Boris V. Reyfman
Russian State University for the Humanities, Faculty of Cultural Studies, Department of History and Theory of Culture, Russia, Moscow
125993, GSP-3, Miusskaya pl., 6.
PhD in Cultural Studies
firstname.lastname@example.orgForms of Realistic Generalization in the Soviet Cinema during the Khrushchev “Thaw”: War Films and Films about the “Present”Abstract:
The purpose of this article is to analyze the Soviet cinema in the timeframe of the Khrushchev’s “Thaw” period as well as to examine a certain logic underlying the evolution of relations between its two trends, which are conceptualized by the author. On one hand, there was a clear desire in the feature cinema for addressing the self-contained need to produce a typology criteria for the new forms of everyday life as well as to unite contemporary audiences through onscreen demonstration of the recognizable communicative situations via new means of cinematic expression. On the other hand, one can acknowledge the undeniable pursuit to reflect upon reality under the implication of rising above the typifying description, to express strong commitment to the directorial awareness in order to deliver its reality’s polysemic yet holistic meaning to the audience. The tension between these two tendencies towards either cinematic expression of ‘generalization’, recognized as a form of descriptive typification of various reality manifestations, or introspective representation of the global world integrity, was manifested differently in the “Thaw” films that addressed the subject of the Great Patriotic War and in the other films that followed its time. According to the author, the essential factor of their differences can be perceived as a dichotomy of identifying and assigning ‘substances’ of the Italian neorealism that became one of the main ‘external’ sources for the Soviet post-Stalinist filmmaking.Key words:
cinema, Thaw, neorealism, realistic generalization, typical, global, integrity, frame, scene, episode, Andrei Tarkovsky.References:
- Bazin A. Qu`est-ce que le cinema?Paris, 7-e art Publ., 1976. 372 p. (in French).
- Bohemskii G.D. The fate of neorealism. 1939-1961. Kino Italii. Neorealizm (1939–1961. Cinema of Italy.
- Neorealism).Moscow, Iskusstvo Publ., 1989. pp. 5–49. (in Russian).
- Deleuze J. Cinéma.Paris, Les Ėditions de Minuit Publ., 2006. 297 p. (in French).
- Dubin B. Memory, war, memory of war. Constructing the past in the social practice of recent decades. Intelros magazine club(in Russian). Available at: http://www.intelros.ru/intelros/reiting/reyting_09/material_sofiy/5023-boris-dubin-pamyat-vojnapamyato-vojne-konstruirovanie-proshlogo-v-socialnoj-praktike-poslednixdesyatiletij.html(accessed 05 Оctober 2020)
- Zorkaya N. Beginning. Mir i fil`my Andreya Tarkovskogo (The World and Films of Andrei Tarkovsky). Moscow, Iskusstvo Publ., 1991. pp. 22–36. (in Russian).
- Krauss R. Le Photographique. Pour une Theorie des Ėcarts,Editions Macula Publ., 1990. 232 p. (in French).
- Nietzsche F. Die Geburt der tragödie aus dem Geiste der Musik. Fridrikh Nitsshe. Poemy. Filosofskaya proza. (Friedrich Nietzsche. Poems. Philosophical Prose).St. Petersburg, Khudozhestvennaya literature Publ., 1993. pp. 130–249 (in Russian).
- Reifman B.V. Explicit and Hidden (About Some Typical for Soviet Cinema Realism of the Stalin Era, Properties of the Structure of the Film “Youth of Maxim”). Voprosy kul`turologii (Questions of cultural studies), 2009, no. 8, pp. 81–85. (in Russian).
- Salynsky D. Kinogermenevtika Tarkovskogo (Tarkovsky`s film hermeneutics). Moscow, Prodyuserskiy tsentr «Kvadriga» Publ., 2009, 576 p. (in Russian).
- Tarkovsky A.A. Lectures on film directing. Andrey Tarkovskiy: nachalo… i puti (vospominaniya, interv`yu, lektsii, stat`i) (Andrey Tarkovsky: the beginning … and the way (memoirs, interviews, lectures, articles)Moscow, Vsesoyuznyy institut kinematografii, 1994. pp. 82–155.(in Russian).
Reyfman Boris V. Forms of Realistic Generalization in the Soviet Cinema during the Khrushchev “Thaw”: War Films and Films about the “Present”. International Journal of Cultural Research. 2020. № 4 (41), 40–51. DOI: 10.52173/2079-1100_2020_4_40