Transcript
Hello Comrades! This is our second video for Week 9, and our subject today is the Thaw Era film I Walk Around Moscow. I’m afraid me don’t have a furry teaching assistant today, because the cats are on strike for better pay. I also don’t have any new announcements for you, except to say: Thanks for your thoughtful comments on the blog and keep up the good work!
The historical background information that you read in our textbook and that I gave you in the previous video pretty much covers the context for this film. The main characters are all members of the “Thaw generation,” which came of age while Nikita Khrushchev was the leader of the Soviet Union. Notably, they are also all members of the working class. Kolya is a construction worker on the Moscow Metro, Volodya is a fitter at a construction site in Siberia, Alyona works in a shop, and Sasha is an army recruit. Their jobs let us know that they are all upstanding Soviet citizens, honest workers helping to build communism.
I Walk Around Moscow was made in 1964, and it was quite revolutionary for its time. Its director, Georgii Daneliia, had a long career as a director of Soviet comedies, but this was certainly his most famous film. It was also the debut film of Nikita Mikhalkov, the actor who plays Kolya, who went on to become a major star in the Soviet Union and remains one in Russia today. I Walk Around Moscow is considered revolutionary for a few different reasons. The storyline departs significantly from those of Stalin Era films, which focused on the glories of industry and agriculture and on the exploits of Soviet military heroes. The style of the film is also a departure. In making it, Daneliia drew heavily on the French New Wave.
I Walk Around Moscow premiered at the Cannes Film Festival in 1964. It won a prize there, which Khrushchev was happy to tout as evidence of Soviet superiority in the Cold War competition over culture. It was also extremely popular with Soviet young people, and the theme song became a hit on its own.
I hope you enjoyed watching it! This is one of my favorite Soviet films.
Leah’s Discussion Questions
1. Consider the main characters, particularly Kolya. What specific characteristics and actions mark them as children of the Thaw Era? What are their tastes and values? How do they express those values through their behavior? Are their values entirely new, or are some of them familiar from the prewar Soviet Union?
Watch the first minute of the film, the scene where Volodya arrives and talks to the happy young woman at the airport. How does this scene set up the film’s main values?
2. How would you describe the atmosphere or “feel” of this film? How does it compare to How the Steel Was Tempered? Consider the storyline. Is this an example of Socialist Realism? Be sure to justify your answer with specifics.
3. Our textbook authors explained that Soviet young people were hungry for more “sincerity” in the arts. They wanted more realistic portrayals of love and conflict and how people really live. Does this film answer that demand? What do you make of the fact that love is a central theme of this film, yet we never see Alyona and Volodya kiss?
4. The love story in this film is really a love triangle. Kolya likes Alyona, but she prefers Volodya. Consider the two male leads: why do you think the director has Alyona choose Volodya? What values are expressed in this choice? Do you agree with Alyona’s preference, or would you choose Kolya instead?
Compare this love triangle to the one we saw in Bed and Sofa. How does the difference in the two storylines help us understand how Soviet society has evolved from the 1920s to the 1960s. Think about this both in terms of morals and how the characters live.
5. The second scene (from 0:1:15 to 0:2:45) shows detailed footage of Kolya’s crew at work on the Metro. Shortly after (from 0:3:00-0:4:45), we see aerial shots and ground-level shots of Moscow in all its glory and hustle-bustle. In addition, throughout the film we get tidbits of Moscow’s history. What are these scenes doing in the film? What are they meant to convey, both to a domestic audience and a foreign audience?
6. Foreign languages also play a role in this film. In the scene at Volodya’s place, which runs roughly from 0:10:00-0:16:30, the café worker listens to English lessons and an English pop song on his record player. Soon after, when Kolya and Volodya encounter the taxi driver (0:20:00-0:22:30), they use German and English to communicate with the Japanese tourist. Why bring foreign languages into the picture? What does it signal about our heroes that they have interest and ability in speaking English? Given that they have this ability, why is it so limited? What might the director be trying to balance here?
7. Volodya is a pipe fitter, but he’s also an aspiring writer. In the scene from 0:33:00-0:40:00, he and Kolya visit Comrade Voronov, a man with an established literary career who has read Volodya’s first story and taken an interest in him. Volodya has an intense argument with a man he thinks is Voronov, who quotes Stalin (“Writers are the engineers of human souls”!) and tells him his story isn’t true to life. It turns out this guy is a janitor. But when the real Voronov turns up, he barely gets one line. Can you unpack this scene? In your analysis, what is the subtext?
8. The difference in generations comes up several times in this film, mostly when the older generation is trying to put the younger generation in their place. For example, the recruitment officer tells Sasha he’s too young to get married, the Metro conductor yells at Kolya for singing, and it’s a middle aged man who accuses Volodya of being up to no good at the park. What is the film’s take on this generational conflict? Is it serious or harmless? Which generation comes out looking better? Can each generation learn from the other? If so, how?
9. Kolya is a good friend. He helps Volodya throughout the film and even saves him from being arrested after the chase in Gorky Park. He also helps hotheaded Sasha get past his fight with his fiancée and get married. But Kolya ends up alone, back at work in the metro, while the others find love and Volodya finds his calling as a writer. What do you make of Kolya’s ending? Is there something particularly Soviet about it, or could you imagine the same thing happening in an American film?
10. In the final scene, Kolya heads through the empty Metro station singing the film’s theme song. We’ve heard the music several times at this point, but this is the first time we hear the words. What is this song really about? How does it express the values and outlook of the Thaw generation? Why do you think it became a popular hit?
In response to question 5, I think it was crucial to include these scenes because it shows the change to industrialization and a modernized society that other locations, such as the West, were already partaking in. The first scene of Kolya and his crew resonated with me because for the first time (at least in our readings/movies), the laborers seems to have an effective, methodical approach to their work. Their jobs are still portrayed as hard work and labor-intensive, however, I am not uncomfortable watching it because it does not feel like extremely inhumane labor. This looks like a man doing his work properly and knowing exactly how to handle it. This is important to note in comparison with the Stalin era literature, where industry was deemed unsafe and was not as “grand” as it is when the nation moves towards modernization.
This thought also is applicable to the shots of Moscow in all of its glory. The audience sees Moscow, from a foreign perspective, as just like any bustling West city. Everything is booming, there is industry, mass public gatherings, etc. It serves to show Moscow as on-par with the rest of the world. From a domestic perspective, this is probably reassuring because to them, it may feel as though the industrialization is nowhere near the level that other nations are at. However, these shots highlight Moscow in its best light, showing the locals that indeed this movement was worth it.
In regards to question 8, I think that the difference between the older and younger generation is much more serious than it seems, even though some of the examples, such as telling Kolya to stop sining, are generally harmless. The film seems to use this generation gap to show the opposition to the lifestyle the love triangle leads. I think that, in my opinion, the younger generation comes out looking a lot better just because the older generation is depicted as extremely bitter and usually are the ones who are putting themselves into other peoples’ business, rather than just ignoring Kolyas singing or biting their tongue when they find out Sasha is getting married.
In regards to Question 2, this film and its atmosphere seem starkly different than that in “How the Steel Was Tempered.” For starters, in Ostrovsky’s book, the image seems quite dark and gloomy. Pavel’s search for vengeance and a renewed purpose in light of the Revolution and the Bolshevik cause are coated in very thick elements of passion and unity behind the cause. In other words, loud propaganda aimed at creating more visionary and passionate members of the party through the portrayal of Pavel’s triumphs in lieu of his humble background. This film is very different. Firstly, there is a much different tone to the way it is shot in general. It seems very normal and informal. We see people doing everyday things and going about life. Not every single interaction builds up to an action packed climax depicting the bravery of the main protagonist. Also, for it still being a black and white film, the lighting is quite spectacular, particularly around 6 minute mark with the canoe passing under the bridge and the several minutes that follow. Even his initial appearance at the airport is bathed in light. You can see the reflections of the buses and parts of the aluminum on parked airliners. The first film adaptation of Ostrovsky’s book, made in 1942, looks to be made on sound stages and closed sets with a few short parts that showcase certain plot points (one scene with a steam locomotive comes to mind, found near the 21:18 second mark on a youtube version of the film). This, along with the low quality of the film, makes things quite dark and dreary to the eye by comparison. The open, large sets of I Walk Around Moscow, by comparison seem inviting. Character interactions seem to be zoomed out more often to show more of this scenery as well. It also seems relatively light hearted. The part with Volodya on the subway/train towards the beginning, and the older man being repeatedly pestered by Volodya doing seemingly nothing particularly comes to mind. These differences in my mind separate this film from both the novel and film of How The Steel Was Tempered, and it is in my view not an example of Socialist Realism because of this departure in tone and political messaging. There is certainly some political messaging, but I would argue in the negatory, that is, the political messaging is in the director proving to the West and film aficionados that not all Soviet films are like (that is, heavily laiden with politics and propaganda as) How the Steel Was Tempered, and that the USSR too was capable of making good quality cinema.
In regards to the fifth question, I think the general portrayal of Moscow is meant to be extremely positive both on the domestic and foreign fronts. Domestically, similar to what Katie said, the first seen of Kolya’s workers in the Metro, there is a strong sense of teamwork among the workers, which I did not sense as much in previous depictions where it seemed workers were trying to survive at all costs. The image of the workers walking together in the tunnel also brings a sense of unity and calmness. Like Katie said, there does not seem to be a forced labor issue here so watching this unfold is not uncomfortable.
On the perception, the playful/upbeat music in the background is important. This gives all the scenes a more happy. campy feel to them. Largely because you cannot hear the struggle of building the metro or the negatives of the hustle-bustle in the city, like people yelling or car horns. One great example of this are the people forcing their way onto the train. This would typically be a chaotic moment but because the music is so upbeat and drowns out said chaos, it just seems like a positive of the city life.
All that being said, the positive images given off show the power of the USSR to build up such an industrial city in 40 years. It both shows their stability to their own people but also their power to foreign nations. Also, going back to the point of uncomfortable feelings from the Stalin Era, these images are something you could see in any American or Western European city at the time, which makes Moscow and the USSR seem more similar to the rest of the world than it is typically depicted.
To answer question 3, I think that overall the movie did a good job to show more sincerity in people overall. The personalities of the main characters were all different but blended well into their friendships and love. Something that I thought was realistic was how much they talked about love and the egoism that goes hand in hand with it. When Sasha shaved his head because “it was hot out,” but in reality it was because he was panicking about his wedding and wanted to call it off because of his fears about growing up. I thought this was a realistic and sincere part of the movie that is easily relatable to a lot of young people who are not sure what they want out of their lives. Overall, I thought the movie was very fun and amusing and was a movie I think a lot of young people would enjoy!
#6
The use of foreign language to some degree could be a stylistic approach–much as American beatniks claimed aspects of Buddhist and French culture, but is likely more a result of the quickly globalizing world. Following the death of Stalin and the effects of the post-war world, it became clear to many Europeans that their world was much bigger than their own national identity (though that was often in question) and was becoming interdependent on many other nations. While Americans largely ignored this fact, this film shows a Soviet response to post-war globalization. English being spoken is a recognition of the importance of the world superpower dyad of the Soviet Union and the United States.
Though only two years after the Cuban Missile Crisis and not in a period of friendly terms towards the United States, the film, as a result of the thaw, used language as a tool in relaxing tensions. Though symbolic, the period of détente experienced between the two nations beginning a few years after the film is proof of that cultural movement towards peaceful globalization.
6.
Bringing foreign languages into the picture was extremely important during this time period, and when the movie was produced (1964). During this time, the curiosity of the Soviet peoples was increased, especially when it came to the Western world. Since they were basically cut off from the Western world before WWII, they had minimal knowledge of the West due to rise of Russification and Stalinization. After WWII, the Western influence was spreading into the Soviet Union. Due to this, the Thaw generation was interested in connecting with Western ideas, and one way to connect to them was to learn other languages. The fact that our two main characters can speak English is very important. This is because they have been educated, and were going through westernization. With Westernization, the languages that, I believe, would be most likely to be learned would be more powerful or populated countries. Therefore, England was a power, thus English was learned. Learning languages also has to do with shared borders of a country. Or just a general interest in a language(s). Overall, the importance of learning a new language to our heroes was all in part of their curiosity to the new Western world, and them wanting to connect to it. Their limited ability to learn new languages would be due to censorship in the media and what they were able to listen, read or see. Another thing that could be part of the limited ability to learn new languages could be due to the older generation not being keen on other languages.
I would like to respond to Question 8. I feel that the generational conflict can be seen as pretty harmless, for most of the examples we see of it are all verbally expressed from the old to the young. However, they are somewhat serious in manner for the old obviously views the young negatively and disapproves of their actions and behaviors. But, the young goes about their ways regardless so that is why I see it as overall harmless. The young clearly comes out as the better generation for they do as they please without criticizing one another like the old is seen to do. I feel that the generations could learn from one another, for the old has been through a lot in their lifetime thus they can be seen as wise and could probably advise the youth at times for they have experience in life. On the other hand, the young can give the old tips as well for they know how to live more carefree and happy which the old should do more of in my opinion(instead of being so cranky lol).
In response to question 5, I think the beautiful aerial shots of Moscow are meant to convey confidence. Specifically, Russia is showing the world they are an advanced, western country. The westernization of Russia is shown through the vehicles and dress of the people. The many cars in the street scene are representative of the wealth their citizens have amassed to afford the vehicles and the modernity of the city. Additionally, Moscow was clean and busy which showed the world there was economic opportunity in the city. The footage of Moscow also reminds citizens to be proud of their country and support it fully as there is not a better, more advanced city. Abroad, the footage encourages tourists to visit Moscow because of the beautiful cityscape. While the landscape scenes can be viewed as a promotional tool for the tourism business, the footage can also be used to assert dominance internationally as the most modern, bustling city. This dominance can also lead to envy abroad and create pressure for other countries or cities to copy Moscow. The landscape scenes of Moscow can be interpreted in many ways, but the overall themes of the footage are pride, confidence, and advancement.
In response to question 3, I believe that this film answers the demand for a more realistic portrayal of love, conflict, and how people actually live. Each of the friends in this film were very different, but they came together as a group of very close friends, which often happens in real life. One of the biggest parts of showing a very realistic portrayal of love and conflict, is when Sasha shaved his head. He claimed he shaved his head because it was hot out, but in reality, he shaved it because he was having extreme doubts about his choices in life, such as getting married and going to the army. This act still happens today. Often when people are questioning something in their life, they often make changes to themselves to help cope with their stresses and choices. Even though we never see Alyona and Vloyda kiss, I believe it still adds to love being the central theme to this film. Not always do we need to see a couple actually kiss to see that love is a central theme in a film.