I chose this post because Quinn takes a focus on the paranoia during the cold war which ties into later posts in the project that discuss this topic. He also does a great job at describing the severity of the issue which is hard for later generations to understand since we weren’t alive during the time.
Quinn Hughes
There truly is a vast amount of information that I’ve learned from the readings. As one who has always had an interest in both American and global history, I find the readings incredibly interesting. Due to the sheer capacity of material deriving from the readings, I’d like to begin and focus on Stephen Whitfield’s “The culture of the Cold War”. For one, like most American college students, I’ve heard stories about the sheer communist paranoia that existed in this nation during such times. However, I genuinely lacked the knowledge regarding the seriousness of the matter. The utter concern and angst regarding domestic communism were ginormous. It was so bad that even Hellen Keller was on the verge of being investigated due to her support for the Soviet Union. I mention this example as this was truly an enlightening moment for me and my understanding of the cold war. Regardless of Keller being both blind and deaf, the sheer terror that resided within this nation during such time resulted in the FBI nearly filing an inquiry into possible USSR connections. Furthermore, I see parallels between this feeling of uncertainty and paranoia with connection to our most recent novel, “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?”. As we’ve discussed in class, a premise in the theme of the text resides on this uncertainty of who is who. In other words, is she/he an authentic human or an android? This contrasts perfectly with this uncertainty of lacking the knowledge of who the Soviet spies just might be. I believe that this mindset is one that happens rarely, and the 1968 publishing date of the novel coincides with such thoughts during the time. I firmly believe that Phillip K. Dick’s depiction of androids would never have come to be if it wasn’t for such uncertainty and paranoia during such a time. Moreover, these readings provide us both representation and a description of mindsets during years when authors such as Dick were composing these novels. I have a feeling that the upcoming SF texts will share similar parallels, with perhaps elements that pertain to these various texts that I have not met connections with yet. However, these assigned readings provide a vast amount of background and explanation for our Science Fiction novels, and I’m excited to make further connections in the future.
11/28 Following World War II and the separation of Germany, the USSR helped the creation of a communist government in Eastern Germany and other countries in East Europe. The Soviet communist government wanted to ensure capitalistic and fascist ideas did not penetrate the minds of the people, so censorship became very important. The first step in Eastern Germany was to eradicate any literature that might promote fascism. It was stated that, “[t]he party maintained that it had eradicated fascist influences from East German literature, by eliminating all texts that fell outside of its restrictive boundaries.” (Fritzsche 70) which promoted the idea that this communistic government is doing well in preventing future fascist revival. In these 2nd world countries, it was believed that all literatures were to have political importance to push the communist agenda and increase efficiency. It is stated that “[t]he key to the success of soviet literature is to be sought for in the success of socialist construction.” (Zhdanov 3) This is to show how important it is to the movement to have texts exclaiming the ideas and betterments of communism. I originally thought that it was believed that leisurely activities are capitalist ideas which would not be beneficial to society and one’s nation, but I had not fully understood the idea of didactic materials. It is not that leisure was bad, it was that leisurely materials should still help the communist agenda and not distract from it. It is not that reading a book for entertainment or to relax was bad, just that the book being read should include ways to help the regime and help show how someone can better their country and society. This gives another layer to the importance of filling the literature with ideas of communism. This formed much of the establishment of science fiction in Eastern Europe by only allowing, for a long period of time, science fictions texts that further show utopic societies based on communism and texts that interested children in the sciences to explore words like in their science fiction novels. Science fiction was believed to primarily show what communism could do for the future. Ideas of preying on fears of mutually assured destruction was considered taboo and not allowed in these countries for a period because it was believed to take away the sense of security that the countries should give to their people. The restrictions that the communist governments gave created very niche, often propagandic science fiction literature before more leeway was given as to what could be read during the thaw.
Josef Stalin
I chose Masato’s post because he described in detail, not only the history of the cold war in these contexts, but also the effect it had on the literature of the time. What he is saying fits well into the context of the style of science fiction during the time period and the later blog posts in this project.
Masato Hirakata
In Istvan Csicsery-Ronay, Jr.’s “SF and the Thaw,” it is first and foremost critical for us to recognize that the “Thaw” in question is not, in fact, the improvement in relations between the Eastern Bloc and the NATO powers leading to the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union in the late 80s and 90s. It is, in fact, referring to what is called “The Khrushchev Thaw,” which is the period of the 1950s to the 1960s immediately following the death of Joseph Stalin. Of science fiction, Csicsery-Ronay defines this period as the creative boom period that had the largest and most profound “…immediate impact on the public sphere, the political culture, and the currents of mainstream literature…” (Csicsery-Ronay, 337), and “…was viewed as such a potent threat by the ruling order…” (Csicsery-Ronay, 377). Csicsery-Ronay also offers his personal understanding of the concrete start and end dates of the Thaw. It is the general consensus that the Thaw begins in 1956, specifically “with Khrushchev’s secret speech to the 20th Communist Party Congress, attacking Stalin for his purges,” (Csicsery-Ronay, 339). It is important to note the latter half of that quotation. Stalin, in his lifetime as Soviet Russia’s dictator, was a ruthless and brutally efficient politician who perpetuated genocides like the Holodomor in Ukraine, the purging of military officers, and employed men like Lavrentiy Beria, who despite his sexual predation and crimes against humanity, remained in power due to his overall usefulness to the state. Open criticism of Stalin, especially by the man now in charge of the Soviet Union (Khrushchev), signaled the end of the Stalin cult and his mythos.
Specifically in the context of science fiction, Soviet literature of the time had its proper place in Khrushchev’s policies of de-Stalinization. Under Stalin, science fiction was utilized as an incentive to the next generation of potential scientists and Soviet intelligentsia to pursue fields of education and research. Additionally, it served as a promise on the part of the state to create the ideal socialist society as depicted in those utopian, optimistic, and speculative science fictions. However, Khrushchev had recognized that, despite the Soviet vindication of their primacy and success over their victories against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan during World War Two, “ The population was exhausted and demoralized after years of war, tyranny, and deprivation,” (Csicsery-Ronay, 339). While Khrushchev similarly encouraged the growth and development of both the manpower and interest in science and industry, he also had the larger goal of improving Soviet society’s impression of the West and its innovations, where it had previously been interpreted as the second coming of fascism and denounced as “bourgeois science” by Stalin. To that end, Khrushchev needed the support of writers and literature, which had been previously ruthlessly suppressed and censored under Stalin. In Russia, where literature remained the primary source of the dissemination of information and ideas, Khrushchev thus decided to get writers “on side,” as it were. As quoted by Csicsery-Ronay of Rothberg, “If they were to enlist the support and co-operation of the people, if they were to steer a course between Stalinism and liberalism, the ruling elite needed the writers to walk the political tightrope with them, and in doing so, help them define the party line, as well as to promote and support it,” (Rothberg 12).
Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev