| These revealing pictures shed light on life in the Soviet Union right at the end of the rule of Joseph Stalin. Published in Soviet Union Magazine, they were distributed across Europe and the Americas in an effort to generate sympathy for the Communist country's ideals. The pages of the magazine offer some of the greatest examples of early 20th-century photo-montage as propaganda. 
Communism in colour: The Volga-Don canal is pictured on the cover of the September 1952 issue of Soviet Union magazine, a propaganda title - published in Russian, French, English, German, and, from 1938, Spanish - that was intended to visually extol the virtues of the Marxist state to audiences abroad Propaganda: The images were published in Soviet Union Magazine, which was distributed across Europe and America in a bid to garner sympathy for Communist ideals 
Smiling faces: The happy scenes vividly portrayed in the magazine belie the harsh truth of forced collectivisation on Russia's agricultural economy 
Land of plenty: A picture shows a market overflowing with fresh produce. The images document the country in the final year of Stalin's life Domestic bliss: Family life in the Soviet Union is presented in these images of rosy-cheeked youngsters and sturdy Russian matriarchs 
Pastoral scenes: The pages of Soviet Union magazine offer some of the greatest examples of early 20th-century photomontage as propaganda 
Soviet salad: With elements such as oversized pages and multi-page fold-outs, each issue exists as an elaborate artistic creation Public relations stunt: The magazine tried to convey the heroic efforts of the Soviet people in fulfilling the objectives set forth by Joseph Stalin Published in Russian, French, English, German, and, from 1938, Spanish, it informed readers abroad of the hyper-construction taking place within the USSR, portraying its emergence as a leading industrial power. The self-proclaimed purpose of the magazine was to 'reflect in photography the whole scope and variety of the construction work now going on the USSR'. More... By focusing on a single theme or initiative in each issue, the contributing artists produced a work which effectively conveyed the heroic efforts of the Soviet people in fulfilling the objectives set forth by Joseph Stalin to transform the technologically deficient country into a highly developed and productive world power. The first issues tended to focus upon large state projects, particularly those related to industrialisation. 
Great works: The Moscow metro's Komsomolskaya station on the cover of the February 1952 edition of Soviet Union magazine 
To take away: A uniformed assistant holds a product in a well-stocked-looking Soviet supermarket The scope of the journal quickly expanded, however, with later issues focusing on different ethnic republics and regions, various building projects, new transportation routes, and themes of daily life such as children, the arts, and athletics, in addition to special political issues. The reality behind the Iron Curtain, however, was a world away from the sugar-coated image Stalin portrayed. The ruthless dictator is estimated to have been responsible for the deaths of over 20million of his own people through purges, famine and forced labour camps, known as gulags. 
High society: These woman and men look suspiciously smartly dressed for what was, in theory, a strictly egalitarian communist country Under construction: A fine example of grand Stalin-era architecture is shown under construction, left, as the bright young things of socialism walk towards the camera. Right, a Russian woman stands proud in what is presumably a new house, with a youngster ostentatiously brandishing a picture of Stalin to decorate the wall 
Babes of the Red Army: Two woman soldiers clad in fatigues discuss dialectical materialism with rifles slung over their shoulders atch out grandpa or I'll denounce you to the secret police! A man and a youngster share a joke, left; on the right trainee teachers contemplate the future of socialism 
Soviet style: A woman straightens her partner's tie. By focusing on a single theme or initiative in each issue, the contributing artists produced a work which effectively conveyed the heroic efforts of the Soviet people It is thought that around 14.5million needlessly starved to death and 9.5million were executed in cold blood for opposing his politics. Some historians have suggested he could be responsible for over 60million deaths. The reality - with so few records kept - is no one knows how much damage this dictator truly inflicted on his people. Stalin died in his bed at home near Moscow on March 5, 1953, at the age of 74 after suffering a stroke. Life in the Soviet Union: The first issues tended to focus upon large state projects, particularly those related to industrialisation 
Hard at work: Workers growing lemons in a chemical laboratory in Pavlov-on-Oka, 1952 
Discussing the five-year plans? A smartly dressed man and woman chat as a crowd looks on in this picture 
A department store is shown being built in a Russian city: In the early-Fifties the Soviet Union was still recovering from the ravages of the Second World War The mining town of Chiatura, Georgia, surrounded by steep cliffs, is criss-crossed by a network of aging Soviet-era aerial tramways that are still in use today. In the early 20th century, after the U.S.S.R. annexed Georgia, Soviet authorities were intent on extracting the vast manganese deposits beneath Chiatura. In the 1950s, planners began work on what locals call the "Kanatnaya Doroga," or "rope road," that still connects almost every corner of the town. Today, while some of the cars have rusted away, 17 of the aging tramways remain in service. Photographer Amos Chapple (who previously took us inside Iran and Turkmenistan) recently visited Chiatura, where he became fascinated with the cable cars and the locals who operate and ride them daily.  At the eastern edge of Chiatura, Georgia, this manganese processing plant, sited next to a mine shaft, operates 24 hours a day. Workers access the mine by taking two tramways up and over steep bluffs. The second tramway is visible at top left. The cable cars are part of a network of aerial tramways built in Chiatura during the Soviet era, used to this day as public transportation through the challenging terrain. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features)
Postmodernist historians of everyday life in totalitarian societies have underrated the role of ideology at the individual level, preferring a performative reading of subjectivity. Yet this fails to explain why the Soviet and Nazi regimes generated absolute commitment, writes Jochen Hellbeck. What is needed, he argues, is an understanding of how ideology is generated in individual acts of appropriation and self-becoming. 
2 Revaze Achvadze rides a tramway up to his home, in Chiatura, Georgia. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) One of the most engrossing and insightful documentary records of daily life in the Soviet Union during the Stalin era originated as the daily scribblings of a peasant youth from Ukraine who had fled from his village in Ukraine to Moscow to escape the deadly wave of the collectivization campaign. The boy's father, Filip Podlubnyi, had been deported as a "kulak" peasant on charges of exploitation and the pursuit of selfish gains. His sixteen-year old son Stepan was suspected of having inherited his father's hostile class essence. Stepan sought refuge in Moscow where no one knew him, partly to hide from the Communist zealots. Yet he embraced his new urban life as an opportunity as well: to become an industrial worker and an educated citizen, and thus to rework his class origins, leaving behind what he believed to be his problematic kulak psychology. In this connection, the diary fulfilled several purposes. On one level Stepan Podlubnyi treated it as a rare friend to whom he could confide the secret of his concealed origins. On another, it served him as a tool of consciousness by means of which he sought to dispose of his problematic past. All the while, Podlubnyi kept his diary with a distinct goal in mind: it was raw material for an autobiographical writing that he intended to publish one day, a novel for which he had already come up with a title: "The life of a redundant class, its spiritual rebirth adjustment to the new conditions".[1] 
3 Overview of Chiatura. The Soviets invested heavily in constructing a "worker's paradise" in the gorge which, in its heyday, claimed 60 percent of the world's manganese production. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) European histories The comfortable historical consensus long obtained within and among western European countries has been undermined by the eastern enlargement of the EU. Europeans are still far from an all-embracing "grand narrative", assuming this is worth striving for at all. [more] As he worked on this project the young author was guided by an awareness of living in an exceptional, historic period that it was his obligation to record. "When will I finally begin to write my memoirs of the thirties?" he wrote in September 1932.[2] The fact that Stepan Podlubnyi posed this question when the decade had barely begun illustrates how much of a notion he had of the Stalinist industrialization campaign as a distinct epoch in the making. While some portions of the diary read like the chronicle of a fearful observer, the bulk of the journal served the opposite purpose of integrating its author into his new socio-political environment. In writing, Podlubnyi created a dialogue between his personal life and his age in historical terms; he rose his self to the level of a historical subject. The practice of insistent self-reflection, of "work on the self" ("Arbeit an sich selbst"), and the goal of self-transformation he set for himself were permeated by the revolutionary ideology of his age. Podlubnyi proceeded to remake his self in the very same terms as the Soviet Union as it was being collectivized and industrialized. Both these processes, his individual work on the self, and the revolutionary transformation of the land, were conducted with the same impatience and zeal, betraying the same awareness of a historical time line that had to be accounted for.
This double purpose of the diary as a record of history in the making and of the self as a historical subject in the making, characterized many Soviet diaries from this period. It was true not only of diarists like Stepan Podlubnyi, who sought absolution from their "impure" class-alien origins, but extended to authors who challenged and confronted the communist regime in their personal writings. The more vocally these diarists criticized the political order, the more strongly they appealed to "history" as their arbiter.[3] The awareness these Soviet diarists had of their lives as a historical canvas, onto which a new civilization and a new type of personality awaited to be inscribed, presents a distinct challenge for historians of everyday life. How are we to conceive of ordinary life in an order striving toward the extraordinary and historic? We observe a conflation of daily life and ideological awareness that needs to be captured analytically, so as to account for the intertwined and mutually dependent character of the everyday, self-construction, and revolutionary ideology.
Historians of the everyday respond to this challenge in contradictory ways. There is a growing awareness that ideology matters and that the social history of Stalinism has to reckon with the language and the practices of the state. But this awareness comes short of an open acknowledgment of the power of ideology to shape the terms of social history. This reticence has to do in part with the ways in which ideology has been conceived in the historiography of Stalinism, specifically the "totalitarian/revisionist" debate. Adherents of the totalitarian paradigm viewed communist ideology as a corpus of official truths that issued from central institutions of power and served the goal of securing state power. Ideology indoctrinated individuals, suggesting to them participation in a great "movement", while deluding them about their true condition of un freedom. Though in many ways compelling, this interpretation reduced Soviet citizens to mere victims of the regime's aspirations. More recently, a generation of social historians has revealed the active participation of large segments of the population in the Bolshevik enterprise. In the process, however, the Soviet order was strangely de-ideologized, and its workings were explained in terms of the "self-interests" of the groups in society identified as its beneficiaries. Yet these historians made no attempt to critically examine the forms self-interest could take in a socialist society.[4]
Recent social historical work still tends to situate people's lives in the Stalinist system as extraneous to their ideological environment. 
4 A woman passenger greets a friend inside an aerial tramway station in Chiatura. Infrastructure in many of Georgia's smaller towns dates back to the Soviet period. After communism collapsed, Georgia's long-awaited freedom from Russia was marred by a civil war which devastated the fledgling economy. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) It also shows a continued reticence to engage with ideology as a productive category of analysis. In a joint essay written for the volume Beyond Totalitarianism (2009), two eminent historians of the everyday, Sheila Fitzpatrick and Alf LŸdtke, discuss the terms of everyday life in Nazi Germany and Soviet Stalinism without once mentioning the term ideology.[5] This is paradoxical, for the thematic focus of the article is on ideology, in substance, if not in name. The authors see the sphere of the everyday shaped in decisive ways by the respective "great cause" promoted by each regime. It is here that a crucial "energy" is emitted that "drives" people to yearn for inclusion in a larger whole. "In our view it is central for understanding the productive and even more the destructive potential of these regimes to address the emotional charges that drove their respective dynamics 'from within': what were the practices of (self-)energizing which people employed or encountered?"[6]
The question is well put, and the author's final verdict is sound, too. The inclusive and exclusive mechanisms practiced by the two regimes, they conclude, had formidable repercussions for how individuals conceived of themselves in Stalinist Russia and in Nazi Germany. "It is the everyday of those actively included in the Volksgemeinschaft – the 'participants in socialist construction', to use the Soviet term – that is illuminated by the energizing paradigm. Those who were excluded and suffered social death found themselves literally 'switched off.'"[7] Yet this finding stands in tension with the body of the essay, where the authors catalogue a wide range of social formations and emotional bonds, some of them of the state, some outside of it, and some standing in tension with it. It remains unclear just how the mobilizing schemes of the Nazi and the Stalinist regimes were able to cut across other social bonds, remodelling or exploding them.
When Fitzpatrick and LŸdtke discuss individual lives they cast them as distinct from their socio-political environment. The article is intercut with six short biographical sketches, each of them presented in a separate text box. In graphic terms alone, this is an interesting commentary on the autonomy that is granted to these individuals, and on the limits of the "energized" environment to take hold of them. Finally, with their use of the analytical term "energy", the authors work with an amorphous and multidirectional concept that does not spell out either the direction or the load of the energetic charge, the ways in which the energy penetrated individuals' bodies or minds, or the effects of this energy on their lives. Ideology, by contrast, would be a more precise designation, not least because it was used by the historical subjects under consideration who relished the clarity and sense of purpose (a directed form of energy!) that accrued from the possession of a distinct worldview. Fitzpatrick's and LŸdtke's arresting image of individuals being "literally 'switched off'" makes sense only if it is joined to such an understanding of ideology with its directed, powerful, often lethal charge.
As a whole, the article gestures toward a rehabilitation of ideology, a move, however, that clashes with the reservations each author has toward ideology as an analytical concept. Fundamentally, both authors appear to project their personal abhorrence of totalizing schemes, of which ideology is but one, onto their historical subject matter, while losing sight of the totalizing longings of the individuals whom they study.[8] Other scholars, writing in a postmodernist key, express a similar distrust of overarching narratives, fearing their hegemonizing thrust, and instead favour moral relativism and a protean, situative, and performative reading of subjectivity. 
5 An operator of Tramway 25 pits cherries in the downtime between passengers. Operators usually wait until there are 3-4 passengers waiting at both stations before ringing the bell and commencing a trip. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) Yet this method makes it difficult to register systems of power that generated absolute intellectual and emotional commitments. What I believe is needed instead is a novel formulation of ideology that departs from the traditional assumption of a monolithic, top-down "Communist Party ideology", and instead observes the workings of ideology and, indeed, its very generation, in localized, individual acts of appropriation and self-becoming.
In my understanding of ideology in the Soviet context, I do not proceed from any given theoretical model, of which there are many. All of the more interesting theories of ideology in one way or another stand in the Marxist tradition of defining ideology as the naturalization of a given reality, rendering it impervious to change. This perspective could also be applied to the Soviet case, in the sense that communist ideology – the self-representation of the regime – masked the real power relationships in the Soviet realm. But such a perspective obscures the qualitatively different status of ideology in the communist context. Unlike, say, bourgeois ideology, which aimed to reproduce the current bourgeois order and which therefore operated invisibly, beneath the recesses of the conscious world, communist ideology was deliberate and transformative, and it targeted the conscious mind rather than the political unconscious. It was an open program of action, a blueprint of a world to be realized. Toward the individual, Communist ideology represented itself as total consciousness, and it called on the individual to elevate his subjective mind to this highest level of consciousness.[9]
Investigations of how Communist ideology resonated with the lives of individuals have begun in recent years, but it is still an area in need of further research.[10]The question to be asked is what ideology offered to individuals in substantive terms, independently of its instrumentalist uses. Why was it appealing, and what about it was appealing? Which parts of the ideological text did an individual appropriate, and what were the effects of this productive encounter between ideology and the self? Hannah Arendt observes that ideologies "always contain in themselves the logic of their respective 'idea'." The idea contains in itself a logical process which is spun out by ideology. Arendt seems to suggests that ideology is not a ready-made, fully articulated text; rather, it unpacks itself, like compressed software, in the process of individual appropriation. Yet Arendt is not interested in the individual as an active subject. For her ideology itself is the driving force, and in encountering the individual, ideology eliminates subjectivity: "ideological thinking is [...] independent of all [individual] experience" and represents an "emancipation of thought from experienced and experiential reality."[11] This view underrates individuals' active and creative participation in the appropriation of ideology, a process that asked them to rework, rather than abandon, subjective experiences. Ideology worked by impelling individuals to read the world through its lens, to structure their sense of self and thereby render it meaningful. This was a creative task that could assume as many different shapes as the number of individual subjects it produced. Individuals poured considerable subjective labour into this process. Raising psychological experience to ideological consciousness was a demanding challenge that kept generating contradictions, moments of failure, and occasions of doubt.
What is thus necessary, as we try to make sense of individuals' life experience during the Stalin era, is an understanding of ideology that is compatible with subjectivity. This can be accomplished through a shift in the conceptualization of ideology, from a pre-given, fixed textual corpus, in the narrow and reductive sense of "Communist Party ideology", to a ferment working in the individual and producing a great deal of variation, as it interacted with the subjective life aspects of a given individual. This perspective restores the individual as an agent, but as an ideological agent. Instead of privileging discourse as the sole historical agent, I suggest a circular or dialogical notion of ideology and subjectivity. The individual operates like a clearinghouse where ideology is unpacked, personalized, and in the process the individual remakes himself into a subject with distinct and meaningful biographical features. And in activating the individual, ideology itself comes to life. Ideology should therefore be seen as an adaptive force; it has power only to the extent that it operates in living individuals who engage their selves and the world as ideological subjects. Much of the logic of the revolutionary master-narratives of transformation (transformation of social space and self-transformation), collectivization (collectivization of individualist producers and collectivization of the self), and purification (political purge campaigns and acts of personal self-improvement) was provided and reproduced by Soviet citizens, who kept rationalizing unfathomable state policies and thus were ideological agents, on a par with the leaders of party and state.
When the American sociologists and historians who took part in the Harvard project on the Soviet social system interviewed Soviet immigrants to the United States in the early 1950s, they were struck by the degree to which their respondents were used to conceiving of the world and their lives in it in terms of "dialectical materialism". Truth for them had no absolute, essential meaning; instead it was relative and unfolded developmentally. Apparent contradictions could coexist without either of them being a lie. The American researchers noted that fifteen percent of their respondents "made constant use of the Marxian dialectic to explain and to predict". Sensing an awareness on the part of the refugee respondents that their chances of entering the US might diminish if they appeared to be Marxists, the interviewers believed the real number to be much higher.[12] Dialectical thinking, of course, pervaded Soviet era literature, as well as the scientific discourse of the Stalinist age. But as the episode from the Harvard Interview project suggests so graphically, Marxist dialectics was more than just an ideological precept, understood in the conventional sense as a method informing the production of Party histories and socialist-realist novels; it was just as much a way of life.
More glaringly even than the Harvard interview protocols, Soviet diaries from the Stalin era show how their authors conceived of truth in developmental terms and sought to master it in a process of hard work. Frequently, authors noted tensions or outright contradictions between the ideological plane (the "ought to") and the observed reality of their own daily life (the "is"). The point, however, is that they did not accept these problems and contradictions, but sought to resolve them by applying mechanisms of rationalization, often in dialectical form. What this means for researchers interested in what it meant to live through Soviet times is that they need to redirect their inquiry of who individuals were, from the identification of select expressions of opinion – whether overheard by the Secret police or culled from personal diaries by researchers themselves – to an understanding of subjectivity as a processual quality. This is especially true in the Soviet revolutionary context, where notions of the ideal personality were predicated on intense struggle and the striving toward transcendence.
By the same token, researchers need to understand strategies of "rationalization", which were very widespread in personal sources from this period, less as desperate attempts to "rationalize away" uncomfortable truths (as modern psychology would have it) than as a constitutive mechanism of ideological appropriation. Rationalization – the ability to detect a rational logic in random acts of state policy, such as sudden arrests of relatives or friends, or one's own misfortune – was essential for Soviet citizens who were supposed to believe in scientific laws of development and the rationality of their existence. Stalin era contemporaries were constantly asked to rationalize, to make their daily observations fit ideological mandates. The more their observations parted from the required viewpoint, the more they were expected to struggle to re-inhabit the grid. An individual's ability to rationalize a phenomenon was thus a characteristic of mental strength and spiritual health. What is more, these mechanisms were not solely internal processes, meant to restore one's peace of mind. Individuals also applied this agenda of "mastering ideology" to their social lives as workers and citizens, such as when they denounced bosses at work or signed public letters calling for the execution of enemies of the people.[13]
In the course of the 1930s Podlubnyi's project of self-integration had evolved in paradoxical ways. He succeeded in mastering the lexicon of a dedicated and politically conscious Soviet worker so well that he drew the attention of the secret police (GPU). Believing him to be a trustworthy, aspiring young communist, they asked him to become an informant whose task was to reveal the proverbial "wolves in sheep's clothing" – class enemies hiding in Soviet society. This involuntary proximity to the GPU, which more than any other state organization incarnated the revolutionary principle of purification, constantly reminded him of his own impure origins. The GPU prompted him to think of himself in precisely the terms he wanted to avoid, namely in an opposition between private thoughts and outward behaviour. This split mind was a far cry from the integrated socialist personality who thought and acted uniformly and as a matter of inner conviction.
While Podlubnyi now frequently felt like a fraud, he erupted in declarations of sincere love and dedication for the Soviet regime whenever he saw signs that he might become a true citizen of the socialist society. But with the sudden arrest of his barely literate mother on charges of anti-Soviet, Trotskyist activities in December 1937, both his chances, as well as his enthusiasm, for integration were undermined. He left the Medical Institute in which he had been enrolled since 1935, and by 1938 his diary had turned into a disillusioned chronicle of the age – the very opposite of the proud record of socialist construction that Podlubnyi had set out to write in 1932.
Podlubnyi now denounced the policies of the Stalinist regime in acerbic terms. The grandiose reception of a returning team of polar explorers was, in his words, an "unprecedented hullabaloo" that served only to deflect popular attention from the trial and execution of the Party's chief theoretician, Nikolai Bukharin. After reading Quo Vadis? by Henryk Sienkiewicz, which was set in Imperial Rome in the first century A.D., Podlubnyi characterized Stalin as "our Russian Nero," specifically addressing his personal cult: "It appears that the unjustified lavishing of praise and attribution of good deeds, as well as deification, are possible in our times too, if only in a more subtle form."[14]
Podlubnyi referred to his diary entries of this period as a "naturalistic recording of facts".[15]Seen through the lens of socialist realism's historical confidence, the naturalist perspective was by definition pessimistic and degenerative. Podlubnyi defended his use of naturalism. His purpose, he wrote, was to cast reality in a different light and thus estrange people from the rhetoric they reflexively invoked to describe their lives. Yet to engage with Soviet reality in a naturalist style came at a price. It was not just a question of the danger that these writings posed for Podlubnyi; they also undermined his self-image, which rested in large measure on socialist realist conceptions of the person. In his diary of the late 1930s, Podlubnyi had to contend with the fact that he had become a "pessimist" at heart, plagued by a lack of willpower, and that his attempt to turn himself into a socialist personality had failed. Having been forced to give up his university studies, he pondered his aimless, "useless" existence: "A life without goals – like an animal's [...] what kind of a life is that? There's nobody to provide me with moral support". Life "without the feeling of progress" deepened his pessimism. The fact that he did not fight to resume his studies and regain a cheerful perspective was evidence of a diseased will: "Too much has my will been dented. I have lost control over myself." Finally, there was the issue of his personal life. Now that he was about to turn 25, it was time to get married, yet the few girls who seemed available were all from the less-cultured classes.[16]
From this lowly position he enviously observed the "milieu" of the university students in whose company he had once been. In the spring of 1938 a friend, Vladimir Vorontsov, who had been expelled from the Komsomol two years earlier because his father had been uncovered as a Trotskyist, was readmitted into the youth organization. He had plans to study philosophy and join the Communist Party. Stepan criticized Vladimir for his decision to become a Party apparatchik; Vladimir in turn chided Stepan for his "egoism", for only taking from life but not giving. To voice purely negative views on existing reality invited charges of egoism, reminding Podlubnyi of his father's kulak essence against which he had been fighting all along. In some sense, the very outspokenness of Podlubnyi's political diary kept undermining the ideal of the collectivist, optimistic, and perpetually striving personality against which he continued to measure himself when he contemplated the failure of his life.[17] In a very tangible sense, Podlubnyi found himself "switched off" from the ideological current that he believed animated the organized Soviet collective, to borrow Fitzpatrick's and LŸdtke's ingeneous formulation.
***
The concept of the ideological subject presented in this essay does not apply to all empirical Soviet individuals or to the totality of an individual, even if his writings show evidence of such a disposition – witness the ebb and flow of Podlubnyi's search for integration in the socialist order. What it refers to is a culturally specific frame of selfhood, of what constitutes a desirable life. During the interwar period in the Soviet Union, and perhaps also Europe as a whole from the 1920s to the 1940s, ideology in the sense of personalWeltanschauung and heightened awareness of one's biography was constitutive of subjectivity. This orientation did not manifest itself at all times; Soviet citizens may not have articulated it when they stood in bread lines and cursed the state distribution system of goods, but it appeared (or, more accurately: was generated) when they recited their autobiographies or justified themselves in public, and also often when they sat down privately to reflect on their lives.[18]
Returning to the history of the everyday and its practice of disconnecting "daily life" from ideology, I see a danger of ignoring the conceptual underpinnings of life, its definition and purpose, in a specific period. Such meaning, I believe, is not universal and not to be culled from universal strategies of daily survival. I find it difficult to subscribe to the proposition, which at first sight may appear basic and unassailable, that Soviet citizens sought to live "ordinary" lives.[19] Many of them strove – or were made to strive – for extraordinary lives, and by the same token Stalinism was an extraordinary period not just because of the excesses caused by the regime, but because of a larger cultural disposition toward the extraordinary. In other words, I believe we must historicize the conceptual underpinnings of the meaning of life, of personal life, and of an epoch. In light of such reconceptualization, we are bound to come to very different conclusions about the terms of interaction between the Soviet regime and its citizens.
About the historicization of historical time, pending future research it appears that the self-engagement to which the term "ideological subject" refers to was most characteristic of the period of Stalin's rule. The Stalin era was a particular formation within the larger communist frame; it was defined by party leaders' deliberate decision to force Soviet society to make a historical leap, toward the end of historical time.[20] This sense, vividly reflected in documents from the Stalin period, of the present as a threshold moment of world history, coupled with an extraordinary willingness to resort to violent means in order to cross the imagined threshold, generated countless individual projects of self-transformation, which were similarly characterized by an unprecedented sense of possibility and necessity. These narratives in some sense depended on an environment of violence to come to fruition. Yet this does not necessarily diminish their experiential relevance. We are familiar from the history of religion that the discovery of truth is often based on prolonged and recurrent suffering.
This conception of the self as an ideological work-in-progress observable during the Stalin period differs profoundly from notions of self familiar to researchers who personally witnessed the last years of the Soviet regime. One reason, perhaps, why the agenda of Stalin era subjectivity gained attention relatively late on was that in thinking about citizens and the state during the Stalin period, we tended to project back in time attitudes that we personally observed during the final years of the Soviet regime, when detached modes of double-speak and cynical engagement of Soviet ideology were rampant. It seems to me, though, that we are mistaken in projecting such conceptions of self, characteristic of the late Soviet regime, back onto an era when the revolution was in full swing, in the form of an ideological apparatus with considerable powers of persuasion, when there existed as of yet no sense of finality – when, in brief, the existential stakes for Soviet citizens were raised to unprecedented heights. It is an altogether different question, in much need of further elucidation, how the heights of Stalin-era self-engagement (d)evolved over time into the attitudes of critical detachment and alienation that were instrumental for the disintegration of the Soviet system as a whole 
6 A mosaic of Lenin and Stalin, made of river stones, at the entrance to Chiatura's main aerial tramway station. Stalin's relationship with Chiatura dates to his days as a revolutionary fugitive hiding out in the mines above the town.(Amos Chapple/Rex Features) Yet this method makes it difficult to register systems of power that generated absolute intellectual and emotional commitments. What I believe is needed instead is a novel formulation of ideology that departs from the traditional assumption of a monolithic, top-down "Communist Party ideology", and instead observes the workings of ideology and, indeed, its very generation, in localized, individual acts of appropriation and self-becoming.
In my understanding of ideology in the Soviet context, I do not proceed from any given theoretical model, of which there are many. All of the more interesting theories of ideology in one way or another stand in the Marxist tradition of defining ideology as the naturalization of a given reality, rendering it impervious to change. This perspective could also be applied to the Soviet case, in the sense that communist ideology – the self-representation of the regime – masked the real power relationships in the Soviet realm. But such a perspective obscures the qualitatively different status of ideology in the communist context. Unlike, say, bourgeois ideology, which aimed to reproduce the current bourgeois order and which therefore operated invisibly, beneath the recesses of the conscious world, communist ideology was deliberate and transformative, and it targeted the conscious mind rather than the political unconscious. It was an open program of action, a blueprint of a world to be realized. Toward the individual, Communist ideology represented itself as total consciousness, and it called on the individual to elevate his subjective mind to this highest level of consciousness.[9]
Investigations of how Communist ideology resonated with the lives of individuals have begun in recent years, but it is still an area in need of further research.[10]The question to be asked is what ideology offered to individuals in substantive terms, independently of its instrumentalist uses. Why was it appealing, and what about it was appealing? Which parts of the ideological text did an individual appropriate, and what were the effects of this productive encounter between ideology and the self? Hannah Arendt observes that ideologies "always contain in themselves the logic of their respective 'idea'." The idea contains in itself a logical process which is spun out by ideology. Arendt seems to suggests that ideology is not a ready-made, fully articulated text; rather, it unpacks itself, like compressed software, in the process of individual appropriation. Yet Arendt is not interested in the individual as an active subject. For her ideology itself is the driving force, and in encountering the individual, ideology eliminates subjectivity: "ideological thinking is [...] independent of all [individual] experience" and represents an "emancipation of thought from experienced and experiential reality."[11] This view underrates individuals' active and creative participation in the appropriation of ideology, a process that asked them to rework, rather than abandon, subjective experiences. Ideology worked by impelling individuals to read the world through its lens, to structure their sense of self and thereby render it meaningful. This was a creative task that could assume as many different shapes as the number of individual subjects it produced. Individuals poured considerable subjective labour into this process. Raising psychological experience to ideological consciousness was a demanding challenge that kept generating contradictions, moments of failure, and occasions of doubt.
What is thus necessary, as we try to make sense of individuals' life experience during the Stalin era, is an understanding of ideology that is compatible with subjectivity. This can be accomplished through a shift in the conceptualization of ideology, from a pre-given, fixed textual corpus, in the narrow and reductive sense of "Communist Party ideology", to a ferment working in the individual and producing a great deal of variation, as it interacted with the subjective life aspects of a given individual. This perspective restores the individual as an agent, but as an ideological agent. Instead of privileging discourse as the sole historical agent, I suggest a circular or dialogical notion of ideology and subjectivity. The individual operates like a clearinghouse where ideology is unpacked, personalized, and in the process the individual remakes himself into a subject with distinct and meaningful biographical features. And in activating the individual, ideology itself comes to life. Ideology should therefore be seen as an adaptive force; it has power only to the extent that it operates in living individuals who engage their selves and the world as ideological subjects. Much of the logic of the revolutionary master-narratives of transformation (transformation of social space and self-transformation), collectivization (collectivization of individualist producers and collectivization of the self), and purification (political purge campaigns and acts of personal self-improvement) was provided and reproduced by Soviet citizens, who kept rationalizing unfathomable state policies and thus were ideological agents, on a par with the leaders of party and state.
When the American sociologists and historians who took part in the Harvard project on the Soviet social system interviewed Soviet immigrants to the United States in the early 1950s, they were struck by the degree to which their respondents were used to conceiving of the world and their lives in it in terms of "dialectical materialism". Truth for them had no absolute, essential meaning; instead it was relative and unfolded developmentally. Apparent contradictions could coexist without either of them being a lie. The American researchers noted that fifteen percent of their respondents "made constant use of the Marxian dialectic to explain and to predict". Sensing an awareness on the part of the refugee respondents that their chances of entering the US might diminish if they appeared to be Marxists, the interviewers believed the real number to be much higher.[12] Dialectical thinking, of course, pervaded Soviet era literature, as well as the scientific discourse of the Stalinist age. But as the episode from the Harvard Interview project suggests so graphically, Marxist dialectics was more than just an ideological precept, understood in the conventional sense as a method informing the production of Party histories and socialist-realist novels; it was just as much a way of life.
More glaringly even than the Harvard interview protocols, Soviet diaries from the Stalin era show how their authors conceived of truth in developmental terms and sought to master it in a process of hard work. Frequently, authors noted tensions or outright contradictions between the ideological plane (the "ought to") and the observed reality of their own daily life (the "is"). The point, however, is that they did not accept these problems and contradictions, but sought to resolve them by applying mechanisms of rationalization, often in dialectical form. What this means for researchers interested in what it meant to live through Soviet times is that they need to redirect their inquiry of who individuals were, from the identification of select expressions of opinion – whether overheard by the Secret police or culled from personal diaries by researchers themselves – to an understanding of subjectivity as a processual quality. This is especially true in the Soviet revolutionary context, where notions of the ideal personality were predicated on intense struggle and the striving toward transcendence.
By the same token, researchers need to understand strategies of "rationalization", which were very widespread in personal sources from this period, less as desperate attempts to "rationalize away" uncomfortable truths (as modern psychology would have it) than as a constitutive mechanism of ideological appropriation. Rationalization – the ability to detect a rational logic in random acts of state policy, such as sudden arrests of relatives or friends, or one's own misfortune – was essential for Soviet citizens who were supposed to believe in scientific laws of development and the rationality of their existence. Stalin era contemporaries were constantly asked to rationalize, to make their daily observations fit ideological mandates. The more their observations parted from the required viewpoint, the more they were expected to struggle to re-inhabit the grid. An individual's ability to rationalize a phenomenon was thus a characteristic of mental strength and spiritual health. What is more, these mechanisms were not solely internal processes, meant to restore one's peace of mind. Individuals also applied this agenda of "mastering ideology" to their social lives as workers and citizens, such as when they denounced bosses at work or signed public letters calling for the execution of enemies of the people.[13]
In the course of the 1930s Podlubnyi's project of self-integration had evolved in paradoxical ways. He succeeded in mastering the lexicon of a dedicated and politically conscious Soviet worker so well that he drew the attention of the secret police (GPU). Believing him to be a trustworthy, aspiring young communist, they asked him to become an informant whose task was to reveal the proverbial "wolves in sheep's clothing" – class enemies hiding in Soviet society. This involuntary proximity to the GPU, which more than any other state organization incarnated the revolutionary principle of purification, constantly reminded him of his own impure origins. The GPU prompted him to think of himself in precisely the terms he wanted to avoid, namely in an opposition between private thoughts and outward behaviour. This split mind was a far cry from the integrated socialist personality who thought and acted uniformly and as a matter of inner conviction.
While Podlubnyi now frequently felt like a fraud, he erupted in declarations of sincere love and dedication for the Soviet regime whenever he saw signs that he might become a true citizen of the socialist society. But with the sudden arrest of his barely literate mother on charges of anti-Soviet, Trotskyist activities in December 1937, both his chances, as well as his enthusiasm, for integration were undermined. He left the Medical Institute in which he had been enrolled since 1935, and by 1938 his diary had turned into a disillusioned chronicle of the age – the very opposite of the proud record of socialist construction that Podlubnyi had set out to write in 1932.
Podlubnyi now denounced the policies of the Stalinist regime in acerbic terms. The grandiose reception of a returning team of polar explorers was, in his words, an "unprecedented hullabaloo" that served only to deflect popular attention from the trial and execution of the Party's chief theoretician, Nikolai Bukharin. After reading Quo Vadis? by Henryk Sienkiewicz, which was set in Imperial Rome in the first century A.D., Podlubnyi characterized Stalin as "our Russian Nero," specifically addressing his personal cult: "It appears that the unjustified lavishing of praise and attribution of good deeds, as well as deification, are possible in our times too, if only in a more subtle form."[14]
Podlubnyi referred to his diary entries of this period as a "naturalistic recording of facts".[15]Seen through the lens of socialist realism's historical confidence, the naturalist perspective was by definition pessimistic and degenerative. Podlubnyi defended his use of naturalism. His purpose, he wrote, was to cast reality in a different light and thus estrange people from the rhetoric they reflexively invoked to describe their lives. Yet to engage with Soviet reality in a naturalist style came at a price. It was not just a question of the danger that these writings posed for Podlubnyi; they also undermined his self-image, which rested in large measure on socialist realist conceptions of the person. In his diary of the late 1930s, Podlubnyi had to contend with the fact that he had become a "pessimist" at heart, plagued by a lack of willpower, and that his attempt to turn himself into a socialist personality had failed. Having been forced to give up his university studies, he pondered his aimless, "useless" existence: "A life without goals – like an animal's [...] what kind of a life is that? There's nobody to provide me with moral support". Life "without the feeling of progress" deepened his pessimism. The fact that he did not fight to resume his studies and regain a cheerful perspective was evidence of a diseased will: "Too much has my will been dented. I have lost control over myself." Finally, there was the issue of his personal life. Now that he was about to turn 25, it was time to get married, yet the few girls who seemed available were all from the less-cultured classes.[16]
From this lowly position he enviously observed the "milieu" of the university students in whose company he had once been. In the spring of 1938 a friend, Vladimir Vorontsov, who had been expelled from the Komsomol two years earlier because his father had been uncovered as a Trotskyist, was readmitted into the youth organization. He had plans to study philosophy and join the Communist Party. Stepan criticized Vladimir for his decision to become a Party apparatchik; Vladimir in turn chided Stepan for his "egoism", for only taking from life but not giving. To voice purely negative views on existing reality invited charges of egoism, reminding Podlubnyi of his father's kulak essence against which he had been fighting all along. In some sense, the very outspokenness of Podlubnyi's political diary kept undermining the ideal of the collectivist, optimistic, and perpetually striving personality against which he continued to measure himself when he contemplated the failure of his life.[17] In a very tangible sense, Podlubnyi found himself "switched off" from the ideological current that he believed animated the organized Soviet collective, to borrow Fitzpatrick's and LŸdtke's ingeneous formulation.
***
The concept of the ideological subject presented in this essay does not apply to all empirical Soviet individuals or to the totality of an individual, even if his writings show evidence of such a disposition – witness the ebb and flow of Podlubnyi's search for integration in the socialist order. What it refers to is a culturally specific frame of selfhood, of what constitutes a desirable life. During the interwar period in the Soviet Union, and perhaps also Europe as a whole from the 1920s to the 1940s, ideology in the sense of personalWeltanschauung and heightened awareness of one's biography was constitutive of subjectivity. This orientation did not manifest itself at all times; Soviet citizens may not have articulated it when they stood in bread lines and cursed the state distribution system of goods, but it appeared (or, more accurately: was generated) when they recited their autobiographies or justified themselves in public, and also often when they sat down privately to reflect on their lives.[18]
Returning to the history of the everyday and its practice of disconnecting "daily life" from ideology, I see a danger of ignoring the conceptual underpinnings of life, its definition and purpose, in a specific period. Such meaning, I believe, is not universal and not to be culled from universal strategies of daily survival. I find it difficult to subscribe to the proposition, which at first sight may appear basic and unassailable, that Soviet citizens sought to live "ordinary" lives.[19] Many of them strove – or were made to strive – for extraordinary lives, and by the same token Stalinism was an extraordinary period not just because of the excesses caused by the regime, but because of a larger cultural disposition toward the extraordinary. In other words, I believe we must historicize the conceptual underpinnings of the meaning of life, of personal life, and of an epoch. In light of such reconceptualization, we are bound to come to very different conclusions about the terms of interaction between the Soviet regime and its citizens.
About the historicization of historical time, pending future research it appears that the self-engagement to which the term "ideological subject" refers to was most characteristic of the period of Stalin's rule. The Stalin era was a particular formation within the larger communist frame; it was defined by party leaders' deliberate decision to force Soviet society to make a historical leap, toward the end of historical time.[20] This sense, vividly reflected in documents from the Stalin period, of the present as a threshold moment of world history, coupled with an extraordinary willingness to resort to violent means in order to cross the imagined threshold, generated countless individual projects of self-transformation, which were similarly characterized by an unprecedented sense of possibility and necessity. These narratives in some sense depended on an environment of violence to come to fruition. Yet this does not necessarily diminish their experiential relevance. We are familiar from the history of religion that the discovery of truth is often based on prolonged and recurrent suffering.
This conception of the self as an ideological work-in-progress observable during the Stalin period differs profoundly from notions of self familiar to researchers who personally witnessed the last years of the Soviet regime. One reason, perhaps, why the agenda of Stalin era subjectivity gained attention relatively late on was that in thinking about citizens and the state during the Stalin period, we tended to project back in time attitudes that we personally observed during the final years of the Soviet regime, when detached modes of double-speak and cynical engagement of Soviet ideology were rampant. It seems to me, though, that we are mistaken in projecting such conceptions of self, characteristic of the late Soviet regime, back onto an era when the revolution was in full swing, in the form of an ideological apparatus with considerable powers of persuasion, when there existed as of yet no sense of finality – when, in brief, the existential stakes for Soviet citizens were raised to unprecedented heights. It is an altogether different question, in much need of further elucidation, how the heights of Stalin-era self-engagement (d)evolved over time into the attitudes of critical detachment and alienation that were instrumental for the disintegration of the Soviet system as a whole 
7 A cabin from Tramway 25 slides over the Kvirila River. The heavily polluted river runs almost black when the manganese factories are in full use. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) Yet this method makes it difficult to register systems of power that generated absolute intellectual and emotional commitments. What I believe is needed instead is a novel formulation of ideology that departs from the traditional assumption of a monolithic, top-down "Communist Party ideology", and instead observes the workings of ideology and, indeed, its very generation, in localized, individual acts of appropriation and self-becoming.
In my understanding of ideology in the Soviet context, I do not proceed from any given theoretical model, of which there are many. All of the more interesting theories of ideology in one way or another stand in the Marxist tradition of defining ideology as the naturalization of a given reality, rendering it impervious to change. This perspective could also be applied to the Soviet case, in the sense that communist ideology – the self-representation of the regime – masked the real power relationships in the Soviet realm. But such a perspective obscures the qualitatively different status of ideology in the communist context. Unlike, say, bourgeois ideology, which aimed to reproduce the current bourgeois order and which therefore operated invisibly, beneath the recesses of the conscious world, communist ideology was deliberate and transformative, and it targeted the conscious mind rather than the political unconscious. It was an open program of action, a blueprint of a world to be realized. Toward the individual, Communist ideology represented itself as total consciousness, and it called on the individual to elevate his subjective mind to this highest level of consciousness. 
8 A heavily greased pulley wheel turns on the Peace tramway. Most tramways in Chiatura use a "jig back" system where two cabins are connected to the same cable. An electric motor pulls one cabin down, using that cabin's weight to help pull the other cabin up.(Amos Chapple/Rex Features) Investigations of how Communist ideology resonated with the lives of individuals have begun in recent years, but it is still an area in need of further research.[10]The question to be asked is what ideology offered to individuals in substantive terms, independently of its instrumentalist uses. Why was it appealing, and what about it was appealing? Which parts of the ideological text did an individual appropriate, and what were the effects of this productive encounter between ideology and the self? Hannah Arendt observes that ideologies "always contain in themselves the logic of their respective 'idea'." The idea contains in itself a logical process which is spun out by ideology. Arendt seems to suggests that ideology is not a ready-made, fully articulated text; rather, it unpacks itself, like compressed software, in the process of individual appropriation. Yet Arendt is not interested in the individual as an active subject. For her ideology itself is the driving force, and in encountering the individual, ideology eliminates subjectivity: "ideological thinking is [...] independent of all [individual] experience" and represents an "emancipation of thought from experienced and experiential reality."[11] This view underrates individuals' active and creative participation in the appropriation of ideology, a process that asked them to rework, rather than abandon, subjective experiences. Ideology worked by impelling individuals to read the world through its lens, to structure their sense of self and thereby render it meaningful. This was a creative task that could assume as many different shapes as the number of individual subjects it produced. Individuals poured considerable subjective labour into this process. Raising psychological experience to ideological consciousness was a demanding challenge that kept generating contradictions, moments of failure, and occasions of doubt.
What is thus necessary, as we try to make sense of individuals' life experience during the Stalin era, is an understanding of ideology that is compatible with subjectivity. This can be accomplished through a shift in the conceptualization of ideology, from a pre-given, fixed textual corpus, in the narrow and reductive sense of "Communist Party ideology", to a ferment working in the individual and producing a great deal of variation, as it interacted with the subjective life aspects of a given individual. This perspective restores the individual as an agent, but as an ideological agent. Instead of privileging discourse as the sole historical agent, I suggest a circular or dialogical notion of ideology and subjectivity. The individual operates like a clearinghouse where ideology is unpacked, personalized, and in the process the individual remakes himself into a subject with distinct and meaningful biographical features. And in activating the individual, ideology itself comes to life. Ideology should therefore be seen as an adaptive force; it has power only to the extent that it operates in living individuals who engage their selves and the world as ideological subjects. Much of the logic of the revolutionary master-narratives of transformation (transformation of social space and self-transformation), collectivization (collectivization of individualist producers and collectivization of the self), and purification (political purge campaigns and acts of personal self-improvement) was provided and reproduced by Soviet citizens, who kept rationalizing unfathomable state policies and thus were ideological agents, on a par with the leaders of party and state.
9 Left: Two locals look out over Chiatura from the Peace tramway. The cabins run without a braking system; if the haulage cable snaps, the cabins will roll straight back down the track cable. This happened to a tramway in Georgia's capital Tbilisi in 1990, killing twenty people. Right: A discarded piece of track cable. The cables weigh around 26lb (12kg) per meter.(Amos Chapple/Rex Features) When the American sociologists and historians who took part in the Harvard project on the Soviet social system interviewed Soviet immigrants to the United States in the early 1950s, they were struck by the degree to which their respondents were used to conceiving of the world and their lives in it in terms of "dialectical materialism". Truth for them had no absolute, essential meaning; instead it was relative and unfolded developmentally. Apparent contradictions could coexist without either of them being a lie. The American researchers noted that fifteen percent of their respondents "made constant use of the Marxian dialectic to explain and to predict". Sensing an awareness on the part of the refugee respondents that their chances of entering the US might diminish if they appeared to be Marxists, the interviewers believed the real number to be much higher.[12] Dialectical thinking, of course, pervaded Soviet era literature, as well as the scientific discourse of the Stalinist age. But as the episode from the Harvard Interview project suggests so graphically, Marxist dialectics was more than just an ideological precept, understood in the conventional sense as a method informing the production of Party histories and socialist-realist novels; it was just as much a way of life.
More glaringly even than the Harvard interview protocols, Soviet diaries from the Stalin era show how their authors conceived of truth in developmental terms and sought to master it in a process of hard work. Frequently, authors noted tensions or outright contradictions between the ideological plane (the "ought to") and the observed reality of their own daily life (the "is"). The point, however, is that they did not accept these problems and contradictions, but sought to resolve them by applying mechanisms of rationalization, often in dialectical form. What this means for researchers interested in what it meant to live through Soviet times is that they need to redirect their inquiry of who individuals were, from the identification of select expressions of opinion – whether overheard by the Secret police or culled from personal diaries by researchers themselves – to an understanding of subjectivity as a processual quality. This is especially true in the Soviet revolutionary context, where notions of the ideal personality were predicated on intense struggle and the striving toward transcendence.
By the same token, researchers need to understand strategies of "rationalization", which were very widespread in personal sources from this period, less as desperate attempts to "rationalize away" uncomfortable truths (as modern psychology would have it) than as a constitutive mechanism of ideological appropriation. Rationalization – the ability to detect a rational logic in random acts of state policy, such as sudden arrests of relatives or friends, or one's own misfortune – was essential for Soviet citizens who were supposed to believe in scientific laws of development and the rationality of their existence. Stalin era contemporaries were constantly asked to rationalize, to make their daily observations fit ideological mandates. The more their observations parted from the required viewpoint, the more they were expected to struggle to re-inhabit the grid. An individual's ability to rationalize a phenomenon was thus a characteristic of mental strength and spiritual health. What is more, these mechanisms were not solely internal processes, meant to restore one's peace of mind. Individuals also applied this agenda of "mastering ideology" to their social lives as workers and citizens, such as when they denounced bosses at work or signed public letters calling for the execution of enemies of the people.
10 A photo of Tramway 25 dating from the 1950s (left), alongside a current picture.(Photo courtesy Georgian Manganese Holdings) In the course of the 1930s Podlubnyi's project of self-integration had evolved in paradoxical ways. He succeeded in mastering the lexicon of a dedicated and politically conscious Soviet worker so well that he drew the attention of the secret police (GPU). Believing him to be a trustworthy, aspiring young communist, they asked him to become an informant whose task was to reveal the proverbial "wolves in sheep's clothing" – class enemies hiding in Soviet society. This involuntary proximity to the GPU, which more than any other state organization incarnated the revolutionary principle of purification, constantly reminded him of his own impure origins. The GPU prompted him to think of himself in precisely the terms he wanted to avoid, namely in an opposition between private thoughts and outward behaviour. This split mind was a far cry from the integrated socialist personality who thought and acted uniformly and as a matter of inner conviction.
While Podlubnyi now frequently felt like a fraud, he erupted in declarations of sincere love and dedication for the Soviet regime whenever he saw signs that he might become a true citizen of the socialist society. But with the sudden arrest of his barely literate mother on charges of anti-Soviet, Trotskyist activities in December 1937, both his chances, as well as his enthusiasm, for integration were undermined. He left the Medical Institute in which he had been enrolled since 1935, and by 1938 his diary had turned into a disillusioned chronicle of the age – the very opposite of the proud record of socialist construction that Podlubnyi had set out to write in 1932.
11 A tramway cabin slides out of Chiatura's central station. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) Podlubnyi now denounced the policies of the Stalinist regime in acerbic terms. The grandiose reception of a returning team of polar explorers was, in his words, an "unprecedented hullabaloo" that served only to deflect popular attention from the trial and execution of the Party's chief theoretician, Nikolai Bukharin. After reading Quo Vadis? by Henryk Sienkiewicz, which was set in Imperial Rome in the first century A.D., Podlubnyi characterized Stalin as "our Russian Nero," specifically addressing his personal cult: "It appears that the unjustified lavishing of praise and attribution of good deeds, as well as deification, are possible in our times too, if only in a more subtle form."[14]
Podlubnyi referred to his diary entries of this period as a "naturalistic recording of facts".[15]Seen through the lens of socialist realism's historical confidence, the naturalist perspective was by definition pessimistic and degenerative. Podlubnyi defended his use of naturalism. His purpose, he wrote, was to cast reality in a different light and thus estrange people from the rhetoric they reflexively invoked to describe their lives. Yet to engage with Soviet reality in a naturalist style came at a price. It was not just a question of the danger that these writings posed for Podlubnyi; they also undermined his self-image, which rested in large measure on socialist realist conceptions of the person. In his diary of the late 1930s, Podlubnyi had to contend with the fact that he had become a "pessimist" at heart, plagued by a lack of willpower, and that his attempt to turn himself into a socialist personality had failed. Having been forced to give up his university studies, he pondered his aimless, "useless" existence: "A life without goals – like an animal's [...] what kind of a life is that? There's nobody to provide me with moral support". Life "without the feeling of progress" deepened his pessimism. The fact that he did not fight to resume his studies and regain a cheerful perspective was evidence of a diseased will: "Too much has my will been dented. I have lost control over myself." Finally, there was the issue of his personal life. Now that he was about to turn 25, it was time to get married, yet the few girls who seemed available were all from the less-cultured classes.[16]
From this lowly position he enviously observed the "milieu" of the university students in whose company he had once been. In the spring of 1938 a friend, Vladimir Vorontsov, who had been expelled from the Komsomol two years earlier because his father had been uncovered as a Trotskyist, was readmitted into the youth organization. He had plans to study philosophy and join the Communist Party. Stepan criticized Vladimir for his decision to become a Party apparatchik; Vladimir in turn chided Stepan for his "egoism", for only taking from life but not giving. To voice purely negative views on existing reality invited charges of egoism, reminding Podlubnyi of his father's kulak essence against which he had been fighting all along. In some sense, the very outspokenness of Podlubnyi's political diary kept undermining the ideal of the collectivist, optimistic, and perpetually striving personality against which he continued to measure himself when he contemplated the failure of his life.[17] In a very tangible sense, Podlubnyi found himself "switched off" from the ideological current that he believed animated the organized Soviet collective, to borrow Fitzpatrick's and LŸdtke's ingeneous formulation.
***
The concept of the ideological subject presented in this essay does not apply to all empirical Soviet individuals or to the totality of an individual, even if his writings show evidence of such a disposition – witness the ebb and flow of Podlubnyi's search for integration in the socialist order. What it refers to is a culturally specific frame of selfhood, of what constitutes a desirable life. During the interwar period in the Soviet Union, and perhaps also Europe as a whole from the 1920s to the 1940s, ideology in the sense of personalWeltanschauung and heightened awareness of one's biography was constitutive of subjectivity. This orientation did not manifest itself at all times; Soviet citizens may not have articulated it when they stood in bread lines and cursed the state distribution system of goods, but it appeared (or, more accurately: was generated) when they recited their autobiographies or justified themselves in public, and also often when they sat down privately to reflect on their lives.[18]
Returning to the history of the everyday and its practice of disconnecting "daily life" from ideology, I see a danger of ignoring the conceptual underpinnings of life, its definition and purpose, in a specific period. Such meaning, I believe, is not universal and not to be culled from universal strategies of daily survival. I find it difficult to subscribe to the proposition, which at first sight may appear basic and unassailable, that Soviet citizens sought to live "ordinary" lives.[19] Many of them strove – or were made to strive – for extraordinary lives, and by the same token Stalinism was an extraordinary period not just because of the excesses caused by the regime, but because of a larger cultural disposition toward the extraordinary. In other words, I believe we must historicize the conceptual underpinnings of the meaning of life, of personal life, and of an epoch. In light of such reconceptualization, we are bound to come to very different conclusions about the terms of interaction between the Soviet regime and its citizens.
About the historicization of historical time, pending future research it appears that the self-engagement to which the term "ideological subject" refers to was most characteristic of the period of Stalin's rule. The Stalin era was a particular formation within the larger communist frame; it was defined by party leaders' deliberate decision to force Soviet society to make a historical leap, toward the end of historical time.[20] This sense, vividly reflected in documents from the Stalin period, of the present as a threshold moment of world history, coupled with an extraordinary willingness to resort to violent means in order to cross the imagined threshold, generated countless individual projects of self-transformation, which were similarly characterized by an unprecedented sense of possibility and necessity. These narratives in some sense depended on an environment of violence to come to fruition. Yet this does not necessarily diminish their experiential relevance. We are familiar from the history of religion that the discovery of truth is often based on prolonged and recurrent suffering.
This conception of the self as an ideological work-in-progress observable during the Stalin period differs profoundly from notions of self familiar to researchers who personally witnessed the last years of the Soviet regime. One reason, perhaps, why the agenda of Stalin era subjectivity gained attention relatively late on was that in thinking about citizens and the state during the Stalin period, we tended to project back in time attitudes that we personally observed during the final years of the Soviet regime, when detached modes of double-speak and cynical engagement of Soviet ideology were rampant. It seems to me, though, that we are mistaken in projecting such conceptions of self, characteristic of the late Soviet regime, back onto an era when the revolution was in full swing, in the form of an ideological apparatus with considerable powers of persuasion, when there existed as of yet no sense of finality – when, in brief, the existential stakes for Soviet citizens were raised to unprecedented heights. It is an altogether different question, in much need of further elucidation, how the heights of Stalin-era self-engagement (d)evolved over time into the attitudes of critical detachment and alienation that were instrumental for the disintegration of the Soviet system as a whole 
12 A socialist realist painting depicting manganese miners of Chiatura during the Soviet period. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) #  
13 Tramway commuters wait for a cabin in the central tramway station. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) # 
14 Left: A telephone inside a cabin of Tramway 25. Right: A miner smokes a cigarette, leaning through the cabin portholes of the "Peace" tramway which runs from the center of Chiatura up to the entrance of one of the manganese mines. Although owned by the mining company, anyone is free to use the tramway. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) # 
15 Two miners stop to smoke in a manganese mine above Chiatura. Through the near-anarchy across Georgia following the collapse of the USSR the mines lay idle and have only reopened in the past few years. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) # 
16 Then and now pictures of one of the tramways built in the 1960s. In 2008 the hauling rope of this tramway snapped with 12 passengers inside. Ramaz Khipshidze, the director of the Aerial Tramway Network says the automatic braking system worked "thanks to God." Chiatura didn't have the equipment needed to rescue the people inside. For 12 hours the passengers dangled above the town until a team from Tbilisi arrived with a rescue cabin. Although unwilling to specify amounts, Mr. Khipshidze says the passengers were paid compensation, and some accepted the company's offer of counseling.(Photo courtesy Georgian Manganese Holdings) # 
17 A tramway operator eases down the brake as a cabin docks. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) # 
18 Side view of a tramway above Chiatura, with a Soviet-era factory in background. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) # 
19 A man waits for a ride over a gorge on the eastern edge of Chiatura. This tramway runs 150 meters (492 feet) above the valley floor. Locals take this across to another tramway (just visible - upper right) which lowers them down to a bus stop on the main road below. (Amos Chapple/Rex Features) # 
20 A local lost in thought as a cabin of Tramway 25 docks. Tramway 25 was the first passenger tramway in the USSR and has run almost continuously since its first run in 1954. If funding comes through it will be replaced in 2014.(Amos Chapple/Rex Features) | | Based on the unfinished novel Vadim (1834) by Mikhail Lermontov, One Russian Summer (1973) (also known as Days of Fury) was a British-Italian production with Bulgaria standing in for the Russian steppes. It was directed by Antonio Calenda, with a script by Edward Bond (Walkabout), and an original score by Riz Ortolani.
Oliver Reed stars as Palizyn, head of a 19th Century Russian farming estate which he runs like a miniature kingdom, cages and whippings at the ready for any unruly serfs. It's one of Reed's better performances, though it does allow him to play to his strengths - quaffing ale, laughing uproariously etc. etc.
The story begins with the entry of the subversive hunchback Vadim, a great performance by John McEnery. At first apparently happy to work like a dog for his master (literally), his cynical manipulations and provocations amongst his fellow serfs lead to revolution and tragedy.
The production has an epic scale and is a splendid evocation of another time and place. The scenes between Reed and McEnery are psychologically fascinating as the relationship develops. However, as is common with European co-productions of the era, the dramatic pace and narrative cohesion leave something to be desired. Still well recommended though. | |
A Siberian Summer Reuters photographer Ilya Naymushin is based in Krasnoyarsk, Russia, the the third largest city in Siberia. He frequently takes photographs of daily life in and around Krasnoyarsk, capturing expansive landscapes, colorful festivals, and intimate moments with equal skill. Below, I've gathered some of my favorite images taken by Ilya over this past Siberian summer. Trucks drive along M53 highway in Khakassia region, some 270 km (168 miles) south of Russia's Siberian city of Krasnoyarsk, on May 19, 2012. M53 highway connects Krasnoyarsk region, the Republic of Khakassia, the Republic of Tuva and the border with Mongolia. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) Below…..Young equestrian Julia Verbitskaya trains Dogovor, a Hanover breed stallion, before a performance at the 1st Summer Children's Paralympic festival of equestrian sports in the suburbs of Krasnoyarsk, on June 8, 2012. Children suffering from locomotive impairments, who attend hippotherapy courses in Irkutsk, Novosibirsk, Krasnoyarsk, Achinsk, Nazarovo and other Siberian cities, took part in a two-day sports festival supported by the regional center of adaptive sports. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) 
| | 
| The Arctic coastal seas are changing from a sink for atmospheric carbon dioxide to a source of the greenhouse gas because of global warming, new research warns. Research into two seas bordering the polar region has shown that they are absorbing ever smaller amounts of atmospheric CO2 and, at points of the year, even becoming a source of the gas. The shock finding suggests that climate change could be fast becoming a vicious, inescapable cycle which can only further accelerate the damage to the environment. 
Source of greenhouse gases: In some months of the summer, the Laptev Sea warms so much that it begins releasing CO2 into the atmosphere Most scientists agree that changes to the Earth's climate are caused by increasing amounts of greenhouse gases released by humans from, for example, the combustion of fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide plays a major role in this process. But, until 1994, approximately half for the world's CO2 emissions from human combustion of fossil fuels was absorbed by the oceans. As the amount of carbon dioxide in the oceans rises, however, their capacity to absorb the gas falls, and it remains in the atmosphere. Iréne Wåhlström, a marine researcher from the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, investigated two of the coastal seas off Siberia, the Laptev Sea and the East Siberian Sea, in a ship-borne expedition, and – in the case of the Laptev Sea – by mathematical modelling. 'The greenhouse gases raise the temperature of the Earth and this increase is particularly noticeable in the Arctic,' said Miss Wåhlström. 'It is even more pronounced in Siberia and its coastal seas.' The increase in temperature has an impact on the environment in the Arctic – the cover of sea ice is lower, for example, and the supply of water from rivers increases, the permafrost thaws and the rate of coastal erosion increases. 'One consequence is that organic matter that has been stored in soil is carried to the seas, where it is partially broken down to carbon dioxide,' said Miss Wåhlström. The East Siberian Sea has a western part and an eastern part, into which water flows from the Pacific Ocean. 
Russian maidens, the same as their European sisters.
|
Wish you were working here? A Siberian tundra awaits those who want to apply for the position 
Far-flung Finland: If staff moved to Helsinki, they could visit its cathedral 
Moving on: News of the World reporters were used to the quaint streets in Wapping, East London And after 260 redundancies were announced with the closure of the scandal-hit Sunday newspaper, some might just be desperate enough to take it. But if Siberia's frozen tundras don't appeal, the Dow Jones arm of Mr Murdoch's vast company has a posting for a reporter in Helsinki and Moscow. News International management are working with staff to try and relocate them after the paper published its final edition on July 10. A GUIDE TO SIBERIA Siberia makes up about ten per cent of the Earth's land surface and has many mountain ranges, icy tundras and swamps and it is home ot the World's largest forests. Annual average is about 0.5°C, January averages about−15 °C (5 °F) and July about 19 °C (66 °F), while daytime temperatures in summer typically are above 20 °C. It's economy is based on its rich mineral resources. It has some of the world's largest deposits of nickel, gold, lead, coal, molybdenum, gypsum, diamonds, diopside, silver and zinc, as well as extensive unexploited resources of oil and natural gas The Sea of Okhotsk is one of the two or three richest fisheries in the world owing to its cold currents and very large tidal ranges and Siberia produces over 10 per cent of the world's annual fish catch. Siberia has a population density of about four people per square kilometer. WHAT TO EXPECT IN WAPPING Wapping's proximity to the river has given it a strong maritime character. Wapping was devastated by German bombing in World War II[7] and by the post-war closure of the docks, which left many of the warehouses empty. The area's fortunes were transformed during the 1980s by the London Docklands Development Corporation when the huge warehouses started to be converted into luxury flats. The area was first settled by Saxons. It developed along the embankment of the Thames, hemmed in by the river to the south and the now-drained Wapping Marsh to the north. This gave it a peculiarly narrow and constricted shape, consisting of little more than the axis of Wapping High Street and some north-south side streets. John Stow, the 16th century historian, described it as a 'continual street, or a filthy strait passage, with alleys of small tenements or cottages, built, inhabited by sailors' victuallers'. There are positions available in Europe, including London, America, Australia and Asia. A spokeswoman said: 'We are exploring every opportunity to help employees affected by the closure of the News of the World find new roles.
| 
| Buyan, a male Siberian brown bear, cools down under a stream of water sprayed by an employee in its enclosure on a hot summer day at the Royev Ruchey zoo in Krasnoyarsk, on July 13, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) | | 
| Former Russian paratroopers salute during the celebration of Russian Paratroopers Day, an annual holiday, at Central Park in the Krasnoyarsk, on August 2, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) | | 
| Hills, reflected in the waters of the Yenisei River in the Siberian Taiga district outside Krasnoyarsk, on August 28, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) | | 
| A man displays stuffed animals for sale including a Siberian brown bear cub, a red fox and a beaver along the roadside of M53 Baikal federal highway near the settlement of Kozulka, about 100 km (62 miles) west of Krasnoyarsk, on July 2, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) | | 
| Combines harvest wheat in a field of the "Svetlolobovskoye" farm outside the village of Svetlolobovo, 390 km south of Krasnoyarsk, on September 3, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) | | 
8 An employee inspects wheat in a field of the "Svetlolobovskoye" farm outside the village of Svetlolobovo, Russia, on September 3, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
| A Russian-made Beriev Be-200ChS amphibious aircraft, owned by the Siberian Regional Center of the Russian Emergencies Ministry, dumps 12 tons of colored water matching the Russian state flag during a demonstration flight at an air show dedicated to the Day of the Russian Air Fleet at the Yemelyanovo airport outside Krasnoyarsk, on August 18, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) | | 
| Hayyim Broy, an 87-year-old Jewish Red Army veteran of World War Two, holds up an old photograph during a visit by volunteer hairdressers to his apartment in Krasnoyarsk, on May 8, 2012. Local school girls and would-be barbers, accompanied by their professional instructor, visited war veterans on the eve of Victory Day to help the elderly prepare for the holiday. As a former front scout and a soldier of the infantry, Broy fought at the 1st Belarusian Front under the command of the Marshal of the Soviet Union Georgy Zhukov. He was seriously wounded during a battle in Berlin in May, 1945. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) | | 
11 A man jumps into the waters of the Yenisei River in Krasnoyarsk, on July 25, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
12 An inmate holds her baby at a children's home, located inside a female prison camp, in Krasnoyarsk, on July 30, 2012. The children of female offenders that were born when their mothers were in pretrial detention or in prison camps, live in the children's home under the care of civilian tutors and officers of the regional penitentiary system until the age 3, after which they are released to their relatives or sent to a civilian orphanage. The mothers also receive exemption from some of their usual duties and tasks in order to have daily contact with their children, according to the camp's administration. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
13 Wheelchair-bound Svetlana Barantseva (right) and Margarita Sidorenko congratulate each other on their good results during a training session in a local amateur archery club on the suburbs of Krasnoyarsk, on May 3, 2012. Disabled people have the opportunity to learn the sport of archery for free due to financial support from the newly created state regional center of adaptive sport, according to club members. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
14 Costumed celebrants slide down a chute on a float during a competition at the Bobrovy Log Fun Park Ski Resort near Krasnoyarsk, on August 26, 2012. The competition was organized for vacationers to mark the end of the short summer season at the Siberian resort. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
15 A car drives along a highway near a monument displaying a Soviet made agrarian tractor near the village of Zlatorunovsk, some 320 km (199 miles) southwest of Krasnoyarsk, on July 19, 2012. The sign reads "The Lenin's Order State Breeding Factory". (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
16 A Russian Cossack burns cannabis plants during a raid near the settlement of Yemelianovo outside Krasnoyarsk, on July 12, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
17 A woman and boy look at a sand sculpture at the "Wheel of History" exhibition in Krasnoyarsk, on June 18, 2012. Sand sculptures depicting space exploration, the personality of Leonardo da Vinci, the Olympic Games, the Patriotic War of 1812 against the army of Napoleon Bonaparte, created by Siberian artists, were on exhibit all summer. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
18 A woman stands on the roadside, spraying water at passing cars during a promotional event for an annual automobile exhibition in Krasnoyarsk, on May 12, 2012. The MotorExpoShow is the largest annual exhibition and automobile festival held in Siberia, according to organizers. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
19 People sail a raft near a camp pitched on the banks of the Yenisei river in the Siberian Taiga, south of Krasnoyarsk, on July 28, 2012. The Territory of the Initiative Youth "Biryusa", was first held in the Biryusa Bay, on the shores of the Krasnoyarsk Sea in 2007, bringing together young people with different talents and skills. The project serves as an annual meeting place for over 5,000 representatives of various youth movements, NGOs and professional communities from Siberian Federal District in general. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
20 FMX-13 team pro-rider Alexei Kolesnikov of Russia performs in the Red Bull X-fighters Jams freestyle show dedicated to the Day of the Youth, in Krasnoyarsk, on June 27, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
21 A German shepherd attacks a trainer during an annual cynologist competition, held by members of the regional penitentiary camps system, outside Krasnoyarsk, on August 24, 2012. 24 teams representing prison camps took part in a five-day-long competition. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
22 Partially-sighted boys hold hands as they take part in a relay race at the Summer Children's Festival of Adaptive Sports in a suburb of Krasnoyarsk, on September 21, 2012. About 120 children in 13 teams took part in the two-day festival for disabled children from the region. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
23 Pensioner Olga Kostina poses near a mosaic, made from plastic bottle caps, which decorates the facade of a courtyard building, in the village of Kamarchaga, in the Siberian Taiga area about 80 km (50 miles) southeast of Krasnoyarsk, on September 10, 2012. Kostina used more than 30,000 colored caps to decorate her house and other constructions in the courtyard. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
24 An actor from Russia's Tuva region, dressed in costume, performs traditional music during the opening ceremony of the third International Music Festival of Asian-Pacific Region in Krasnoyarsk, on June 29, 2012. Artists and actors from 19 countries from Asia-Pacific took part in more than 60 concerts and exhibitions during the week-long festival in the center of Siberia. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
25 Beekeeper Valery Titov, 63, watches as his daughters, Anastasia (left), 11, and Valentina, 14, use his self-made fitness apparatus on his farm outside the village of Novopyatnitskoye, about 120 km (75 miles) east of Krasnoyarsk, on July 15, 2012. The psychologist, a graduate of Leningrad (current St. Petersburg) State University who now lives together with his family at an apiary farm, patented his self-built invention, which is made of more than 20 pieces of fitness equipment that can be used for bodybuilding and physiotherapy. His equipment, made of Angara pine and cedar without any metal components, have no demand among investors and businessmen at the moment, according to Titov. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
26 A woman takes a nighttime bungee jump from a 44-meter high (144-feet high) bridge in the Siberian Taiga area outside Krasnoyarsk, on August 19, 2012. Enthusiasts took part in the "After Midnight Bungee Jumping" event on an old waterpipe bridge near their tourist camp. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
27 A local man drives his motorbike as a herd of cows crosses a highway in Tyulkovo village, some 190 km (116 miles) south-west of Krasnoyarsk, on June 5, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
28 Local residents dressed in historical costumes take part in the opening ceremony of an installation called "The Borodinsky Highway" created by a group of Russian and French arts students under the guidance of French artist Bertrand Gosselin at the Borodinsky opencast colliery located near Borodino, about 150 km (93 miles) east of Krasnoyarsk, on September 7, 2012. The colliery is the biggest opencast coal mine in Russia at 7 km (4 miles) long and 100 meters (328 feet) deep. The creation, a 90-meter (295-feet) road made from railway sleepers that passes through 3 apertures, symbolizes the difficult historical path of industrial development in Siberia. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
29 Married women dressed in wedding and fancy dresses pose for a picture during the annual Parade of Brides festival in the center of Krasnoyarsk, on June 17, 2012. About 100 young married women took part in the festival to experience their wedding day again, according to organizers. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
30 Members of the clergy wait for the arrival of Kirill, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, near the Paraskeva Pyatnitsa Chapel, the oldest building in Krasnoyarsk, on September 12, 2012. Patriarch Kirill was visiting the Krasnoyarsk region for the first time on a 3-day trip. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
31 Amateur spider keeper Yegor Konkin, 23, shows a venomous Psalmopoeus cambridgei spider at his parents' apartment in the town of Minusinsk, 425 km (264 miles) south of Krasnoyarsk, on May 20, 2012. Konkin, a hobbyist who has collected spiders for two years, keeps approximately 50 venomous spiders of various species, which are deadly to humans and other animals. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
| Participants in the annual Mansky tourist festival, dedicated to the opening of the amateur rafting season, greet people aboard rafts on the Mana river, near the settlement of Beret in the Siberian Taiga, about 75 km (47 miles) east of Krasnoyarsk, on June 22, 2012. Local nature-lovers, fans of ecological tourism and devotees of the festival have gathered for more than 30 years, to travel by self-made rafts, take part in the overnight festivities and relax around campfires. | 
| 
33 Participants in the annual Mansky tourist festival land a raft on the bank of the Mana river near the settlement of Beret in the Siberian Taiga, on June 22, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
34 A German shepherd puppy plays on a bank of Yenisei River outside Krasnoyarsk, on August 13, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
35 An aerial view of an opencast aluminum ore mine of the Rusal Achinsk aluminum plant near the town of Achinsk, 180 km (112 miles) west of Krasnoyarsk, on September 24, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
36 A worker operates a mixer of fused aluminum at the foundry shop of the Rusal Krasnoyarsk aluminum smelter in Krasnoyarsk, on August 14, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
37 Workers store aluminum ingots in the Rusal Krasnoyarsk aluminum smelter in Krasnoyarsk, on August 14, 2012. The smelter produces about 1 million tons of aluminum a year and accounts for 25 percent of all aluminum production in Russia and 3 percent of global output, making it one of the largest smelters in the world. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
38 School children line up during a ceremony to mark the beginning of a new academic year at school-liceum number 12 in Russia's Siberian city of Krasnoyarsk, on September 1, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
39 A police dog handler, accompanied by Gladys a female German shepherd, searches for explosives during an anti-terrorist patrol in a city school on the eve of a new academic year in Krasnoyarsk, on August 31, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
40 A view of the town of Bogotol, Russia from a helicopter carrying medical staff from the regional Sanitary Aviation special medical service before landing, on September 24, 2012. Bogotol is located 270 km (168 miles) west of Krasnoyarsk. According to the service, around 5,000 people a year receive emergency treatment from them in the Krasnoyarsk region, an area covering 2.4 million square kilometers (925,000 square miles), using private aircraft under long-term state contracts. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
41 A helicopter carrying medical staff from the regional Sanitary Aviation special medical service, after landing in the town of Bogotol, Russia on September 24, 2012. The service has been operating since 1939. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
42 Konstantin Baryshnikov (left), a surgeon and the head of the regional Sanitary Aviation special medical service, and doctor's assistant Oleg Ratushny attend to a patient in a local hospital before he is evacuated from the village of Kozulka, located some 100 km (62 miles) west of Krasnoyarsk, on September 24, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
43 Men fish as a barge is transported in a boat lift at the Krasnoyarsk Dam and hydroelectric power station, 45 km (28 miles) south of Krasnoyarsk, on September 22, 2012. The lift is a caisson riding on an electric track on an inclined plane designed to allow ships to bypass the dam situated on the Yenisei River, one of the world's largest hydro electric projects. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) # 
44 A brown bear cub walks in an area of taiga near the village of Ust-Mana, 30 km (18 miles) south of Krasnoyarsk, Russia, on September, 16, 2012. (Reuters/Ilya Naymushin) | | | |
1 comment:
I will recommend anyone looking for Business loan to Le_Meridian they helped me with Four Million USD loan to startup my Quilting business and it's was fast When obtaining a loan from them it was surprising at how easy they were to work with. They can finance up to the amount of $500,000,000.000 (Five Hundred Million Dollars) in any region of the world as long as there 1.9% ROI can be guaranteed on the projects.The process was fast and secure. It was definitely a positive experience.Avoid scammers on here and contact Le_Meridian Funding Service On. lfdsloans@lemeridianfds.com / lfdsloans@outlook.com. WhatsApp...+ 19893943740. if you looking for business loan.
Post a Comment