Stalin and Hitler or "Red” vs “Brown”: Historical Issues in Cultural and other Perspectives

 

 

This course is intended as a broad treatment of issues that dominated the twentieth century: the rise of fascism out of the carnage of World War One and the Bolshevik revolution to which the war and Czarist Russia's involvement in it contributed. It is intended to be both interdisciplinary in its use of political and philosophical, historical, literary, documentary, and memoir texts as well as innovative in the search for the important connections that relate political, ideological, historical, and cultural developments in both the German and Russian or Soviet setting to each other. A number of films will also be shown that lend themselves to a variety of classroom purposes. Because propaganda played such an important role both in Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia, we will look at examples of films from the two ostensibly antithetical political systems in order to discuss the role and effectiveness of film propaganda in general, to see what distinguishes them from each other, and to ascertain what they may have in common. Some of these films we will also consider both in terms of their artistic innovativeness as well as the careers of the controversial filmmakers, like Riefenstahl and Eisenstein, who created them. A few Western films — Dr. Zhivago, Reds, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, 1984 — will figure either as film treatments of literary masterpieces or as artistic depictions of historical celebrities like John Reed. At the center of much of this figure singular personalities like Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler, and we will examine the role played by these key figures in historical events of this magnitude. Passing consideration will be given to that brief period in which these two systems colluded, 1939 through 1941, in order to ask how such collusion was possible given each system’s ideologically embedded hostility toward the other; why that collusion ended, whether the end was inevitable, and which side was responsible for it (was Stalin really planning a preventive war against Hitler on the eve of “Barbarossa,” the German invasion, and why did Stalin ignore the warnings of impending attack?). From there we will proceed to a discussion of the titanic clash between the two countries and their militaries, raise some important questions with regard to the emerging implications of the Red Army’s march westward after Stalingrad, talk a bit about Yalta, consider the fall of Berlin, and take a look at the importance of victory in Soviet political and ideological thinking (and mythology). More towards the end of the semester, we will consider the situation created in Western and Eastern Europe by the defeat of fascism and contemplate the origins and evolution of  the cold war. We conclude with a quick consideration of the dissolution and democratization of Eastern European countries, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and, against the entire tragic background of the past, close with the issue of general prospects for democracy in Eastern Europe and Russian in the future.

 

Teaching Methodology

 

The Covid pandemic, which in spring 2020 led to a sudden disruption of in-class teaching and a shift to remote instruction, necessitated a major alteration in the way I teach my classes. As you will have inferred from my initial pre-semester email to you all, that earlier approach revolved around a loosely structured, always germane, but improvisational, associative presentation of issues vital to the course. I do not adhere slavishly to a rigid syllabus. Additionally, you will be periodically sent links to articles and news stories related to the inherent subject matter of our course. You will soon come to understand that this course, as do all courses I teach, raises issues that cannot be in some rigid historically compartmentalized, with neat beginnings and neat ends. Your world, the world you live in, remains vitally affected, to this day, by the experiences of the two totalitarianisms: Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. Our operating principle can be summed up by Shakespeare’s lines in The Tempest, “The Past is Prologue,” and/or Faulkner’s line “The past is never dead. It's not even past.” Or…. To employ the title plus addendum from a novel published in 2005, which resulted in a film of the same name, “Everything is Illuminated [by the light of the past].” This could be put slightly differently: [knowing about and understanding] the past sheds light on the present and is the only way to place the present in a context that enables understanding of the “era” we live in; but the present, if you are informed about it and ponder it sufficiently to grasp some of its essences, provides a critically important window into grasping the past more fully. You will come to understand that various things we experience or are experiencing are not new. To quote Yogi Berra (google the name), it’s déjà vu all over again…. Making these connections is part and parcel of understanding the subjects we are studying this semester.

Though this approach of mine has in the past struck students as unorthodox, unconventional, my experiences with outstanding students, their evaluations, written work, emails, conversations, etc. produced a record of confirmation of the effectiveness of this approach and a broad consensus of student endorsements. I grant you that, for some students, it can take a week or two or perhaps even three to get used to. But, in the beginning, there is no reason for anyone to be unsettled about this. Sooner or later (usually sooner!), you will grasp the approach and understand what it can achieve. However…. This approach was, of course, impossible under any conceivable remote circumstances. I do not, and will not, use Zoom – that’s a class killer in any case. What I hit upon beginning in March 2020 ultimately generated an abundance of evidence from my students that my “remote” approach worked and worked well. I surprised myself. Given the enormous enrollments in my classes (this, too, is a phenomenon of the last 4-5 years, when my enrollments began skyrocketing), I will divide each class into GROUPS. The Freshman Seminar (FYS), with a current enrollment of 25-27, will result in two separate groups. For any given assignment, alternating groups will EMAIL to me and the rest of the class, a substantive, but succinct “impression” of a few paragraphs of the assignment. With each specific assignment, a specific group will be given a deadline to disseminate impressions. Everyone in class is expected to read these impressions carefully and be ready to discuss some of the major points in class. Those of you not belonging to a specific group disseminating these “impressions” of any specific assignment are nonetheless also required to write your own impression of that assignment and save it. At midterm time, everyone in class compiles their collected impressions and sends them to me as a WORD or PDF document. Same thing the end of the semester. These impressions form the largest basis of your grade, and, importantly, everyone of you can and should be comparing what you write in the way of your impressions with what other students disseminate. Though it doesn’t work this way, in theory you ought to be able to grade yourselves by comparing the quality of your thought and the quality of your writing with that of others in the class.

There are no other written assignments, but there will be a final exam. During our remote semesters, I responded voluminously to the disseminated impressions: I called them my “covid lectures.” Just to give you an example, counting my “responses” as well, my course last spring “Auschwitz and Gulag” generated close to 1,000 emails. It was one of the best courses I’ve ever taught and included some of the finest students I’ve ever had. This approach brought out their best.

What I will be attempting to do this semester is to hybridize, combine, what has worked best in my teaching approaches – the one practiced for years in the form of free-wheeling classroom presentations of essential issues related to the class, and my recent “remote” practice of student “impressions.”

It is up to you to organize these emails; print them out, put them in a loose-leaf notebook, make dedicated folders in your email – I don’t care how, but keep track of them, and any responses I elect to make by email. I will be reading ALL of your impressions, as will you, but rather than commenting upon them in writing by email, as I did during our remote semesters, I will attempt to engage some of the best insights from the impressions in class. I may or may not elect in additional to respond by email to this or that especially good point in an impression. We’ll see.

Importantly: I do not yet know how, if at all, to handle questions from you. You are all required to be masked. I asked the administration whether this or that student can lower a mask to ask a question; if you cannot, then I will not be able to understand you, sadly, and questions posed in class will not take place. Unsurprisingly, the administration has not answered my question, and likely will leave it unanswered – that’s the way they do things. Either way, we will have to find ways of being flexible under, at best, trying circumstances.

 

As indicated in my earlier email, you are all expected to install the Check-In app on your Android phone or iPhone and, before each class meeting, use it to check-in to that class session.

Attendance is absolutely mandatory; if you must be absent, you are allowed, for acceptable reasons, only two excused absences. Each subsequent absence lowers the grade otherwise earned by a half grade point - i.e., a third absence takes an A to an A-, a fourth from an A- to a B+, and so on. There are no automatically excused absences. If you must miss class, you are expected to email me in advance with your reason. These policies adhere closely to university "Academic Procedures," which are outlined in the Undergraduate Bulletin and which you are expected to be familiar with.

 

** Absolutely NO mobile phones, iPhone or otherwise, are allowed in class. Not in your hand, not on your desk. This is a policy to be strictly adhered to, and violations of it may be considered by me to be honor code violations. The same thing goes for recording of any kind without my express permission. Equally so, NO open computers are allowed in class.


 

 

 

Tentative Course Outline

 

Week One

 

Readings: The Communist Manifesto; All Quiet on the Western Front

 

 

Week Two

 

Readings: Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism

Film: Reds
 

Week Three

 

John Reed, Selections from Ten Days that Shook the World;

Films: Ten Days that Shook the World

 

Readings: Selections from Mein Kampf; Brecht’s Three Penny Opera

Film: The Three Penny Opera

Kurt Weill, Songs from the Three Penny Opera (Lotte Lenya; Louie Armstrong)

 

Week Four

 

Brecht, Three Penny Opera

Film: The Three Penny Opera; Songs from Three Penny Opera

 

Week Five

 

Reading: Benjamin, “Art in the Age of its Reproducibility”

Film: “The wonderful horrible life of Leni Riefenstahl”

 

Week Six

 

Readings: Orwell, Animal Farm

Film: 1984

 

 

 

Week Seven

Georg Buechner, Danton's Death

 

Week Eight

 

 

Reading: Solzhenitsyn, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich

 

Reading: Lourie, The Autobiography of Joseph Stalin

 

Week Nine

 

Readings: Kennan, “Russia — Seven Years Later”; Churchill, “Iron Curtain Speech”; “Long Telegram”

 

Week Ten

 

Readings (selections and excerpts): Rosenbaum, Explaining Hitler

 

Week Eleven

 

Reading: Steiner, The Portage to San Cristobal of A.H.