The Man-Made Environment in Post-Stalinist Europe 1953-1968

This project looked at the various responses, both political and aesthetic, to the end of socialist realism and the return of pre-war modernism as a desirable ideal. It considered both the built environment and objects of daily use (furniture, radios, TV sets, etc.) in several countries of the region, including Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Russia and Romania, also comparing developments there with corresponding ones in the west. Among particular aspects considered were the effects of Kruschev's speech in December 1954 to workers in construction, machine-building and design industries, in which he argued against monumentalism and criticised both "classical architecture" and socialist realism. The team see the real issue in interpreting Eastern European architecture as its lack of a critical edge, since official discourses took the place of any form of criticism and architects sought to implement the "official line". Megastructures became increasingly popular from the 1960s onwards and in Romania, for instance, came to dominate the city in the late 1980s. Such structures proved an efficient way to control the environment in countries plagued by prefabrication and social housing, and the group see the exhibition of inflated concrete grids as perhaps the most important feature of Eastern European architecture in the 1960s and 1970s. They also point out the rarity of glass and steel architecture in the east, where the preferred material was concrete, a material seen as "revolutionary" as it was the product of heavy industry and was grey, i.e. the workers' colour. Tactile elements were more important here than the visual elements favoured in the west, and a solidity more in line with the dominant ideology than the ephemeral qualities of glass.

Marginal Man in Modern Russian Literature

This research was focused around the intersection of two discourses: that of marginality and that of ideology. Ponomarev analysed works by Alexander Zinoviev, Vladimir Maximov and Eduard Limonov - three writers representing different groups of Soviet dissidence - from the viewpoint of the concept, drawn from anthropological theory, of marginal man. Using a methodology he describes as ideological analysis, Ponomarev showed that the ideologies of both the writers and their characters are marginal, lying as they do between official Soviet and western democratic ideologies. He showed that the works and the 'creative behaviour' of the three writers did not change after 1991, when their ideas seemed victorious. Marginality is shown to be a permanent characteristic and is linked with the main ideas of the dissident movement in the USSR. On the basis of this marginality, Ponomarev identified some common traits in dissident ideas and drew up a model of dissident ideology. This general model of dissident ideology seems to be one of the special Russian variants of the marginal ideologies of intelligentsia and could be compared to the ideology of Rodon Raskolnikov, the central character in Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment. The discourse of ideology in the USSR in the 1970s-1980s and in 1990s Russia thus appeared as a process in which the elements of the official Soviet ideology were gradually superseded by those of the dissident ideology linked with the ideology of the underground, the Russian version of the post-modern. Marginal ideologies won and became mainstream but did not lose their basic marginal traits. Ponomarev concludes that the gap between the 'state ideology' and the dissident ideology, taken together with the special Russian version of postmodernity has shaped the current literary process in Russia, making the figure of the marginal man into the main writer type.