Transcript
Hello, Comrades! This is our video for Week 10, Day 2. Today we’re continuing our exploration of the Brezhnev Era, and our teaching assistant is [cat.] I have been behind schedule this week and am posting this video rather late on Thursday, so I don’t expect you to respond by Friday at 5. Go ahead and take the weekend, if you need it.
The only announcement I have for you today is that you should continue to think about your final papers. It would be a good idea to choose your topic this week and start thinking about the argument you want to make. Remember that your one-paragraph introduction and your outline for the paper will be due on Sunday, April 19.
Today, we’re discussing Natalya Baranskaya’s novella A Week Like Any Other, which was first published in the literary journal Novyi Mir in 1969. Novyi Mir was the a highly respected journal. Its editors were known for pushing the boundaries of acceptable literature. For example, that in 1962 Novyi Mir published Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s novel One Day In the Life of Ivan Denisovich, the first account of the Stalinist Gulag to appear in an official publication. Readers looked to Novyi mir to lead the way on cultural questions. The fact that Baranskaya’s novella was published there meant that it was widely read and discussed in Soviet society.
Natalya Baranskaya was a relatively new voice in Soviet literature in the 1960s, but she was not young, herself. She was born in 1908, almost the same year as Dmitrii Shostakovich (whose Seventh Symphony we listened to before Spring Break). She spent her career working in literary museums and only began writing fiction after she retired. Most of her short stories and novellas deal with the lives and concerns of Soviet women. A Week Like Any Other is by far her most famous work. After it appeared in Novyi Mir, it generated international interest was translated and published in other countries, including the US. It’s interesting to consider that while this is not a particularly flattering portrayal of Soviet life, it was officially approved for both domestic and international publication. You might also consider that communication across the “Iron Curtain” was strong enough at this point that American editors were reading Soviet publications and looking for material to translate for their own audiences. As you read, you might consider what this reveals about the situation for Soviet writers in the Brezhnev Era.
I also encourage you to compare this novella to Ostrovsky’s How the Steel Was Tempered and Sholokhov’s Fate of a Man. Consider whether A Week Like Any Other can be called Socialist Realism and how Soviet literature has evolved over the decades.
Leah’s Discussion Questions
1. The main character of this novella, Olga, is meant to be a typical Soviet woman, living a typical Soviet life under Brezhnev’s developed socialism. How would you characterize her life? What possibilities are open to her? What limitations hold her back? What expectations do the people in her life place on her shoulders? What expectations does she place on her own shoulders? What insights does her story give us into the “double shift” or “double burden” of Soviet women’s lives?
2. The novella opens with Olga rushing into work fifteen minutes late and getting yelled at by her boss, Yakov Petrovich. Soon we notice that all of the researchers in Olga’s lab are women, while the supervisor is a man. What do you make of this gender disparity? What factors make it difficult for women to rise to the level of supervisor? How does the conversation between Yakov Petrovich and Olga on pp. 1-2 (including the things she thinks but does not say out loud) help us understand the reasons behind this gender disparity and how women like Olga are expected to behave? Is this a particularly Soviet problem, or do we see aspects of it in our society as well?
3. A recurring theme in this novella is the questionnaire, which the women in the lab have been asked to fill out. Find the passages where the questionnaire is described and discussed. What sorts of questions does it ask? What assumptions about women’s lives do these questions imply? Why do the women in Olga’s lab find it both ridiculous and frustrating? If we think of the questionnaire as a literary device, what purpose does it serve for Baranskaya? In other words, how does it help her tell this story?
4. The questionnaire prompts the women in Olga’s lab to talk about the issue of having children. They feel pressured by the government and by their partners to have at least two children a piece. But most of them resist having multiple children, and Dark Lusya has even had an abortion to avoid it. Why are they resistant to having more children? What factors are part of this choice? How does their conversation on pp.19-21 help us think through the complexities of their decision-making? How does this relate to Olga’s feeling that missing 78 workdays makes her a bad citizen, even though all of those days have been spent taking care of her children?
5. Note that at the end of this passage, Olga mocks official rhetoric in an effort to wrap up the conversation (p.21). Does this make her an anti-Soviet person? How does her comfort making this kind of joke in front of her colleagues at work help us understand the relationship between citizens and the state in the Brezhnev Era?
6. It seems clear that official pressure is not working on these women. If the Soviet state really wants them to have more children, what other steps could it take to encourage them that might be more effective? Or do you think that women will always have to choose between ambitious careers and having children, no matter what system they live in?
7. Consider the situation of Dark Lusya’s abortion on pp.47-48. Why does she make this decision? How does her story compare to the story of Lyuda in the film Bed and Sofa, which we watched back in Week 3? Consider how Lyuda’s situation in the 1920s compares to Dark Lusya’s in the 1960s. What does this comparison reveal about the development of Soviet society? What does it reveal about changes, or lack of changes, in Soviet women’s lives?
8. One thing that keeps Olga going through all her stress is the strong friendships among the women at her lab. We might conceptualize this as a form of emotional labor that they perform in addition to their other duties. Is this labor part of their obligation as workers, as women, or both? Would Pasha Angelina recognize the relationships among the women researchers? Would Eugenia Ginzburg recognize them? Do these relationships represent continuity or change in life of Soviet women?
9. Olga remarks several times that she is lucky to be living in one of the new housing complexes that began to appear in the Khrushchev Era. Based on her description, would you consider her apartment luxurious? What infrastructural problems make it hard for her to do things like grocery shopping and commuting to work? How does this shed light on the “good life” the Soviet Union was providing to its citizens at this point?
10. Olga’s relationship with Dima is also an important part of this novella. The women in the lab consistently praise Dima as a good husband. Yet we often see him sitting by while Olga does the shopping, cooking, cleaning, and the majority of the childcare. How do you analyze their relationship? How does it compare to relationships among American couples in the late 1960s (you might ask your parents or grandparents for help with this)? If Dima is considered a good husband, what does that reveal about relationships between men and women in the Brezhnev Era? What would Alexandra Kollontai think of all this?
11. Consider Olga and Dima’s relationship, as well as the other factors we’ve discussed today. In light of all of this, why do you think she is so resistant to quitting her job, as Dima suggests? What reasons does she give explicitly? What reasons does she leave unsaid? Do you think she is right to hold on to her job, despite everything? Why or why not?
The novella opens with Olga rushing into work fifteen minutes late and getting yelled at by her boss, Yakov Petrovich. Soon we notice that all of the researchers in Olga’s lab are women, while the supervisor is a man. What do you make of this gender disparity? What factors make it difficult for women to rise to the level of supervisor? How does the conversation between Yakov Petrovich and Olga on pp. 1-2 (including the things she thinks but does not say out loud) help us understand the reasons behind this gender disparity and how women like Olga are expected to behave? Is this a particularly Soviet problem, or do we see aspects of it in our society as well?
Question 2:
It seems like the gender disparity is in place for a reason. The soviets were taking advantage of the fact that, no matter what, they could control any group of women by putting a man in charge because he had more power than them. It is difficult for women to rise to those levels because they are expected to give their time to their children, work, household duties, etc. and do not have time to receive proper training or put in extra hours. The conversation Olga has with her supervisor shows that, women are expected to be subservient and give more than 100% of themselves to every aspect of their lives, including work, even though there are not enough hours in the day to do so. I don’t think this is only a Soviet problem. This exists around the world, here too, all the time. Women have to work twice as hard to get into higher-paying job fields (where we wouldn’t even get paid the same amount as men doing a lesser job), are expected to have children and often met with sympathy or scrutiny if they do not want/have them “yet”, and are not taken seriously in most research circumstances because we are scrutinized twice as hard on anything we produce. I think Olgas plight is still relevant to what women go through currently.
In response to Question 4:
The women presented in Olga’s workplace, including herself, are hesitant to have more children because in many cases their lives are stressed as is. Socialism, or at least the direct effect of it in the USSR, also meant the sweeping sense of independence that we saw in Bed and Sofa. At the time, and in name, it appears that the Soviet state encouraged this for propaganda purposes and to gain more supporters across the USSR. However, an issue that arises is that we see the Soviet government, as shown in this novel, as incredibly overbearing and somewhat hypocritical. They encourage independence for women, and have been for some time, but when it comes to the demographic crisis the novel mentions, they choose to complete dismiss everything this sense of independence has done. It would mean them asking women to give up that independence to have more children, and if people are unwilling to do so, they are in many cases resorting to shame. This is what we see with Lusya’s 78 missed days. It makes one wonder if the rhetoric supporting women in the USSR was either somewhat hollow all along, or being hollowed out by the new leadership under Brezhnev in an effort to solve the issue with an overly simplistic solution, which Lusya on page 20 dismissed as a “short minded attitude.” The discussion they have highlights the debate over women’s rights and independence versus the good of the state, even when the state is acting in a way that seems most illogical. Based on the questionnaire itself, we can come to the conclusion that the state is somewhat deaf to the concerns of women at this time.
In answer to Question 7:
Compounding with what we know both from the text and from the answer to #4, we now know that there is great stress on women within the USSR. Stress from home, to make it a better environment for the family, and stress from work so as to remain productive and able to help the nation. Dark Lusya’s story is much more dark than Bed and Sofa because rather than being able to act on her own volition, she is being assailed by the obligation to the state and the obligation to her family. Now, with this demographic crisis the questionnaire somewhat revolves around, women are being attacked from the state from two different directions: Direct productivity and future productivity. This, to me, exhibits that Soviet society has at the very least stalled and at most turned surprisingly conservative in social values in ways prior generations had not seen. Then again, as I said before, it also brings up a question as to whether what we did see before was mostly propaganda and this semi-conservative social atmosphere was always in fact present since Stalin’s times.
Question 4
A reason for resisting child birth may be due the way the state views motherhood. The idea that the state views child birth as a job all women are assumed to fulfill is extremely dehumanizing as if it likens humans to living factories trying to fill a human quota. This constant state pressure, furthered by practices like the questionnaire, strip away the human qualities of motherhood. This is further supported by the guilt Olga feels over missing work to tend to her children as depicts the intersection of her duty to the state as a worker as well as her duty to the state as mother.
Question 6
The most efficient way to promote motherhood would be through offering flexible maternity leave, maybe going as far as providing access to necessary medical services in order to show that state acknowledges motherhood as something of equal or even more importance as work. The guilt Olga feels over missing work to tend to her children legitimatizes this divide between work and the humanity of motherhood, and the difficulty she experiences tending to her kids on top of her work is depicted through chaotic scenes like that on page 16, where she frantically rushes to prepare breakfast, wake and prepare her children as well of herself for work. Without the proper systems in place, an ambitious career coupled with motherhood is extremely difficult.
Leah, I would like to go off of Sarah’s response in regard to question #2. I do believe that the Soviet government had the ability to sway a group, especially women, into acting a certain way and living a lifestyle that the government put in place for them , versus what their actual independence would lead to. I feel as though women in the Soviet Union during this time experienced the gender disparity because not only was it expected of Soviet WOMEN to act and think a certain way, but it was also expected of Soviet PEOPLE in general to do the same. If women did not want to succumb to the standards being forced on them, it was more than just a gender problem, it could also be seen as Soviet problem. When Yakov explains to her the importance in her diligence, he coins on the term “we” and says things like “We have the right to hope that you’ll value the trust we have accorded you as a young specialist” (Baranskaya 2), where “we” could be seen as speaking to the Socialist society as a whole. This manipulates people, women particularly, into shaming themselves for letting down the movement they worked so hard to be a part of. Women were living in shame and mocked for their actions on both the basis of it being their womanly duty as well as their Soviet duty, and any opposition was seen as a threat to both of these collective mentalities. While gender disparity is not just a Soviet problem, the moral obligation that Soviet women felt may be heightened compared to other regions because, again, it is more than just women’s rights and expectations being questioned, it also the woman’s Soviet loyalty being regarded.
In response of question 9, I noticed in a scene about Olga’s living situation affecting her life on page 15. It seems to me that Olga is dreaming at the top of the page about daily life and a normal morning at home where she gets up and dressed and puts the kettle on. It seems like a normal simple thing until Dima wakes her up. When Olga actually wakes up, her morning routine is not as luxurious and normal as her dream was. Unlike her kitchen dream, she forgets to turn the gas on, and the matches hurt her fingers. In the bathroom she says “Damn, damn, damn everything,” (15), but immediately thinks she should be grateful because she is living a “great” life. I believe this is important because although she is told that her life is great and she lives in this “luxurious” and new apartment it is not really that much better because it does still impair normal life and makes it hard. When comparing the reality to her dream, you realize it is not that easy and simple. Although it should be for people like Olga and Dima. I believe that Olga’s dream is what “good life” should be like in the Soviet Union, but then when she wakes up and actually goes through the motions of her morning that is what most realities are like in the Soviet Union, even with hard work and during the Khrushchev Era.
Question 3.
Olga and her fellow workmates are met with an intrusive questionnaire in their place of work. The document itself gages the work-life balance of the women in the lab. The questionnaire also asks for information on their housing, available in-home amenities, family structure, and children. The questions were intrusive and aimed to identify a common problem that working, Soviet women faced which hindered them from producing more children, thereby working less. This line of thinking is inherently problematic because it insinuates that all women want to have children. While most of the women in the lab already have children, the questionnaire places pressure on them to produce more, regardless of their personal wishes. The pressure that the women experience from the questionnaire also manifests into anxiety and fear for their jobs. Specifically, Olga’s coworker, Dark Lusya, is very upset that her aspirations to complete her dissertation are seen as disposable in the eyes of the government (8). Overall, the questionnaire makes the women feel as if their ability to reproduce is more valuable to their employer than their work in the laboratory.
#5
Her mocking rhetoric would have certainly made her an anti-soviet citizen in another era. Minor protest against the state would not have been as tolerable under Stalin or even Kruschev to an extent, however, the newfound relationship between citizens and their government in the Brezhnev Era suggests a much calmer atmosphere for dissent. While not outwardly welcomed, the casual mockery with Olga’s coworkers shows a considerable amount of trust and comfort in the changing government. This permissiveness allowed for a rebuilding of trust following Stalinism and the instability of Khrushchev as well as an outlet for complaint against the government that could bear little responsibility on the government.
question 1
At this time of Soviet life under Brezhnev’s socialism, I believe that Olga had a a fairly normal life compared to the other women she works with in the story. While reading the story, it seemed as if all of the women working in the lab had hectic and tiring lives. Their lives were so busy that the women had to go grocery shopping on their lunch breaks to be able to get food for their family. Olga had a lot of opportunities open to her such as being able to have the freedom to have a job and not just be a housewife. She also had the opportunity of being able to have a family while she works. Even though she had the opportunity of having children, it was also a big limitation for her. While filling out the questionnaire, she realized that she had to miss a lot of her work because she had to be the one to stay home with the children when they were sick and not her husband. In her life, her husband places expectations on her to just be an ordinary housewife and take care of the children. He wants her to do all of the cooking, cleaning, and getting the children ready for school and bed. Olga puts a lot of expectations on herself. She expects her to be able to work a demanding job in the lab during the day, and then taking care of the children, and being a housewife after her long day at work. She has very high expectations for herself that causes her to breakdown. This story allowed me to see that even though the women were given several opportunities to be equal in the workforce, the expectations of being a housewife did not yet change at all. This caused the women to have the “double shift”, and became extremely hard on them. The Soviet women were faced with many responsibilities and expectations during this time.
Question 2:
The gender disparity displayed in pages 1 & 2 exemplify the Soviet social contracts that stand to allow women to work, but not so much to the point where their responsibilities at home become secondary. Olga is late for work, and is scolded for her “insufficient rigor,” but is promoted. She even mentions that the supervisor constantly uses the pronoun “we” when describing evaluations of employees’ performance, which I interpreted as a mechanism of suppression and belittlement that would be used to minimize the workers, which are all women. I believe that these things are paralleled in our society today and are proven by a gender wage gap. Hardly ever do we see female corporate heads or high ranking officials in business which is a result of American social constructs that look to keep women at home.
I would like to respond to Question #6. I believe that if the Soviet state wanted to encourage women to have more children they needed to have a program in place that supported these woman while they were out of work due to their newborn child. This program should have allowed for a paid maternity leave; therefore, a mother would be able to take a short period of absence to attend to her child before returning to work without having to worry about income loss. These women should have also been guaranteed their exact spot/position at work upon their return from the maternity leave so they would not have to fear being replaced. Thus, if there is a proper system in place for maternity leave, I believe it is possible for a woman to balance her career with motherhood.