Beatlemania Soviet Style
By Sean at 14 February, 2009, 10:19 am
The BBC World Service has an interesting documentary on Beatlemania in the Soviet Union. When the Fab Four hit the international scene in 1964, youth in the Soviet Union were no exception in succumbing to their tunes. But unlike fans in the West, the Beatles’ aficionados had to record songs off the Western radio, smuggle their records and then copy them ton x-ray machines (the new hit movie Stilyagi opens with how this was done.), and pass the copies hand to hand or peddle them in underground markets. To be a Beatles fan in 1960s Russia meant you had to be in the know, have connections with those “above,” or just have plain luck. The Beatles were more than just a past-time; it was a way of life.
The Beatles’ penetration into the Soviet Bloc was more than just a symbol of Soviet youth’s hunger for the imagined West. If anything the Beatles’ popularity proved that the Iron Curtain proved quite porous in the face of globalization.
Put simply, for many hearing the Beatles for the first time was a transformative experience. In an interview with popular music scholar Yngvar Steinholt, Nikolai Vasin, Russia’s No 1 Beatles Fan, recalled his first time hearing John, Paul, George and Ringo:
When did you hear about The Beatles for the first time?
It was in the beginning of 1964. I had just finished school, I was still a teenager, I was 18 years old. And I remember that I met, I even, I didn’t learn about it from the radio, not from the papers. But I learned it by the way of what we call the jungle telegraph [narodnaia molvá]. I tell you that radio is the most important radio – the jungle telegraph. And so I met this friend of mine from school. And he asks:
-Have you heard the Beetle-beaters [zhuki-udarniki]?
I say:
-I don’t even have an idea what that is. I know Bill Haley, I know Little Richard, but the Beetle-beaters I don’t know.
-How can that be! That band’s a must! It’s the newest, coolest band in England!
That’s what he told me, and he goes:
-I’ll bring a tape player over to your place tomorrow and we’ll listen to it! And so he comes to me with a little Aides-player, a player from Riga, and we listen to a recording made from BBC radio, the frequency changes, noise, cosmic interference hardly lets the music through. I remember hearing a kind of music that I had never heard before. I had a feeling of utter [nevizny] and unusualness and I even leaned over to him and said something like:
-Now I’ll be damned, that’s something new, there wasn’t anything like that before! And that’s it. That’s how it began. And from then on the further the more. A whole cardboard box of recordings of the Beatle-guys were brought to me, that is the Beetle-beaters from Liverpool, that’s what they were called at the time. On BBC Radio there was a musical programme and it call them the Beetle beaters or the beaters from Liverpool. And literally in the cause of a couple of months I became a passionate Beatles-fan. I suddenly felt spellbound, enlightened, I enjoyed everything wildly and I already started collecting all kinds of articles about them, I don’t know what, recordings on bones there were, too. Then there was this newspaper from England, the Morning Star. I started running around to kiosks to get to know when the next issue would arrive, when it would be brought in and already in the early morning I would run over and buy the fresh issue, because there were very often articles about pop-music. It was called pop-music back then.
Popularity: 9% [?]
Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
My experience with native English speakers is that they rarely are aware that in non-English speaking countries very few understood lyrics of The Beatles or CCR for that matter.
An interesting write-up, Sean, about an interesting and complex subject. I did not get into following Western music until mid 70s, but the situation did not change much. Even in 1985, after I moved to Moscow, I would go to what noe became Gorbushka to trade Traffic for Gentle Giant or whatnot. And before Gorbushka, it was in a forest someplace 30 miles away from Moscow.
Ah, yes, that brings back memories…
Of course, the Morning Star was British Communist party newspaper, the only authentic English paper I remember in the Soviet kiosks.
And of course there was a HUGE disconnect between the lyrics and the rest of the Rock music phenomenon in the minds of regular Soviet people. I remember vividly one Soviet official tele-montage about Capitalist depravity with a ‘Easy Living’ by Uriah Heep used as the soundtrack (that was decades before YouTube, btw).
The pictures of Capitalist degeneration (dissolute playboys and steely whores) seemed to go so well with ‘Easy Living’ frenetic rhythm! Of course the lyrics actually spoke of finding true love and saving oneself. But lyrics were not understood at all. Russians looked at the images, rocked to the rhythm and drew their own conclusions.
I think this huge disconnect still remains between Russia and the West. Just now I came across one Russian ‘expert’ of Ken Hensley totally flabbergasted by him becoming Born Again Christian. Yet if you just listen to Uriah Heep lyrics you realize that it is the most logical outcome of the whole worldview expressed there.
And if Russians are still confused by the simplicity of Uriah Heep, imagine how little can they comprehend the extremely diverse and multi-faceted Beatles lyrical output.
“zhuki-udarniki”
That’s the best laugh I had in weeks.
extremely diverse and multi-faceted Beatles lyrical output.
I always thought (since the time my English got sufficient enough to understand lyrics) that the Beatles’ texts were quite… bland. Especially before Sgt. Pepper. Compared to them, Аквариум sounded like John Fowles. Whether that complexity came from lack of understanding of English vs. much better and sophisticated understanding of Russian I don’t know.
Which brings another interesting point: oppressive regimes generate “innovative” authors via фига в кармане, i.e. all you need to do is create hints and double meanings and the intelligentsia gobbles it up. Instead of stating something directly, an artist creates imagery. To a degree, Tarkovsky is a decent example.
Yes, this brings up memories. And, Sean, in your studies of Komsomol, the story of Gorbushka might be an interesting subject. It was, as far as I remember, mostly set up by the then Khrinichev Space Center (ГКНПЦ им. Хруничева) Komsomol Secretary Игорь Танких, under the watchful eye of a fairly liberal party boss at Khrunichev. (Лебедев, I believe).
Танких was quite into the rock music himself and got permission form Лебедев to allow a weekly gathering of record collectors, just like postage stamp or coin collectors were allowed to get together and trade elsewhere. From then on, дк Горбунова became the de facto rock music center. I remember going there for the first Moscow performance of Наутилус Помпилиус.
I only said that Beatles’ lyrics are more sophisticated than Uriah Heep.
Nothing is more sophisticated than Uriah Heep! They are the Yakov Smirnoff of rock — a true sophisticate’s music.
Я от Хипов балдею!
Chrisius, а ты ваще не рюхаешь!
Юраий хип и дип пурпле очень нравятся урле…
Urlo, c’est moi.
“Then there was this newspaper from England, the Morning Star.”
Isn’t that the newspaper of the CPGB?
Both my parents passed by “Beatles craziness”.
Dad was an active football player. Mother preferred Maya Kristallinskaya. The most of times I have heard Beatles was in school at English classes.
Where are Sean’s posts? Has the KGB retired him from active service?
Chris, I suspect that Sean’s elitist tendencies triumphed over his better nature and he arrogantly decided that academic work is more important than keeping us distracted with blog posts. What a jerk!
Sean’s a dick.
The danger inherent in feeding the multitudes is that you may run out of feed but you never run out of demanding multitudes.
Not even cake?
Doom demands that Sean post something or else suffer Doom’s wrath. Doom is bored, and for this someone must pay.
Nothing is more sophisticated than Uriah Heep! They are the Yakov Smirnoff of rock — a true sophisticate’s music.
Singular talents. Like Averko.
I always thought (since the time my English got sufficient enough to understand lyrics) that the Beatles’ texts were quite… bland. Especially before Sgt. Pepper. Compared to them, Аквариум sounded like John Fowles.
You might be confusing Lennon vs. McCartney.
John Lennon wrote more introspective and thought provoking lyrics.
McCartney wrote “June with a spoon” style lyrics. Even at his best, he wasn’t very deep.
It has been hours since Doom has strongly hinted that Sean should make another post. A “strong hint” from Doom is tantamount to a direct order. Yet, no such post has been forthcoming.
This does not bode well for Sean’s future.
So I was watching old Uriah Heep and Deep Purple clips, and I was jolted (yes, jolted!) every time Byron and Bolin would start slowly swinging a mike on a line while swinging their hips at the same time. Must have been a killer move in the 70-s. You can’t do it in the wireless age. Oh, the things we’ve lost to technical progress!
John Lennon wrote more introspective and thought provoking lyrics.
I agree here, although I think in terms of imagery, БГ is quite a bit better. Also, I was referring to pre- Sgt Pepper stuff. From then on, the differences between Lennon and McCartney widened a lot. But the worst became of Lennon when he turned his poetry into some sort of political poster art. Leonard Cohen he surely wasn’t.
The Beatles were far inferior lyrically to the Kinks anyway. Not to mention Dylan.
Doom is a particularly big fan of Arthur.
So I was watching old Uriah Heep and Deep Purple clips,
Darn, I forgot YouTube! I never saw either of them on video, since my brief interest in that music ended at about the 9th grade when I switched to Genesis and Gentle Giant
Russia deserves a kind word for supporting all the Rock legends in their dotage years. Looks like since the fall of the USSR, Moscow features very prominently on all ancient rock groups’ itineraries.
When I say this in real life, and I find myself doing so more often than I’d prefer, people look at me like I am bleeping mad. Nice to know one other living human being shares my opinion.
BTW, where’s Sean? I really like his new slogan.
Poemless,
Where have you been? We thought for sure that you’d been swept up by the Obama administration and put under strict no blog-posting orders, as your new job was so secret, important and scrutinized. Why else would you not contribute to so many interesting threads…well maybe you didn’t miss much. I cringe and sigh every time I open SRB to see this old Beatles thing again. If we read it backwards, will find somewhere in the html “Sean is dead.”
I’ve been missed? You can stalk me on facebook like Doom and Sean do.
Interesting. I thought of you … something about Gregory Pfifer. Did I tell you? I used to wake up to his shtick when my alarm went off each morning. Then, I began getting up much earlier, and lo… I still woke up to him. It really upset me.
Also, I am now getting RT through the magicalness of digital tv. Maybe that’s why I’ve not been reading the blogs. I’m obsessed with RT. The other day, they were tatooing cats. Madness.
Also, since Dima (where is the false Dmitri these days?) has taken office, there has been a serious drop off in interesting things being done in and said about Russian politics. As is evidenced by sean’s latest post.
It has been hours since Doom has strongly hinted that Sean should make another post.
Sean is not dead but is working with Richards on writing about the miserable lives of Komsomol activists in the 1920s. Richards keeps insisting that activists’ misery was the fault of Annihilus, but Sean says its because life was generally miserable in the 1920s and everyone took a special pleasure in shitting on activists. Also Richards keeps making Sean feel guilty every time he thinks about blogging. Now Sean understands why Doom thinks Richards is a dick.
Sean hopes to turn his attention back to topics like Politkovskaya, Medvedev’s “Golden 1000″ and the end days of the siloviki, fanciful claims of a rift between Putin and Medvedev, Nashi spies, and Russian labor soon.
Richards is not a man to be trusted, Sean. Believe nothing he says about Annihilus, despite the long piece of court flattery that is Deutscher’s three-volume biography — Mr. Fantastic Unarmed is a particularly dishonest work.
This is completely off topic, but I was wondering if anyone here knew anything about the origin of the hole in the middle of Russian blanket covers (pododeyalnik). I’ve seen them in early Russian films, but I can’t find any information on how and why this hole appeared.
Thanks in advance!
Caroline
That’s how you insert the blanket.
Yep, but I’m wondering why there is a big hole right in the middle rather than a slit along one edge, which would also alow you to insert the blanket. The problem with the hole is that if you don’t want to see it, you have to turn the whole blanket and cover the other way round. Then you run the risk of slipping inside the hole during the night, or getting one leg in and one leg out, which can be rather scary, not to say annoying.
Doom wonders why one should be concerned so about unsightly blanket wrapper holes. ?
The rombical opening in ‘pododeyalnik’ center is for decoration. It is not just a hole, it is always framed and often embroifered. It looks nice allowing the color of the ‘odeyalo’ to contrast with whiteness of the ‘pododeyalnik’. It is always exposed and shown to advantage when the bed is made. When you sleep, it is always facing out (so you don’t get tangled, of course).
Solid sheet without a decorative opening looks like a ’savan’ (funeral shroud). Only utilitarian American mind can conceive of such a monstrosity; Russians are immediately horrified by the idea. It’s as Russian as a carpet on the wall, Americans wouldn’t understand.
“I cringe and sigh every time I open SRB to see this old Beatles thing again.”
You are not really cool, are you Tess?
“I’m wondering why there is a big hole right in the middle rather than a slit along one edge, which would also alow you to insert the blanket.”
I just asked my mother-in-law about the Russian duvet system. (Yes, she’s still here. And yes, I’m not cool…but, I am a saint. To kolya, garden is going great. It’s been raining.)
The ‘pododeyalnik’ serves as top-sheet as well as blanket cover. So there is the expectation to change it often (ras nadily). Big hole facing up is about efficiency and speed in doing the change. Russian women need to get the home jobs done fast to get back to work. Throw a small decorative blanket on top, if you don’t like the hole.
Obviously, Candide does not need to get back to work, as he has time to write B.S like the following:
The rombical opening in ‘pododeyalnik’ center is for decoration. It is not just a hole, it is always framed and often embroifered. It looks nice allowing the color of the ‘odeyalo’ to contrast with whiteness of the ‘pododeyalnik’.
‘Pododeyalnik’ with a hole in the center is about as efficient as a square-shaped ‘podushka’.
If you want efficiency and comfort, stick with American bedding.
Russian bedding is Folk Art, that’s what it is.
I knew that Candide would be so deranged as to try to use bedding as another example of American superiority. Hilarious.
Hilarity good, no?
Right, thanks guys. And does anyone know when this hole appeared? I mean when was this type of pododeyalnik invented? Can you believe I can’t find anything on the internet that will tell me the origins of Russian bedsheets?
I think ‘pododeyalnik’ came to be at about the same epoch as ‘Matrioshka’ nesting doll, ‘balalaika’ and decorated wooden spoon. Perhaps they precede Time itself.
Another completely idiotic Russian custom is to wrap infants’ in a tight cocoon so they look like tiny corpses. I have female relatives with high education, well travelled and politically savvy, who still insist to perpetuate this ancient idiocy. When asked, “Why on Earth do you bind your poor infants’ hands and feet so it can’t move for hours?”, they suddenly loose all their cosmopolitan veneer and start raving nonsense like senile ‘babushki’. So I never get a coherent explanation. They also can’t explain why they hate American chickens so much.
‘Pododeyalnik’ with a hole in the center is about as efficient as a square-shaped ‘podushka’.
Tell that to the industrial designers responsible for the Kleenex box.
The wrapping is about calming the infant’s nervous system. The thinking is that when the newborn is allowed to flay its limbs about , he/she becomes frightened by the flying objects coming at her/him and works himself/herself into a greater frenzy. If nervous system must adapt to a habit of such frenetic screaming, you can imagine the adult that results. Jim Kramer of street.com would be the extreme case. Baby doesn’t realize the limbs are attached. Wrapped state simulates the immobility of the womb. I think Russian women are a little extreme about the wrapping myself. I’ll give you that.
Interesting topic: swaddling. Really, I mean it. It seems that since prehistoric times many (if not most) cultures used to practice it (perhaps not in the tropics–I’m not sure), so there should be good reasons why swaddling became so common across the world: Europe, Asia, Africa, America. (The Jews and Egyptians of Biblical times swaddled their babies, so did the Etruscans.)
It’s interesting that light touching and deep touching have different effects. Deep touching pressure has a calming effect not only on babies, but also on animals (including adult humans.) A few years ago I read a fascinating book by Temple Granding. Her autism led her to become an animal behavior expert. She realized that because of her autism she could understand animals better than most other people: what spooks an animal, what calms an animal, and so on. She noticed that while light touching made her nervous and fearful, the pressure she felt from deep touching had the opposite effect: it made her calm and peaceful. She invented the “squeeze machine” as a calming device. (I don’t remember if she wrote about swaddling.)
“The Jews and Egyptians of Biblical times swaddled their babies, so did the Etruscans.”
Another words, swaddling is right there with Circumcision and No Bacon.
Tess, you are repeating exactly the same ‘arguments’ my relatives always do.
I just read the informative Wikipedia entry (sorry Chris) on swaddling:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swaddling
And the entry for the hug machine (aka squeeze machine):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hug_machine
I thought it was all about preventing bowed legs…
“Tess, you are repeating exactly the same ‘arguments’ my relatives always do….female relatives with high education, well travelled and political savvy…”
So I’m in good company. After reading Kolya’s links I’d say there is some modern science supporting the “ancient idiocy”.
BTW, thanks for those, Kolya. Somehow, I managed the time for those; but still haven’t processed Sean’s Nashi post. I wonder if those kids were swaddled properly? I wonder if it’s too late? Maybe we could stick them in a hugging machine and they would come out better.
“…the psychologist Arthur Janov claims that even this form of swaddling has profound effects on the adult emotional life of a swaddled child. He claims that swaddling causes a lifelong deficit on oxytocin and oversupply of cortisol, resulting in a lifetime of rage and anxieties…”
That seems to be Mother Russia in a nutshell…
I guess Candide is imitating Chris in his drive by/hit & run snarkiness. If Janov’s speculations are true then pretty much all of Western Europeans before, say, 1700, suffered of a lifetime of rage and anxiety as a result of swaddling. And, of course, not only them, but also Central Asians, Chinese, Native Americans, and so on. Actually, 17-years ago, when my daughter was born, she was swaddled tightly (and cozily) in the hospital. The nurses taught us how to do it. When my wife asked them about it, we were told that swaddling is making a comeback in US hospitals because research has shown that babies suffer less stress as a result.
Besides the Wikipedia entry and Temple Granding’s insights, I have not read anything else on the matter. I think Tess is correct, though: I doubt it’s a matter of mere “ancient idiocy.”
Kolya,
Normally I always respect ancient traditions. Don’t forget, I am The Conservative around here, ferchrissakes! So my snark can’t be as venomous as Chrisius’, by definition. Just making a little fun at expense of my old birthplace, that’s all. Also, I was swaddled in infancy, was fed off wooden spoons and slept under ‘pododeyalniki’ half my life, so I think I earned this little diversion.
My main point was that all those ancient traditions can’t be explained by rational approach. Sure, swaddling (just as circumsicion and pork prohibition) can make perfect sense under certain circumstances, but once you start to investigate why the ancient people were doing it, very soon you come against a whole system of archaic beliefs and superstitions that are completely alien to the modern worldview.
Besides, even ‘tess’ agrees Russian women are too extreme about swaddling. And their hatred for American chickens is way beyond reasonable.
“My main point was that all those ancient traditions can’t be explained by rational approach. Sure, swaddling (just as circumsicion and pork prohibition) can make perfect sense under certain circumstances, but once you start to investigate why the ancient people were doing it, very soon you come against a whole system of archaic beliefs and superstitions that are completely alien to the modern worldview.”
Candide, I don’t disagree with the above. Often old custom have a beneficial effects even if the traditional explanations behind the custom are false. And yes there also old customs that somehow became ingrained even if they never made much sense or brought any benefit (except perhaps some of them served as as tools to enforce social cohesion.)
This exchange about swaddling babies is really bringing me back to just after the birth of my first born in Paris. This was the first time that my mother-in-law swooped into my life like some sort of Rumplestiltskin explaining that rights to raising my children were preordained to be hers — The Baba — by the laws of Russian tradition. If I was 17-years old at the time as so many Russian mothers are, I could understand that; but, I was a 30-something American business professional with sufficient independence to be on my own in Europe. Still, why turn down the help? I took all advice with a grain of salt and still do. Not only did she insist on the severe swaddling, she also advised that I put the baby outside on the balcony for all naps Fall, Winter and Spring. Now if the air were clean as well as cold and damp, I might have complied. But, my balcony looked out upon the Monteparnasse train tracks, 12 flights up–but still dirty. Now this seemed the opposite of reenacting the conditions of the womb. This time the theory was the cold air develops the lungs.
Baba’s can be great. But, I don’t think parents should ever be given ‘a pass’ when it comes to raising their own children. The Nashi kids are crying for some parental attention.
“If I was 17-years old at the time as so many Russian mothers are,”
Huh? It’s not the USSR. IIRC the average age for motherhood in Russia is currently the late 20s.
Seriously, Doom, sometimes you sound like a paraplegic deprived of any links to the world outside your room. In which case you have my deepest sympathies, of course.
Doom is encased in his powered armor and far from the concerns of normal men, it is true, but he is fully capable of reading statistics.
Doom also has poor opinions of those who mock the handicapped.
Doom is Politically Correct sycophant.
Candide is Doom’s troll!
Seriously, Sean, can you write something sensible about Figes recent burst of paranoia?
Joera
In Sean’s absence, here is a good post from
Jason Linkins writing for the Huffington Post:
Media Picks Up Crazy Russian ‘End Of America’ Story For A SECOND Time
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/04/media-picks-up-crazy-russ_n_171892.html
Huh? It’s not the USSR. IIRC the average age for motherhood in Russia is currently the late 20s.
Doom…averages are funny things. I know so many Russian 30, 40 and 50-somethings that have started 2 families – one baby they have at 18 or 19 years old (baba or someone else raises; certainly not XY-chromosome donor)Then they start again with a new baby at 36 to 40 years of age. Voila -average of late 20s. Cue Mark Twain on statistics