kulaks, the NKVD's extreme concern with suicides of party members (an important index of social health).

All of this detail is woven together into a logical and coherent account that never lapses into pedantry, never turns into a big messy bag of information. It's social history at its best, an essential companion to those histories of the USSR that focus on people like Lenin, Stalin, and Trotsky and that often reduce their victims to statistics.

Dr. Fitzpatrick once nearly put my eye out with a waving pen, and she gave me serious grief over a historiography that read like a research paper. Even so, I enthusiastically recommend this book. It requires no specialized knowledge of Russian or Soviet history to be appreciated, but it offers a great deal of insight both to the lay reader and to the specialist. It isn't light reading, but it's very readable. Of the many dozens of history books on Russia and the USSR that I've acquired over the years, this is one of the few that I've read with pleasure.