SOVIET SOCIETY AND ITS CINEMA
85
of their brothers in capitalist America, then there would be no need
for the cinema to continue to propagandize for socialism. But the
banalities in such films give the lie to the Kremlin, for if all this were
true, then the cultural level of Soviet society would be at least as high
as that of Hollywood.
As
it is, the crudity of these films, far from be–
ing an expression of a healthy new society, is as much a reflection of
the reactionary nature of the regime as was the burning for political
heresy, several years ago, of Eisenstein's film
Bezhin Lug.
112
If
one considers how far Russia still is from socialism, how back–
ward socially and industrially compared to capitalist nations, how
grim and penurious life really is for the Russian masses, it is hard to
see much difference between the 'escapist' movies of Hollywood and
Moscow. A .film studio can be a dream factory, whether it is on the
shores of the Black Sea or of the Pacific.
II. THE CINEMA AND THE MASSES
Art and Blast Furnaces
In these articles I have emphasized, perhaps too much, the part
played by the conscious policies of the Stalin regime in the decline of
the cinema. The responsibility of the Kremlin is indeed heavy. But
let us not deceive ourselves. The Stalinist Thermidor has succeeded
only because it found a response in the Russian masses. The basic
fact_about
R~ssia
today, as in 1917, is that it is a backward nation,
culturally and otherwise. This backwardness is not a failing of the
Russian 'national character,' nor is it what the Ivory Tower esthetes
think
it is: the immemorial stigma of the vulgar herd. It is a historical
phenomenon which can be traced to nothing more mysterious than
the fact that up to 1917 some 70% of the population could neither
read nor write. "We are a dark people," said the
mo~jiks
of Holy
Russia. Illiteracy for the masses was a deliberate policy of the Czar,
whose regime in turn was a reflection of the low level of production.
A lack of blast furnaces expre$Sed itself ultimately
in
a lack of taste.
Such evidence as I have been able to find as to the popular re–
sponse to the cinema is not very satisfactory. The inarticulateness of
the Soviet masses and the increasing difficulty of any spontaneous ex–
pression. of their preferences make any final judgment difficult. But
t.'tere
are
a few fragmentary indications. One recent visitor reports
that movie audiences shout encouragement to the hero, groan at the
villain, produce imitation kisses during the love scenes, and so on.
113
Another writes: "Strangely enough, though Soviet films were among
the first to develop to a high degree complete naturalism in screen
