In studying Soviet history, I often find that primary sources are my favorite way to really understand what is happening. Andrei Zhdanov’s speech to the first Congress of Soviet Writers contains a few points that I think would be worth discussing. The overall tone of the speech closely follows the format often employed by Stalin: make claims about some major “achievements,” and follow it up with some “minor” adjustments to make things even better. One claim that “Only Soviet literature, which is of one flesh and blood with socialist construction, could become, and has indeed become, such a literature-so rich in ideas, so advanced and revolutionary” stands out to me. This is something that Zhdanov really leans on as a core objective. He recognizes how powerful literature can be in a propagandist’s tool box. What does it mean for the “flesh and blood” of literature (and other arts) to be constructed in a socialist way? Is it ok to include portions of the Soviet Union’s not so socialist past during the Imperial era?
