The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

Features of cultural construction in the Soviet Russia the 20-30th: to a question of subject aspect of history



osobennost of cultural construction in the Soviet Russia of the 20-30th years: to a question of subject aspect of history

A.V. Kostina (Moscow humanities university) *

The period of the 20-30th years in the Soviet Russia was connected with change of types of the subject of historical action. The qualitative specifics of social development of the 20th years were made with what was connected with manifestation of personal activity, the period of the 30th years became time of domination of the massovizirovanny individual which distinctive features are submission to the strategy of management from the outside.

Features of Cultural Construction in the Soviet Russia of the 1920-30: to the Question on a Subject Aspect of History

A. Kostina

(Moscow University for the Humanities)

The period of the 1920-30 in the Soviet Russia was connected with the change of types of historical action subject. The qualitative specific character of social development in the 1920s was made by things connected with personal activity display, period of the 1930s became the time of domination of the mass-man whose distinctive features were submission to strategy of management from the outside.

The era of the 20-30th years of the 20th century in the Soviet Russia was the period in which borders the consecutive transition from one type of culture to another was carried out. To consider that variety of trends which characterized this period not simply, but it is possible. However for creation of the verified model of this process the allocation of its most basic, structure-forming elements and "removal for brackets" of many, perhaps, its essential components is advisable. As rather objective approach allowing to do certain generalizations the subject approach — the analysis of the leading trends of sociocultural development of it is represented productive

rather local period from the point of view of dominating in 20th and 30th type of the subject of historical action.

The main thesis is previously representable: the Soviet era of the 20-30th years appears as the period of sharp change of types of the subject of historical action. The specifics of social development of the 20th years were defined by quantitative domination of the identity of collective type, but the qualitative specifics of this time were made substantially with what was connected with manifestation of personal activity. In the 20th years both the social and art activity was so essential that it allows to consider the first postrevolutionary decade as time intensive razvi-

* Anna Vladimirovna Kostina is a Doctor of Philosophy, the manager of department of cultural science of the Moscow humanities university. Ph.: (495) 374-61-81. Al. address: appa_ko8 І Ї pas @ _pyokh.gi

Tia of the active and personal beginning in culture, the period of the 30th years became time of domination of the massovizirovanny individual which distinctive features are submission to the strategy of management from the outside.

Subject of culture of the 20th years as creator of social space: peasantry

The October revolution of 1917 was a performance not only against former political system how many against the core cultural wealth of former culture. It was the unconscious aspiration to destroy a former image of Russia, and then to enter this space as the new subject making own history. This process of democratization became the period of awakening of social activity of masses and their introductions in social and political life. At the same time the structure of postrevolutionary culture essentially changed, all subsystems of culture significantly changed the former contents. Noble culture — the basis of the Russian culture which had world value (we will notice that on a population census of 1897 the nobility made 1.5% (History the USSR..., 1986: 7) — it was destroyed: a part of the nobility was forced to go to emigration, a part underwent repressions, certain representatives got up on service to the new state. Representatives of raznochinny culture formed the basis of the proletarian intellectuals. The country culture which was "the nutritious soil" and the base of culture of Russia (peasants in 1897 made 71% of the population), underwent considerable structural and substantial transformations: "raskrestyanivaniye" was followed by forced relocation, moving to the city for work at the plants that led to deleting of social memory and destruction of this culture. City culture was significantly marginalized.

In the first postrevolutionary decade there is a situation when the peasantry —

though rather transformed — remains the dominating class, continuing to maintain collective representations and still feeling the communication with community. However this obshchinnost collapses.

On the one hand, it was caused by its "obmirshcheniye", loss of feeling of participation in true piety and need of preservation of Orthodoxy. In spite of the fact that antireligious promotion was conducted in the village quite sluggishly ("to a .vvid of absence of heads, work develops poorly; literature is not enough, also the Bezbozhnik magazine extends a little. Debates are single.") (Stopanin, 1926: 63), atheism begins to take roots and occupy that niche from which the religion is forced out. The reading room began to perform functions of church. Here the peasant could receive explanations concerning taxation, receive the certificate of purchase of agricultural stock and cars, of receiving the credit, the help in writing of letters to various state instances and just to relatives (Vilenskaya, 1925: 107). On the other hand, peasants received the earth from the government, and it significantly strengthened authority of the state on their eyes. Changes concerning the Soviet power were fixed also by the observers noting that those peasants who "in the past 1924 abused it and damned. this year thank" (Leningrad. 1925: 11-12).

Of course, strengthening of a role of the state institutions and weakening of those communications which were an essence of the communal relations, did not mean destruction of collectivist representations of the peasantry. The peasantry still showed a set of qualities allowing to consider them the carrier as the individual who is a representative on behalf of collective. Such features as traditional character, inertness, orientation to precedents, were also considered by the power as the most destructive qualities of the peasantry as the class which hardly is giving in to fast and effective management. Really, peasantry hardly

perceived the interests of the Soviet power as own and showed extreme indifference to its needs. In particular, "trudmobi-lizovanny", directed to the enterprises as labor set of various areas (at the beginning of 1921 in Petrograd at the city enterprises about 8,000 such workers (Ivanov, Kanev, worked 1961: 11) and used generally as ancillary workers — for unloading and loading, for supply of firewood, on earthwork and in construction, constantly created instability at the plants, being ready, "without reckoning with situation, under any given pretext to leave the plant and to go to the country" (the Protocol. 1999: 103).

Besides, in the conditions of poorly developed industry, the peasantry was the main producer of a food resource, than put itself in opposition to the power. After the revolution there was an intensive arkhaization of the relations and naturalization of economy which those years was realized as kickback to HUN-HUSH of centuries. (Revolution. 1925: 5). It was shown in a primitivization of farm patterns, in dependence of life on own work, health of the owner and existence of a horse, in revival of podsechny agriculture, in replacement of a plow by a plow, in return to manual millstones, in revival of a domotkanina, in refusal of the pottery acquired from handicraftsmen and production by own efforts of carved wooden ware. The lack of the market and depreciation of money as equivalent of exchange led to a universalization as exchange unit of bread when the measure of a rye allowed to recalculate mushrooms for calico. After 1925, forty-degree state vodka became such equivalent (Kozlova, 1996: 103-104).

Shops in such conditions became a source of only several types of goods — salts, matches, agricultural stock, fabric. In other words, the city could not give to the village anything, as generated among peasants opinion that we "will live without the city, let the city without us will live" (CDNA. T. 366). Similar a spirit -

a niya of peasants, certainly, were known to the power which perceived peasants in quality not only the reactionary force, but also a potential source of danger": "peasants represent people who. manage on themselves and the surplus bread can turn into slavery of the workers, owing to ruin of the industry who do not have an opportunity to give them an equivalent for bread". According to V.I. Lenin, the relation of the power "to these petty-bourgeois owners whose number millions, is the war relation. It is the cornerstone of dictatorship of the proletariat" (Shishkov, 2004: 508).

But if to address moods of the proletariat in the 20th years, then it will turn out that they are in consonance to moods of the peasantry. Indifference, political indifference, inactivity become the dominating manifestations here that is fixed in reports of informants: "To the Soviet power, the Communist Party and labor unions the relation of workers passive", "treat a present situation passively because it is not enough or are absolutely undeveloped in the political relation", "the attitude towards collective (RCP) from most of workers indifferent", "at meetings is observed slackness of attendees", "questions to the speaker are not set, resolutions are in the majority adopted offered by speakers" (Yarov, 1999: 8-10). The interest of the proletariat is similar to the interest of the most backward classes in the ideological and political plan and it is shown only in the field of economic everyday issues. It shocked the leader of Mensheviks F.I. Dan remembering that the thought of operating masses "did not go further direct satisfaction of elementary needs for food and heat" (Dan, 1922: 111). In the report of a revstroyka of the 1st Urban area the same interests of the workers breaking the normal course of work as disputes on distribution of rations, footwear and clothes which interests them more, than "all kronshtad-sky events" (Yarov, 1999 are noted: 9).

It is characteristic that workers explained these phenomena of political indifference

presence at the proletarian environment of a considerable share of "alien elements", components sometimes up to 70% and resisting to "workers shaft horses" (Petrograd. 1923). In documents of these years these groups are described as keeping a certain autonomy from radical workers as passive regarding independent promotion of political or economic programs and not capable to initiation of social actions as the closed on themselves, rather conservative, inert and traditionalist communities. The former peasants remained the most conformal part of workers refusing not only of active political life, but also — is quite frequent — from participation in strikes (Yarov, 1999: 26).

Of course, it is necessary to take the fact that processes of industrialization in Russia began long before the revolution into account. Prerequisites of mass society develop already in the second half of the 19th century, and especially obviously these processes began to proceed after carrying out a complex of reforms — economic, political, including country, and educational. They led to the end of the century to industrial upsurge in Russia, to formation of the uniform market and the uniform system of the railroads, to the intensive growth of the capital. Development of the heavy industry of Russia in the 80-90th years of the 19th century is demonstrated by regular holding national industrial exhibitions where the greatest interest of producers is attracted by the sections "Cast Iron, Iron and Steel", "Machines and Devices", "Lead and Silver", "Glass and Pottery". At the end of the 19th century in Russia the mass consumption and mass production appears: factories on production of furniture, perfumery, confectionery, ware, paper, studio on mass standard tailoring. At this time the companies and associations which products openly compete with western prosper: "Conductor" (production of rubber products); "Siu and To", Eynem, "Apricots

and sons" (confectionery); "Bro-kar and To", "A.M. Zhukov" (perfumery, tobacco, drinks).

Promptly the sphere of mass communications develops — the circulation of newspapers and the illustrated editions (for example, only the special magazines "Fotograf", "Vestnik fotografa" and "Fotograficheskoye obozreniye" were devoted to the art of photography) grows, the cable agencies are created, the print advertizing and its such forms as the poster, the poster, the brochure, the booklet, the catalog actively develops. Industrial transformations cover also handicraft work which is replaced by professional workshops soon (for example, Akhmetyev' workshops in Moscow, Golyshev in Mster) that demonstrates gradual and implicit replacement of individual creativity with an industrial way of creation of objects of arts and crafts (Kostina, 2004: 111-120).

It is natural that hereditary and highly skilled workers were the most active, the free, creatively focused part of the proletariat though their representation in lump was much less 30% designated earlier. The facts do not allow to speak about domination at early stages of development of the Soviet power of the massovizirovanny individual as relevant representative of society. As it is represented, it is connected not so much with weakness of the industrial relations in the 20th years in the Soviet Russia (the similar backwardness of institutes of mass society in Europe already the end of the 19th century allowed to see nevertheless this phenomenon so distinctly that already F. Nietzsche expressed to it the relation, having designated a weight phenomenon through not philosophical category "herd"), but with domination during this period of absolutely other types of a historical subject — the collective personality and the personality individualized. The Massovizirovanny individual will become the main historical prezentant in the following -

of syatiletiye, marking the beginning of development is perfect other type of culture.

Subject of culture of the 20th years as creator of social space: proletariat

About a pronounced personal component of that small part of workers which in the first decade of the Soviet power proved rather actively, a number of the facts demonstrates. First of all, this conscious participation of many of them in oppositional political activity (first of all in parties of Social Revolutionaries and Mensheviks) that led to disengagement of labor unions within several months after the February revolution on political sign. Though already at the I All-Russian congress of labor unions in January, 1918 among delegates there were 273 Bolsheviks, 66 Mensheviks and 33 representatives of other parties, and in 1922 at the V congress — 773 Bolsheviks and 2 Mensheviks in the absence of oppositional groups (Pankratov, 1927: 146). In 19221923 when the Bolshevik party remained the only legitimate party, the fight against dissent gained economic character, having poured out in a form of so-called re-registrations, and in essence — lock-outs. The re-registration meant dismissal of all workers, and their employment was carried out by the special commission eliminating "unreliable". In 1921 in Petrograd the re-registration was carried out on Pipe and Obukhovski Plant, at the Nevsky filar factory and Laferm factory. The fired workers it agrees to the resolution VSRM adopted in the spring of 1919 originally it was planned to move for Don for the constant settlement. However the similar workers showing ability critically to treat the power and the ideas imposed by it, there was quite a lot, and this decision was unrealizable — workers or went to other enterprises, or returned to the plants (Yarov, 1999: 157-158).

Despite the strengthened opinion that the large plants with pre-revolutionary

traditions — Metal, Obukhovsk, New Lessner — were a stronghold of the dominating power, the most consecutive attempts of workers to express own opinion on the Constituent assembly, on the system of distribution, on labor unions exactly here were observed. Among labor unions there is an Union of printers and the Union of chemists showed the greatest autonomy from the power that led to the organization of the alternative "red" Union of printers, appointment of the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions (under the pretext of overcoming split) a unifying congress and to election on it a Bolshevik rule, to dissolution of the old Union. It is characteristic that even such large and well planned actions as trial of Social Revolutionaries in 1922, did not generate agreement of opinion of responses and opinions. So, on Obukhovski Plant after the report on counterrevolutionary activity of this party the worker of the mine workshop Kapustin who gave an assessment to fight of Bolsheviks and Social Revolutionaries as race for power in which workers are not involved acted the court contradicts common sense as at any system "all weight falls on the worker", and not the court, and "the general association" is necessary. In spite of the fact that the speaker was arrested, at the same enterprise later Stepanov authorized from workers stated reproaches that constantly allow to express only to one party that does not allow to assess a situation objectively (Yarov, 1999: 149-151). During this period what — with positive connotations — received later definition of "creativity of masses" was brightly shown. It and socio-political activity — in Petrograd by 1923 was more than 3000 activists whose main types of public work was the delegatstvo at the enterprises, membership in trade-union committees, participation in mediation boards, cooperatives, control authorities (Vasilashko, 1979: 71), and activity social and art where long before the beginning of political revolution "the spirit revolution" began to be carried out.

Soviet era of the 1930th years: hierarchy, totalization, canonization as intrinsic properties of culture of autocratic type

Features of cultural development of the 30th years were in many respects caused by change of an economic and political situation when significant are, on the one hand, undoubted achievements of the Soviet Russia, with another — such negative points as hunger of 1932-1933, drama consequences of collectivization and industrialization, the amplifying leader's cult, prefeeling of World War II. The specifics of social and cultural development of this period are connected with strengthening of the ideological control directed to formation of strictly set contents.

In the 30th years the autocratic type of culture which is characterized by set of specific features receives final registration: hierarchy that, in particular, is reflected available specialized group of creators of culture, or cultural experts occupying a high step in social hierarchy; high degree of orderliness of all elements of culture; canonization of the cultural samples which received the status legitimate (beginning from political life, art and finishing with ways of behavior); totalization where culture submits the universal interpretative schemes explaining specifics of life and real; an exception of alien cultural elements, aspiration to integrity, connectivity and interdependence of the elements providing to culture stability of the geshtaldt and dynamics of reproduction; simplification, the data of the difficult phenomena to simple; teleologic orientation, understanding by all society of the high aim having lines of a romantic ideal and aspiration to it; orientation of culture and ideology as its power making on legitimation (Ionin, 1996: 181).

In essence, exactly in the 30th years of the 20th century in Russia such type of the personality is formed,

as the massovizirovanny individual whose characteristics were subjected to the detailed analysis in H. Ortega's works - and - Gasse - that, G. Markuz, E. Fromm. He also becomes the main prezentant of culture of the specified period. Let's emphasize that in this work the subject of culture is understood not so much as the certain active, reformative beginning provoking influences, very important and extensive on degree, and to consequences processes, how many as the representative of a certain culture, social community or group embodying characteristics, typical for specific sociocultural community, otherwise, of the speaker not so much as the creator of this culture, how many as the carrier of its values.

Intrinsic qualities of the massovizirovanny individual are defined by those historical circumstances in which he was constituted. Industrial processes and processes of an urbanization and marginalization accompanying them caused omassovleny cultures and appearance of the standardized individual with the lost subjectivity and the erased personal beginning. This situation in which, according to H. Ortege-i-Gassetu, heroes disappeared there was only a chorus, was a registration situation as the person of weight dominating like the personality with a standard set of abilities and requirements. The researcher with alarm stated violation of traditional balance between a high-spiritual and highly skilled part of society and its other part and also growth of social prevalence of massovizirovanny type of the personality with its aiming at expanded parasitic consumption, with inevitability leading to vulgarization of culture. According to representations of the Spanish philosopher the mass person perceives life as the field of pleasures, having been sure that he can rise by the highest step of a social scale of ranks, considers the desires and requirements the most significant and is convinced that society and the state dolzh-

ny to satisfy them, and the ideas of beauty and moral ideals, not faultless, he considers as the absolutes (Ortega-and-Gasset, 1991: 315-319).

N. Berdyaev gave to such type of the personality definition of "the person of the small way" living "without efforts, not trying to correct itself and to improve", "going down stream" (Berdyaev, 1995: 143, 121). The similar type of the personality triumphing everywhere — and in art, both economy, and policy, destroying everything, other than the standard, outstanding, personal, and accepting only what is sustained within its representations, was direct generation of a civilization with its principles of equivalence and rationality.

The attitude towards this subjectless person was and remains sharply critical. However here it is obviously necessary to emphasize that emergence of this type of the individual was historically caused, the person of weight was created in those conditions when mass society began to get the classical outlines and when its instability, conflictness, discrepancy appeared with all evidence. The person of weight in all areas began to hold neutral position at once — in the system of information was content with the adapted, average knowledge, in a system social — showed total conformism, taking for granted that set of meanings, values and values which contains in the world picture broadcast by means of communication. It is characteristic that in Russia these universal circumstances connected with development of the industrial relations in borders of any sociocultural system were complemented with specifics of the moment which consisted in the special social status of workers as the class leader. The identity of workers, apparently, was based not only on community of "class" consciousness, but also on feeling of participation in the class taking the highest positions in gradation of hierarchies. This domination carried both symbolical character, and especially material and the beginning

to be felt the 1920th years. It became a basis for distribution of housing where "consolidation" meant also change of the social status — increase for "condensing" and decrease for "condensed". Domination of the proletariat was felt also in the sphere of food supply. Leveling compensation was followed in Petrograd in 1920-1921 by cancellation of a payment for services in the cities, and in May, 1918 increase in working rations at the expense of "persons of liberal professions". Moreover, recognition of legitimacy of similar privileges became so steady constant of "class consciousness" that developed into formation of "working opposition" of 1920-1922. It arose, among other causes, because of discontent of workers with big rations for experts and employees that was perceived the first as violation of own legitimate and neottorzhimy rights.

It is characteristic that for the person of weight the private sphere was represented so insignificant that production, household and political spheres began to be perceived as closely interconnected, and the household behavior began to be treated as production and political (to enough remember practice of intervention of the state in affairs of family and assignment on it of responsibility for change of semeynobrachny traditions). Systematic inclusion of the worker in political life in which nonparticipation was regarded as violation of labor discipline led to the actual coincidence of methods of labor and political control. And, despite confidence in social justice of the Soviet society, the built proletarian to the very top of a social pyramid, the worker in Russia, in essence, became the carrier of the same conformist to the focused ideology, as his western fellow. The main changes of qualitative parameters of this person of weight were connected with reorientation of his internal sobytiynost to external that was shown in the need not to be allocated from the world around and dey-

to stvovat according to it. Similar people began to need rigid power and the state which could provide them with behavior stereotypes, social reference points, value systems and the system of "mental unloading". It "the person of the organization" (White, 1956) as well as "person locator" (Riesmen, 1953), orientation to opinion of other people, search of approval of the actions at people around characterized, the low level of interests, conformality, pliability to others influences.

Totalitarian culture: objectification of the subject

In this situation it would be possible to be surprised to short-sightedness or ideological involvement of many prominent foreign scientists and art, and the far from policy, coming to the Soviet Russia 30th years and more sincerely admiring the Soviet country. "The prevailing impression of my travel to Moscow — R. Rolland wrote, is a powerful stream of the young, bursting forth vital force exulting from consciousness of the power proud for the progress, from confidence in the correctness, from belief in the mission. I know that the Soviet Union is the most powerful guarantee of social progress and that human happiness is under its protection" (Rolland, 1972: 24). In the same sense G. Mann spoke: "Let knows the Soviet Union what humanistic example is set by it to the world. Where on the earth people fought for freedom, for the independence, for the right to build the happiness — everywhere the great image of the Soviet Union stands nearby" (Mann, 1937). W. Benjamin was bewitched by the idea about a celebration of communism so necessary before threat of promptly coming national socialism which implicitly is present in it "The Moscow diary". There is an impression that in similar moods the operation of "the mechanism of the emotional infection" described in a game - is felt

tse 19th century G. Tard and G. Le Bon when in the statements of independent authors in the judgments panegyrics from the official Soviet press that "life of our great country which entered in the second Stakhanov year beats with a joyful key are heard.", about "millions of workers who are summing up the results of victories of Stakhanov year and with a new force, energy and enthusiasm continuing fight for a total victory of communism, for new life, for further increase in the moral and cultural level." (From edition, 1936: 1-2).

It is not believed that to the same time there was Kamenev and Zinovyev's process, Pyatakov, Radek, Sokolnikov, Serebryakov's second "Moscow" process and the third with the main defendants Bukharin and Rykov, the trial of the highest military leaders — Tukhachevsky, Blyukher, etc. took place. Hardly it is possible to believe that during this joyful celebration of optimism in a year (between January, 1937 and December, 1939) about 7 million people from whom it is shot were arrested and more than 2 million died in the conclusion (Chego-dayeva, 2003: 72-74). It is natural that in similar, repressive on the attitude and towards the certain person, and to society in general, situations of people it was forced to choose those mechanisms of activity which were also the most optimum in terms of his simple survival. Successful functioning of a state regime is interfaced to stability of the adaptive sociocultural field and efficiency of the chosen adaptive strategy promoting creation of such information situations, in which:

— the subject obtains only such information which content and volume conform to requirements of the mode;

— informal sources of information appear false in advance, and attempts of obtaining alternative information appear criminal;

— possession of a metainformation (information on location of information) are a mode prerogative;

— information which is contained in libraries, archives, the museums, etc. is subject to careful check and selection;

— works of art are estimated in terms of efficiency for the mode of information which is contained in them.

The individual in these conditions chooses adaptation strategy where regardless of his relation to the cultural purpose — its rejections or acceptances — the institutional rules and norms intended for achievement of this purpose are accepted and executed by it. As a result of ritual following and compliance of institutional model the subject receives illusion of security, and the state — a possibility of effective management of mass consciousness. At the same time at the person acting in a limited information field and needing fast adaptation the social and emotional discomfort decreases, and alienation from society is leveled by means of formal collectivism. This type of the personality is characterized by what, on the one hand, easily gives in to information manipulation from the outside, and with another — constantly needs such manipulation.

If to speak about those visitors to the pre-war Soviet Union prominent representatives of world community, then here, it is represented, it was possible to see other reasons of their interest in socialist construction. Attractive to thinkers was not that reality which could be observed, but the idea of the possible ideal world, which to it was put potentially. It was realized also by the famous economist J. Keynes noting that the students of Cambridge going "to an obligatory travel to the Holy Land of the Bolshevism" do not feel disappointment at the sight of the poverty reigning there. They see completely different there — an ideal of the person exempted from a pursuit of profit (Ryklin, 2005: 44). This person acted as lost the private interests and appeared as a part great social

systems where one mind and one will dominates. In a situation of a deep economic crisis and ideological rigidity the formation of the person as parts of weight was quite justified strategy. At the same time the totalitarian social system with its suppression of the personal beginning and maintenance of collectivism as personal neutrality steadily reproduced also a certain type of the subject of historical action, namely the massovizirovanny individual with the dominating collectivist representations. The subject of history, i.e. a source of social and cultural development, this individual with good reason, most likely, to call difficult. It was a subject of historical development in marksovy understanding — as the person making history as the fact of own life in the course of the daily existence. However, once again we will emphasize, the person of weight felt the participation in implementation of history, and, perhaps, its historical mission consisted in it.

Thus, the specifics of the Soviet culture of the 30th years were defined not only those social and economic tasks which she helped to solve to the state, but also a peculiar isolation, the isolation of the Soviet state existing up to the 60th years. Unlike western the Soviet society functioning in the typical forms in the 30-60th years of the 20th century was mass totalitarian society of mobilization type, it was characterized by closeness, militarism, lack of democracy and a guarantee of the rights of the personality (Totalitarianism, 1989). Totalitarianism, as we know, was not feature of exclusively Soviet state system, but defined also the nature of political systems of Germany, Spain, Italy, China during the period between 30th and 60th that in many respects caused similarity of mass culture of these countries, especially Russia and Germany.

If to compare the Soviet culture of 20th and 30th, then it is possible to note that

these two stages of cultural development represent realization of opposite adaptation strategy, one of which is directed to realization of kreatsionny potential of culture and creative potential of the person, another — on his visible harmonization with Wednesday. It allows to define the culture of the 20th as humanistic, keeping and developing aspiration inherent in the person to creativity, and the subject of culture of this period (dominating not quantitatively, but is qualitative) it is possible to consider in characteristics of the prevailing personal beginning. This individual as the maker of history had pronounced lines of subjectivity, i.e. ability to creative transformation of reality.

The aiming at harmonization of the person in society through the unified adaptation strategy offered it when the state in enough rigid political and economic circumstances began to create purposefully the adaptive situations which are not assuming active search of their permission, and, on the contrary, concluding in to themselves ready "answers" that as a result forced the personality to address for them the state became a dominant of culture of the 30th years.

LIST OF REFERENCES

Berdyaev, N. (1995) inequality Philosophy. M

Vasilashko, L.V. (1979) Involvement of workers of Leningrad in the Soviet construction in the years of recovery of the national economy (19211925)//Workers of the Northwest of RSFSR during construction of socialism: sb. nauch. tr. L.

Vilenskaya, I. (1925) Reading room — the strong point of educational work//About what needs to be told in the village. Samara.

Dan, T. (1922) Two years of wanderings (19191921). Berlin.

Ivanov, V.M., Kanev, S.N. (1961). On a peace basis. The Leningrad party organization in fight for restoration of the industrial city. 1921-1925. L.

Ionin, L.G. (1996) culture Sociology. M

The history of the USSR (1986) XIX — the beginning of the 20th century M.

The Leningrad workers in the village (1925)//Results of summer working holidays in 1929 / under the editorship of N. Matorikh. L.

Kozlova, N.N. (1996) the Horizons of daily occurrence of the Soviet era (voices from chorus). M

Minutes of a general meeting of workers of Baltic shipbuilding and mechanical Shipyard on position in the enterprise//CGA SPb. T. 4591. Op. 5. 13. L. 26-28 about. Original. (Tsit. on: Yarov, 1999: 103).

Kostina, A.V. (2004) Mass culture as phenomenon of post-industrial society. M

Lurye, S.V. (2004) Historical ethnology. M

Mann, G. (1937) the Welcome address in the Pravda on November 7, 1937

Ortega-and-Gasset, X. (1991) Revolt of masses//Aesthetics. Philosophy. Culture. M

From the editorial office (1936) Expose Enemies of the People//Architecture of the USSR. 1936. No. 9.

Pankratov, A.M. (1927) Political struggle?

Stefan Dominik
Other scientific works: