No description available.

Die vorliegende Arbeit wollte eine Antwort auf die Frage geben, was das wirtschaftliche und soziale Handeln tadschikischer Kolchosbauern seit den 1960er Jahren leitete. Das Kernargument der Arbeit ist, dass die Bauern auch nach der Industrialisierung der Agrarproduktion an einem vorindustriellen Wirtschaftshandeln festhielten. Zum vorindustriellen Wirtschaftsverhalten gehörten zum einen familiengetragene Bauernwirtschaften, zum anderen bewährte Formen von Reziprozität wie Patron-Klientel-Strukturen, redistributive Ausgaben für die Dorfgemeinschaft und die kollektive Nutzung von Ressourcen. Das Konzept, dass die Existenz im Sinne der vormodernen moral economy über soziale Bindungen gesichert wird, hatte während der Sowjetperiode Bestand. Die Fortdauer einer vormodernen Wirtschaftsgesinnung zeigt sich auch darin, dass die Bauern in den peripheren Gebieten (Kaukasus, Mittelasien) stärker als die Bauern in den zentralen Regionen der Sowjetunion die persönliche Nebenerwerbswirtschaft für die Steigerung ihres Einkommens nutzten. Die Steigerung der privaten Hoflandproduktion seit den 1960er Jahren ging mit einer sozialen und kulturellen Re-Traditionalisierung einher. Dank der konzilianten Haltung, die die Brežnev-Führung gegenüber den Muslimen einnahm, und den gestiegenen Einnahmen aus dem informellen Sektor lebten lokales Brauchtum und lokale Festkultur wieder auf. Die Befunde zur sozialen und wirtschaftlichen Situation in der Maxim-Gorki-Kolchose stellen die von James Scott vorgebrachte These in Frage, wonach die sowjetische Agrarmodernisierung als Misserfolg einzuschätzen sei. Die sowjetische Transformation brachte an der tadschikischen Peripherie eine komplexe Variante der Moderne hervor, in der sowjetische und traditionelle Identitäten gleichzeitig nebeneinander gut funktionierten. Diese subjektiven und lokalen Perspektiven müssen ebenso bei der Frage berücksichtigt werden, ob man das Verhältnis zwischen Zentrum und Peripherie als kolonial bezeichnen kann. / The present doctoral dissertation aimed to explore economic and social motives behind peasant activities in Tajik kolkhozes since the 1960s. The core-argument of the dissertation is that the Soviet agrarian modernization production could not overcome the peasants’ preindustrial mentality. Like pre-modern societies the rural Tajik communities were shaped by the family household economy and by different patterns of reciprocity such as the exchange of food, protective patron-clientele-relationships, the collective use of village resources and prestigious, redistributive expenditures of village elites. The concept that social ties secure one’ s existence as defined by the moral economy endured during the Soviet Period. The persistence of a preindustrial mentality also become apparent that the peasants of the Soviet periphery more intensely than the peasants of the central regions used the “personal garden plot economy”. The rise of the family production in the Brezhnev-Era went along with a social, cultural and political re-traditionalisation. Due to a more conciliatory attitude towards the Muslims and against the backdrop of the declining ideological appeal of Communism in the Brezhnev era, the kolkhoz farmers began to spend the increased revenues from the private fruit and vegetable trade for costly celebrations of life-cycle and religious holidays. In Tajikistan, the establishment of the new district (oblast') Kurganteppa in 1976, offered the opportunity to purchase posts in politics and administration. The findings concerning the social and economic situation in the Maxim-Gorki-Kolkhoz challenge James Scott’s thesis, that the Soviet agrarian modernization has to be regarded as a failure. The Soviet transformation generated a complex form of modernity, which smoothly combined traditional and Soviet identities. These local perspectives also have to be taken into account in the debate, if the relationship between Moscow and its Central Asian periphery was colonial or not.

This dissertation thesis focuses on a topic that is of growing interest among scholars, and for which there is still plenty of room for analysis and interpretation, namely the role of the Ukrainian Sixtiers during the Khrushchev Thaw in the USSR in the period 1956-1964. This cultural phenomenon is analysed within a broader socio-cultural context with the help of the approach of colonial studies. The key research question is "How did the worldview of the Sixtiers develop during the Khrushchev Thaw (1956-1964) from the point of view of colonial studies and how was this reflected in their literary works?" The first chapter describes the historical, political and cultural context of this period. It includes an analysis of the circumstances surrounding the proclamations made in Khrushchev's secret speech in 1956, the beginning of the policy of de-Stalinization, and its impact on the political and cultural life in Soviet Ukraine. Particular attention is paid to the development of the official discourse of socialist realism as an official and dominant cultural concept, which was to be applied in artistic and literary works. The main principle of socialist realism, so-called "internationalism", is analysed in terms of its role as an element of colonial discourse. The second chapter focuses on the...

The present work analyses the fiction of the post-Soviet Russian writers, Vladimir Sorokin, Vladimir Tuchkov and Aleksandr Khurgin against the background of the notion of post-Soviet Russian postmodernism. In doing so, it investigates the usefulness and accuracy of this very notion, proposing that of ‘post-Soviet neo-modernism’ instead. Common critical approaches to post-Soviet Russian literature as being postmodern are questioned through an examination of the concept of postmodernism in its interrelated historical, social, and philosophical dimensions, and of its utility and adequacy in the Russian cultural context. In addition, it is proposed that the humorous and grotesque nature of certain post-Soviet works can be viewed as a creatively critical engagement with both the past, i.e. Soviet ideology, and the present, the socially tumultuous post-Soviet years. Russian modernism, while sharing typologically and literary-historically a number of key characteristics with Western modernism, was particularly motivated by a turning to the cultural repository of Russia’s past, and a metaphysical yearning for universal meaning transcending the perceived fragmentation of the tangible modern world. Continuing the older Russian tradition of resisting rationalism, and impressed by the sense of realist aesthetics failing the writer in the task of representing a world that eluded rational comprehension, modernists tended to subordinate artistic concerns to their esoteric convictions. Without appreciation of this spiritual dimension, semantic intention in Russian modernist fiction may escape a reader used to the conventions of realist fiction. It is suggested that contemporary Russian fiction as embodied in certain works by Sorokin, Tuchkov and Khurgin, while stylistically exhibiting a number of features commonly regarded as postmodern, such as parody, pastiche, playfulness, carnivalisation, the grotesque, intertextuality and self-consciousness, seems to resume modernism’s tendency to seek meaning and value for human existence in the transcendent realm, as well as in the cultural, in particular literary, treasures of the past. The closeness of such segments of post-Soviet fiction and modernism in this regard is, it is argued, ultimately contrary to the spirit of postmodernism and its relativistic and particularistic worldview. Hence the suggested conceptualisation of post-Soviet Russian fiction as ‘neo-modernist’.