14-60
Theoretical Concepts of Film Studies in Cinema Art Journal: 1969–1985
Authors: Alexander Fedorov
Number of views: 15
Authors’ analysis of film studies concepts (in the context of the sociocultural and political situation, etc.) of the existence of the Cinema Art during the period of "stagnation" (1969–1985) showed that theoretical works on cinematic subjects during this period can be divided into the following types:
- theoretical articles written in support of the resolutions of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee on culture (including – cinematography), still defending the inviolability of socialist realism and Communist party in cinematography (V. Baskakov, A. Dubrovin, S. Freilich, A. Karaganov, I. Lisakovsky, L. Mamatova, V. Murian, V. Tolstykh, I. Weisfeld, R. Yurenev, V. Zhdan, etc.)
- Theoretical articles balancing ideological and professional approaches to cinema (S. Freilikh, E. Levin, K. Razlogov, I. Weisfeld, R. Yurenev, etc.);
- theoretical articles, discussions devoted mainly to professional problems: analysis of the theoretical heritage of the classics of Soviet cinema, directing, film dramaturgy, genres, the specifics of television, etc. (L. Anninsky, M. Bleiman, Y. Bogomolov, Y. Khanyutin, L. Kozlov, E. Levin, A. Tarkovsky, V. Shklovsky, A. Vartanov, I. Weisfeld, M. Yampolsky, M. Zak, and others);
- theoretical articles calling on the authorities to provide organizational transformations that would promote the intensive development of film studies as a science, the sociology of cinema, and film education (I. Weisfeld, E. Weizman, etc.).
- theoretical articles opposing bourgeois influences, contrasting them with communist ideology and class approaches (V. Baskakov, L. Melville, M. Shaternikova, V. Shestakov, etc.).
On the whole, the Cinema Art journal in 1969–1985, just as during the Thaw, was still within the typical model of a Soviet journal for the humanities, which, despite significant concessions to censorship and those in power, at least half of its total text tried to preserve its ability to engage in artistic analysis of the film process (unfortunately, this did not allow it even in minimal doses to criticize the flaws in the works of the most "bosses" influential Soviet screen artists of the time).
The journal was unable to maintain the thaw that was still strong even in the late 1960s and found itself largely in the ideological rut of Leonid Brezhnev's peak, although, paying tribute to Soviet propaganda, the journal was able to afford "in some narrow plazas" to publish meaningful discussions and important theoretical works.