I would like to thank Vance Kepley, Ben Brewster, David Bordwell, Birgit Beumers, Milena Michalski, Vincent Bohlinger, Maria Khotimsky, Mark D. Steinberg, Harriet L. Murav, and the anonymous reviewers for Slavic Review, as well as Francine Hirsch and David McDonald and the participants of their history research colloquium for their feedback.

1. See, e.g., Youngblood, Denise, Soviet Cinema in the Silent Era, 1918-1935 (Austin, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2. Cavendish, Philip, Soviet Mainstream Cinematography: The Silent Era (London, 2008), 136 Google Scholar.

3. Clark, Katerina, Petersburg: Crucible of Cultural Revolution (Cambridge, Mass., 1998), 296 Google Scholar.

4. Clark, Petersburg, 279. On Clark's discussion of the antiformalism campaign, see the epilogue to Petersburg and her Moscow, the Fourth Rome: Stalinism, Cosmopolitanism, and the Evolution of Soviet Culture, 1931-1941 (Cambridge, Mass., 2011), 212-13.

5. Maksimenkov, Leonid, Sumbur vmesto muzyki: Stalinskaia kul'turnaia revoliutsiia 1936-1938 (Moscow, 1997)Google Scholar.

6. Although the Soviets preferred to distinguish between form, on the one hand, and content, on the other (as in a typical 1920s question: “Does new [communist, revolutionary] content require a new form?”), I prefer to use the term theme, for it better captures the fact that everything, from the general subject matter (tema) to the small-scale ideas suggested by the film's story and characters, was at stake.

7. Jerry T. Heil provides a superb close reading of the film in No List of Political Assets: The Collaboration of Iurii Olesha and Abram Room on “Strogii Iunosha” [A Strict Youth (1936)] (Munich, 1989). Milena Michalski offers a detailed production history and stylistic analysis based on unpublished production materials in “Promises Broken, Promise Fulfilled: The Critical Failings and Creative Success of Abram Room's Strogii iunosha,” Slavonic and East European Review 82, no. 4 (October 2004): 820-46.

8. Evgenii Margolit, introductory lecture at the Moscow International Film Festival, where the film was screened as part of a retrospective of Soviet avant-garde film, June 2008. See also Evgenii Margolit, “‘Sluzhenie dal'nim': Razmyshleniia o sovetskom kinoavangarde v kontekste retrospektivy ‘Sotsialisticheskii avangardism,’” Kinovedcheskie zapiski, no. 89/90 (200809): 354-62. Dobrenko, Evgenii, Politekonomiia sotsrealizma (Moscow, 2007), 332-41Google Scholar.

9. See also Dobrenko, Politekonomiia sotsrealizma, 338-39.

10. My approach is partly inspired by Kristin Thompson's Herr Lubitsch Goes to Hollywood: German and American Film after World War I (Amsterdam, 2005).

11. Zil'ver, E., ed., Za bol'shoe kinoiskusstvo (Moscow, 1935), 131-32Google Scholar.

12. See, e.g., articles under the general heading “O formalizme i naturalizme” in Literaturnaia gazeta from March 10 to March 27, 1936.

13. “Rech’ A. Ia. Vyshinskogo, ‘Zadachi sovetskogo teatra,’” Pravda, June 15, 1939, 4.

14. Zabrodin, Vladimir, Eizenshtein: Kino, vlast', zhenshchiny (Moscow, 2011), 255-74, 290-317Google Scholar.

15. Anderson, K. M. and Maksimenkov, L. V., eds., Kremlevskii kinoteatr, 1928-1953: Dokumenty (Moscow, 2005), 406 Google Scholar.

16. “Usilit' rukovodstvo,” Kino 14, March 24, 1937, 1. Emphasis added.

17. Gromov, Evgenii, Stalin: Vlast’ i iskusstvo (Moscow, 1998), 189 Google Scholar.

18. Eisenstein, Sergei, “The Mistakes of Bezhin Meadow ,” in Taylor, Richard, ed., The Eisenstein Reader (London, 1998), 136 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19. For more on Bezhin lug, see Kenez, Peter, “Bezhin lug (Bezhin Meadow),” in Eaton, Katherine Bliss, ed., Enemies of the People: The Destruction of Soviet Literary, Theater, and Film Arts in the 1930s (Evanston, 2002), 113-26Google Scholar; and Ofil'me “Bezhin lug” S. Eizenshteina: Protiv formalizma v kinoiskusstve (Moscow, 1937).

20. On the Bolshevik theories of art, see Brewster, Ben, “The Soviet State, the Communist Party and the Arts 1917-1936,” Red Letters, no. 3 (Autumn 1976): 3–9 Google Scholar.

21. Olesha, Iurii, “Strogii iunosha. P'esa dlia kinematografa,” Novyi mir, no. 8 (1934): 66–89 Google Scholar. In English, Yury Olesha, “A Strict Young Man,” in Yury Olesha, The Complete Plays, ed. and trans. Michael Green and Jerome Katsell (Ann Arbor, 1983), 185-233. On Olesha's screenwriting career, see Michalski, Milena, “Cinematic Literature and Literary Cinema: Olesha, Room and the Search for a New Art Form,” in Kelly, Catriona and Lovell, Stephen, eds., Russian Literature, Modernism and the Visual Arts (Cambridge, Eng., 2000), 220-49Google Scholar. On this screenplay, see Arkadii Bliumbaum, “Ozhivaiushchaia statuia i voploshchennaia muzyka: Konteksty ‘Strogogo iunoshi,ș” NLO, no. 89 (2008), at http://magazines.russ.ru/nlo/2008/89/bllO.html (last accessed January 12, 2015).

22. See Boris Pil ’niak's O'kei: Amerikanskii roman (Moscow, 1933), 368-70, for a similarly skeptical opinion expressed by Theodore Dreiser.

23. The film was in production between June 24, 1934, and January 15, 1936.

24. For a list, see Heil, No List, 97-100; and Margolit, Evgenii and Shmyrov, Viacheslav, Iz'iatoe kino: 1924-1953 (Moscow, 1995), 56 Google Scholar.

25. Miller-Budnitskaia, Rashel’, “Novyi gumanism,” Literaturnyi sovremennik, no. 12 (1934): 104-9Google Scholar; Prozorov, A., “Diskussiia o sotsialisticheskoi morali,” Khudozhestvennaia literatura, no. 2 (1935): 12–15 Google Scholar; Ia. E. Man, “‘Strogii iunosha.’ Novoe proizvedenie Iu. Oleshi,” Literaturnaia gazeta, July 6, 1934, 4; Levidov, Mikhail, “Sluchai s Oleshei,” Literaturnyi kritik, no. 10 (1934): 180-84Google Scholar; Zhdanov, N., “O geroiakh,” Literaturnyi sovremennik, no. 9 (1935): 158-62Google Scholar; Vera Chernova, “Pis'mo ‘staroi komsomolki’ Iuriiu Karlovichu Oleshe,” Molodaia gvardiia, no. 1 (1935): 157-59; and Kulikov, I., “O chuvstvakh sotsialisticheskogo cheloveka,” Volzhskaia nov', no. 8/9 (1935): 76–102 Google Scholar.

26. The Main Cinema Administration (GUK) repeatedly warned Ukrainfil'm of the screenplay's shortcomings. Vladimir Usievich, “Za kachestvo!,” Kino, March 16, 1936, 2; ”Pouchitel'naia istoriia,” Kino, July 28, 1936, 2.

27. “‘Strogii iunosha.’ Stsenarii Iuriia Oleshi,” Vecherniaia Moskva, July 3, 1934, 3.

28. Grashchenkova, Irina, Abram Room (Moscow, 1977), 140 Google Scholar.

29. Anderson, and Maksimenkov, , eds., Kremlevskii kinoteatr, 320 Google Scholar. (Sound films during this period typically cost between 400,000 and 1,500,000 rubles.)

30. Zil'ver, Za bol'shoe kinoiskusstvo, 180.

31. On Olesha's representation of the new Soviet man, see Irina Panchenko, “Nesvoevremennyi utopist Iurii Olesha: Ideia ‘novogo cheloveka’ i sud'ba kinop'esy ‘Strogii iunosha,’” Novyi zhurnal, no. 250 (2008), at http://magazines.russ.ru/nj/2008/250/pal3.html (last accessed January 12, 2015).

32. Scott, H. G., ed., Problems of Soviet Literature: Reports and Speeches at the First Soviet Writers’ Congress (New York, 1935), 21.Google Scholar

33. Dmitrii Maznin, “Grisha Fokin otmezhevyvaetsia. Konferentsiia geroev ‘Strogogo iunoshi,’” Literaturnaia gazeta, October 24,1934,3. See also Man, “‘Strogii iunosha’“; and Dobrenko, Politekonomiia sotsrealizma, 334. Many of the sets and settings that Room's characters inhabit are clearly supposed to represent idealized versions of Soviet living and work spaces (e.g., Grisha's constructivist apartment building and Stepanov's sparkling cancer clinic and expansive private dacha).

34. See also Heil, No List, 64.

35. Grashchenkova, Abram Room, 172. The film was clearly slotted for export: Michalski reports that “an English-language poster had been commissioned” for it. Michalski, “Promises Broken,” 829.

36. “Ukrainfil'm,” Kino, November 28, 1934, 4; Usievich, “Za kachestvo!,” also cited in Michalski, “Promises Broken,” 830-31. The film was still in the editing phase in February 1936. “Chto novogo?,” Kino, February 21, 1936, 1.

37. An attack on Ukrainfil'm's Prometei (Prometheus, 1935) appeared in “Grubaia skhema vmesto istoricheskoi pravdy,” Pravda, February 13,1936, 4.

38. Usievich, “Za kachestvo!” There is no doubt that due to the strong position of Ukraine's leadership in the Soviet political hierarchy and Ukrainfil'm's relative independence from Moscow, the organization was less likely to listen to Moscow's warnings.

39. Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi arkhiv literatury i iskusstva (RGALI), f. 962, op. 3, d. 88 (transcript of Committee for Arts Affairs meeting, 1936), 1.22ob.

40. Vershinin, V., “Brakodely v kino,” Pravda, February 20, 1936, 5 Google Scholar. Reportedly, 60 percent of Sluchainaia vstrecha was “radically remade.” V. Tarov, “Besslavnoe proshloe i budushchee,” Vecherniaia Moskva, October 13, 1936, 3.

41. Tkach, Mark, “Postanovlenie tresta Ukrainfil'm o zapreshchenii fil'ma ‘Strogii iunosha,’” Kino, July 28, 1936, 2 Google Scholar. It appears that the film was banned at the republic level. It is likely, however, that with a film of this magnitude, GUK was consulted before Ukrainfil'm's decision was finalized. In accordance with the decree, Room was relieved of his position as film director (he made his next film in 1939), cinematographer Iurii Ekel'chik was reprimanded, and the deputy head of the Kiev studio in charge of production was fired. A Strict Young Man was shelved until 1963.

42. “Doklad nachal'nika GUK tov. B. Z. Shumiatskogo,” Kino, January 22, 1937, 2.

43. Panchenko, “Nesvoevremennyi utopist.”

44. Artizov, Andrei and Naumov, Oleg, eds., Vlast’ i khudozhestvennaia intelligentsiia: Dokumenty, 1917-1953 (Moscow, 2002), 290 Google Scholar. Emphasis added.

45. Incidentally, Meyerhold was supposed to appear in Strogii iunosha (probably in an episodic role as the eccentric pianist), and Olesha dedicated the screenplay to Meyerhold's wife, Zinaida Raikh.

46. In a telegram to Olesha, Room reported that the first screenings of the film at the studio were successful. RGALI, f. 358, op. 1, d. 27 (telegrams from Room to Olesha, 1935), 1.2, cited in Michalski, “Promises Broken,” 831.

47. RGALI, f. 631, op. 2, d. 173 (transcript of Writers’ Union meeting, 1936), 1.10, partially cited in Michalski, “Cinematic Literature,” 235.

48. RGALI, f. 2758, op. 1, d. 1449 (papers of Maksim Shtraukh), 1.28, cited in Michalski, “Promises Broken,” 832.

49. RGALI, f. 3044, op. 1, d. 272 (Room's production materials), 1.64.

50. Tkach, Mark, “‘Strogii iunosha’ i nestrogie rukovoditeli,” Kino, July 28, 1936, 2 Google Scholar.

51. Dzigan, E., “Prikazy vmesto rukovodstva,” Pravda, October 15, 1936, 4 Google Scholar.

52. Volkov, Solomon, Shostakovich and Stalin: The Extraordinary Relationship between the Great Composer and the Brutal Dictator, trans. Bouis, Antonina W. (New York, 2004), 109 Google Scholar. On the banning of Dmitrii Shostakovich's opera, see Fitzpatrick, Sheila, The Cultural Front: Power and Culture in Revolutionary Russia (Ithaca, 1992), 183–215 Google Scholar.

53. See, e.g., Hoffmann, David L., “Social and Cultural Unity under Soviet Socialism,” chap. 5 in Stalinist Values: The Cultural Norms of Soviet Modernity, 1917-1941 (Ithaca, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Lazar’ Fleishman argues that the campaign was Stalin's response to Adolf Hitler's 1935 speech on art. Lazar’ Fleishman, Bon's Pasternak i literaturnoe dvizheniie 1930-kh godov (St. Petersburg, 2005), 406.

54. RGALI, f. 962, op. 3, d. 65 (transcript of Committee for Arts Affairs meeting on the feature film production plan, 1936), 1.53ob.

55. “Iskusstvo na ‘kholostom khodu.’ Iz rechi tov. N. Aseeva,” Literaturnaia gazeta, March 20, 1936, 2.

56. See “Velikoe narodnoe iskusstvo. Iz rechi tov. Iu. Oleshi,” Literaturnaia gazeta, March 20, 1936, 3; and Panchenko, “Nesvoevremennyi utopist.“

57. Tsentral'nyi gosudarstvennyi arkhiv literatury i iskusstva Sankt-Peterburga (TsGALI SPb), f. 257, op. 16, d. 432 (transcript of Lenfil'm directors’ board meeting, 1936), 1.2ob.

58. See, e.g., Eizenshtein, Sergei, “Volki i ovtsy,” Izbrannye proizvedeniia, vol. 2 (Moscow, 1964), 305 Google Scholar. Many Soviet screenplays from the period were numbered; however, this did not mean that the numbers, which were only approximate, were followed in production.

59. See, e.g., RGALI, f. 2453, op. 2, d. 335 (transcript of Mosfil'm Artistic Council meeting, 1940). See also Popov, I. F., ed., Kak my rabotaem nad kinostsenariem (Moscow, 1936)Google Scholar, as well as my chapter, “The Literary Scenario and the Soviet Screenwriting Tradition,” in Birgit Beumers, ed., A Companion to Russian Cinema (Hoboken, forthcoming).

60. Shklovskii, Viktor, Kakpisat’ stsenarii (Moscow, 1931), 69 Google Scholar.

61. Eizenshtein, Sergei, “O forme stsenariia,” Izbrannye proizvedeniia, 2:297-98.Google Scholar

62. Olesha, Iurii, “Kardinal'nye voprosy,” Tridtsat’ dnei 12 (1935), 45 Google Scholar. Emphasis in the original.

63. The shooting script and production notes (preserved at the Dovzhenko National Film Studio, in Kiev) show that not only imagery, atmosphere, and action but also much of the wording made their way into the shooting script. See excerpts published by Irina Grashchenkova in Abram Room and Isai Lelikov, “Mezhdu strokoi i kadrom,” Iskusstvo kino, no. 11 (1996): 92-107. See also Michalski, “Promises Broken.”

64. Man, “‘Strogii iunosha.’”

65. TsGALI SPb, f. 257, op. 16, d. 432,1. 3; RGALI, f. 631, op. 2, d. 173,1. 60.

66. Grashchenkova, Abram Room, 139-40.

67. Olesha, “Kardinal'nye voprosy,” 46. Emphasis in the original.

68. Room's visual approach is addressed in Michalski, “Promises Broken”; Michalski, “Cinematic Literature,” 237-44; Heil, No List; and Mariia Belodubrovskaia, “Ekstsentrika stilia v kinokartine A. Rooma ‘Strogii iunosha,’” Tynianovskii sbornik, no. 12 (2006): 318-38.

69. Heil, No List, 11.

70. Room added two extra qualities to the moral code of communist youth that Grisha discusses in the film: clarity of goals and humanism. “Clarity of goals” was a quote from Stalin, which was added to make Grisha's moral code more palatable for film executives. Tkach, “‘Strogii iunosha.’” Other small changes in wording were made along these lines. See Dobrenko, Politekonomiia sotsrealizma, 336.

71. In some of these cases, the soundtrack has music on it, indicating that the concurrent dialogue mutings are deliberate and do not result from a technical mistake or from print damage.

72. Room and Lelikov, “Mezhdu strokoi.”

73. Luppol, I. K., Rozental, M. M., and Tret'iakov, S. M., eds., Pervyi vsesoiuznyi s”ezd sovetskikh pisatelei, 1934: Stenograficheskii otchet (Moscow, 1990), 464 Google Scholar.

74. On early Soviet popular filmmaking, see Youngblood, Denise, Movies for the Masses: Popular Cinema and Soviet Society in the 1920s (Cambridge, Eng., 1992)Google Scholar. On these films and Room's 1927 Ukhaby (Potholes), see Graffy, Julian, Bed and Sofa: The Film Companion (London, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Widdis, Emma, “Socialist Senses: Film and the Creation of Soviet Subjectivity,” Slavic Review 71, no. 3 (Fall 2012): 590–618 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

75. Mikhail Levidov, “Bol'shaia piaterka,” Kino, November 6, 1926, 2, cited in Grashchenkova, Abram Room, 6. See also Michalski, “Promises Broken,” 822.

76. Grashchenkova, Abram Room, 12-18.

77. V. B. Shklovskii, “Room. Zhizn’ i rabota,” in his Za 60 let: Raboty o kino, ed. E. Levin (Moscow, 1985), 137. See also Grashchenkova, Abram Room, 35; and Widdis, Emma, “Faktura: Depth and Surface in Early Soviet Set Design,” Studies in Russian and Soviet Cinema 3, no. 1 (2009): 5–32 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

78. Zvukovaia sbornaia programma no. 1 contained four parts and its total length was eight reels. Room's film, at six reels, was the second and lengthiest part of the program. Room also codirected the program's third part (one reel), which comprised drawn animation about Tip-Top, a sound innovator.

79. See, e.g., Abram Room, “Nash opyt,” Kino, January 11, 1930, 3; and Ippolit Sokolov, “‘Plan velikikh rabot,’” Kino i zhizn', no. 10 (April 1, 1930): 5-6.

80. Izvolov, Nikolai, “Iz istorii risovannogo zvuka,” Kinovedcheskie zapiski 53 (2001): 290-96Google Scholar; Deriabin, Aleksandr, “ARRK. Stenogramma lektsii tov. Avraamova v gruppe zvu Simikovogo kino,” Kinovedcheskie zapiski 53 (2001): 300-13Google Scholar; and Vincent Bohlinger, “Compromising Kino: The Development of Socialist Realist Film Style in the Soviet Union, 1928- 1935” (PhD diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2007), 156.

81. “Zvuk kak smysl,” Kino i zhizn, no. 10 (April 1, 1930): 14. For more on the Zvukovaia sbornaia programma films and Soviet sound innovation, see Bohlinger, Vincent, “The Development of Sound Technology in the Soviet Union during the First Five-Year Plan,” Studies in Russian and Soviet Cinema 7, no. 2 (Summer 2013): 189–205 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Kaganovsky, Lilya and Salazkina, Masha, eds., Sound, Speech, Music in Soviet and Post-Soviet Cinema (Bloomington, 2014)Google Scholar.

82. Zil'ver, Za bol'shoe kinoiskusstvo, 55.

83. “Pouchitel'nyi primer,” Kino, March 22, 1934, 1; B. G., “Predel nedobrosovestnosti,” Kino, March 22, 1934, 1. See also the March 22, March 28, April 4, and April 10, 1934, issues of Kino; Michalski, “Cinematic Literature,” 232; and Youngblood, Soviet Cinema, 193,202.

84. Christie, Ian, “Making Sense of Early Soviet Sound,” in Taylor, Richard and Christie, Ian, eds., Inside the Film Factory: New Approaches to Russian and Soviet Cinema (London, 1991), 176-92Google Scholar.

85. Thompson, Kristin, “Early Sound Counterpoint,” Yale French Studies, no. 60 (1980): 115-40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

86. There is even a joke on the organic-sound theory in the film. In the second-to-last scene, we hear some dissonant chords being violently played on the piano. As soon as we decide that the music is non-diegetic (i.e., non-organic), we see the man who has produced the chords. He steps onto his balcony to scorn Masha and Grisha, who just happen to be standing under the balcony, and exclaims, “As soon as you start playing, they come along to eavesdrop!”

87. A. Dovzhenko, “Aerograd. Literaturnyi stsenarii,” Arkhiv Gosfil'mofonda, f. 2, op. 1, d. 4545.

88. RGALI, f. 631, op. 2, d. 103 (transcript of Writers’ Union meeting, 1935), 1.45.

89. See, e.g., “‘Aerograd,’” Literaturnaia gazeta, December 1, 1935, 6.

90. RGALI, f. 631, op. 2, d. 103,1.15.

91. Lebedev, Nikolai, Partiia o kino (Moscow, 1939), 49–50 Google Scholar.

92. Reznikov, B., “Zamechatel'nyi fil'm,” Pravda, November 12, 1935, 4 Google Scholar.

93. Izgoev, N., “‘Aerograd,’” Izvesdia, November 5, 1935, 3 Google Scholar.

94. On the political implications of Aerograd, see Kepley, Vance, In the Service of the State: The Cinema of Alexander Dovzhenko (Madison, 1986), 106-10Google Scholar.

95. “Protiv formalizma i naturalizma,” Kino, April 17, 1936, 3; Br. [Brothers] Tur, “Protokol breda,” Izvestiia, November 17, 1936, 4; and Voskhodov, I., “V krivom zerkale,” Pravda, November 5, 1936, 4 Google Scholar.

96. Veisman, E., “Primitivno i skhematichno,” Pravda, April 9, 1936, 4 Google Scholar; Khokhlov, German, “Pozhaleem stsenarista,” Literaturnaia gazeta, May 10, 1936, 5 Google Scholar.

97. According to Petr Bagrov, it is likely that Na otdykhe, co-scripted by Evgenii Shvarts and Nikolai Oleinikov, had Stalin's approval. Petr Bagrov, “Eduard Ioganson i vse-vse-vse,” Kinovedcheskie zapiski, no. 65 (2003): 72. For a thematic analysis of these and other “peer” films, see Julian Graffy, ‘“An Unpretentious Picture'?—Igor’ Savchenko's, A Chance Encounter,” Studies in Russian and Soviet Cinema 6, no. 3 (2012): 301-18Google Scholar.

98. Michalski also notes these similarities between Room's and Savchenko's films. Michalski, “Promises Broken,” 839. On light and sunlight in Olesha's writings, see, e.g., Michalski, “Cinematic Literature,” 222-33.

99. V. Tarov, “Liricheskaia kinonovella,” Vecherniaia Moskva, March 31, 1936, 3. Another critic said that the film would be debatable but that this was a positive thing. Paul’ Lori, “Ekzamen na zrelost',” Vecherniaia Moskva, December 29, 1935, 3.

100. “‘Aerograd,’” Literaturnaia gazeta, December 1, 1935, 6.

101. Dobrenko, , Politekonomiia sotsrealizma, 332-41Google Scholar.

102. Vsevolod Vishnevskii, My iz Kronshtadta (Moscow, 1936), 78. Emphasis added.

103. Fridrikh Vol'f, “‘My iz Kronshtadta,’” Kino 12, March 6, 1936, 3.

104. Ibid.

105. Zastava u Chertova broda (Outpost at Devil's Ford, dir. K. F. Isaev), 0 strannostiakh liubvi (On the strangeness of love, dir. la. A. Protazanov), Otets i syn (Father and son, dir. M. A. Barskaia), Polovod'e (The flood, dir. L. Golub and N. F. Sadkovich), Zhenit'ba (The marriage, dir. E. P. Garin and Kh. A. Lokshina), and Prometheus were banned. See, e.g., Margolit and Shmyrov, Iz'iatoe kino, 46-56. Kosmicheskii reis (Cosmic journey, dir. V. N. Zhuravlev) and Posledniaia noch’ (The last night, dir. Iu. la. Raizman), which had to be rewritten, were judged borderline. For a summary account of problematic films, see, e.g., RGALI, f. 962, op. 3, d. 66 (transcript of Committee for Arts Affairs meeting on formalism, 1936).

106. Six were banned and at least two more were judged to be borderline. See Margolit and Smyrov, Iz iatoe kino, 39-46; Vershinin, “Brakodely v kino“; RGALI, f. 962, op. 3, d. 66; and A. Dubrovskii, “Isporchennaia tema,” Vecherniaia Moskva, September 20,1935, 3.

107. RGALI, f. 2456, op. 1, d. 209 (transcript of Ukrainfil'm meeting, 1937). The film was indeed initially shelved by Shumiatskii. Taylor, Richard, “Singing on the Steppes for Stalin: Ivan Pyr'ev and the Kolkhoz Musical in Soviet Cinema,” Slavic Review 58, no. 1 (Spring 1999): 150-51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

108. Shklovskii, Viktor, “Slovo o moem druge,” Sovetskii ekran, no. 12 (1974): 17 Google Scholar.

109. Eizenshtein, S., “Oshibki ‘Bezhina luga,‘” in Ofil'me “Bezhin lug”S. Eizenshteina: Protiv formalizma v kinoiskusstve (Moscow, 1937), 52–53 Google Scholar.