Contents:
Learn: The Profession of a Methodologist from Scratch to PRO
Learn moreWho was called "muzhiks"
In pre-revolutionary Russia, the word "muzhik" had one of the meanings, denoting a representative of the lower classes, as well as a rough and uncouth village person. The term was often used to describe ordinary peasants, reflecting their living conditions and social status in the society of that time.
In the 1920s, students from the lower classes, both urban and rural, were called "muzhiks" in universities. Vsevolod Stratonov, Dean of the Physics and Mathematics Faculty of Moscow State University, elegantly referred to them as "neostudentstvo." These young people, previously unable to attend university, were given the chance to study under the new regime, which opened up broad prospects for them.
Some of these people were members of the Bolshevik Communist Party or the Komsomol, and some took part in the Civil War, naturally on the side of the Reds. Many of them entered higher education institutions through vocational training, which in the early 1920s was the only means of admission. These vocational training was granted by party or trade union organizations. It should be noted that not all vocational training recipients sought higher education; however, following party guidelines, they were responsive to the demands of the times. Working-class youth had the opportunity to enroll in universities through rabfaks (workers' faculties)—specialized departments created to prepare young workers and peasants for higher education. Students who were members of the Communist Party, as well as rabfak graduates, enjoyed a number of advantages, including priority admission and scholarships. These benefits contributed to expanded access to higher education for working people, which in turn contributed to raising the level of education in the country and the socialization of the working classes. These students were distinguished by both their appearance and manners, differing significantly from their predecessors. One of the professors of that time, Ilyinsky, described the "muzhiks" as follows:
Class origin had a significant impact on the appearance, demeanor, and way of thinking of people. This is manifested in various small things, starting with the worker's cap, which nowadays, like the once popular blue peaked cap, is worn with a certain style. Putting out cigarettes on a rough, calloused palm becomes a symbol inaccessible to the former student. Origin is also reflected in the use of the form of address "ty" instead of "vy" in friendly relations, which is especially noticeable in interactions between different sexes, where the form "ty" clearly prevails.
Ilyinsky I. in his notes on higher education, published in the magazine "Novy Mir" Published in 1929, Ilyinsky examines key aspects of the educational process and its impact on students' personal development. The author emphasizes that higher education should not only impart knowledge but also foster critical thinking and a creative approach to problem solving. He emphasizes the importance of the humanities, which contribute to students' comprehensive development and prepare them for professional work. Education, according to Ilyinsky, should be aimed at developing not only specialists but also citizens capable of contributing to society. These ideas remain relevant in the modern educational context, emphasizing the need to integrate humanities and technical knowledge. Many students of proletarian origin were significantly older than the intelligentsia who entered educational institutions immediately after high school. These students had the opportunity to go through the trials of the Civil War, which added unique experience and maturity to their educational process.
In her memoirs, Tatyana Favorskaya recounts the diversity of her student group. She notes that among the high school graduates were also grown men in greatcoats and sheepskin coats, which bore the marks of overnight stays around a campfire. This contrasting combination underscores the uniqueness of student life at that time, where the destinies of people of different ages and backgrounds intertwined.
Student Savva Zhukov was remembered for his vibrant personality, standing out among his peers. Favorskaya noted that his manner of interacting with the professors was surprising. He would approach his supervisor, pat her on the shoulder in a friendly manner, and declare, "You don't know, Frida Davydovna, how difficult it is for us, workers' faculties." When other students pointed out to him the inappropriateness of using the informal "ty" with a professor, he would smile and reply, "I haven't learned any manners." Despite the difficulties he faced, it's unclear whether he ever completed his university studies. Savva Zhukov became a symbol of his relaxed approach to learning and interacting with professors, highlighting his uniqueness among students. Higher education is often perceived by students as an opportunity to acquire professional skills and improve their social standing. Among young workers and farmers, complex specialties such as engineers, technicians, agronomists, and doctors are particularly in demand. Many strive to enter a university, guided by the principle: the main thing is to get accepted, and further steps will depend on their circumstances. It is important to note that the choice of profession can significantly affect career prospects and financial stability in the future.
The level of school education among working-class and peasant youth often did not meet the requirements for admission to higher education institutions. Most graduates lacked sufficient literacy skills, let alone knowledge of specialized subjects such as physics or social studies. This created serious obstacles to further education and professional growth.
In 1921, at the Faculty of Medicine at Moscow State University, half of the applicants failed the entrance exams, which corresponded to the level of fourth- and fifth-grade students. One student, who had arrived for the exam on a business trip, was asked to write the number two in a square by drawing a square with a two inscribed in it on the board. The workers' faculties were unable to significantly improve the situation either.
Student Gushchev, always dressed in a long-tailed overcoat with frayed edges and scorched spots, tried several times to pass my exam (the word "exam" had already fallen out of use at that time), but was never able to overcome the difficulties of chemistry. In the end, he gave up, saying: "Chemistry is an incomprehensible science." Another student could not understand or remember anything. When I asked her why she chose the chemistry department, she replied: "My parents said - go to the chemistry department, it's a profitable profession." I recommended that they both consider changing their direction before it was too late, and eventually they both left the University.
Favorskaya T.A. in her memoirs "The Life of the Family of a University Professor. "1890–1953" shares unique moments in the life and daily life of a professorial family in St. Petersburg. Published in 2019 by St. Petersburg State University, the book immerses readers in the academic world, revealing the daily worries, joys, and challenges faced by the scientists and their families. The memoirs cover important historical events and societal changes that impacted the lives of the professors and their families. Readers will see how science and family intertwine, creating a unique portrait of the era. This work will be of interest not only to those studying the history of education in Russia but also to any literature enthusiast interested in learning more about life in the past.
Some professors were biased against proletarian youth, arguing that "the mental abilities of workers are not suited to the study of higher sciences." Meanwhile, others, such as Tatyana Favorskaya, joyfully celebrated the achievements of their students. These successes were significant: one of Favorskaya's students, a former Red Army soldier who attended classes in a greatcoat, later became a teacher in the organic chemistry department at the Technological Institute. Thus, proletarian youth were able to overcome stereotypes and achieve high results in education and science. Students from working-class backgrounds approached their studies with a revolutionary spirit, striving to master science with enthusiasm and perseverance. Those who genuinely desired to learn compensated for their lack of basic education with their thirst for knowledge and diligence. Many of them felt shame for their ignorance. Historian and philosopher Georgy Fedotov emphasized that this desire for knowledge became an important character trait. Thus, despite the difficulties, they demonstrated high motivation and a desire to develop, which contributed to their educational growth. Persistent moles continue to "gnaw at the granite of science." However, they will not be able to fill the gaps in general education, as the necessary resources and opportunities are lacking. Universities lack philosophy departments, genuine scientific journals, lectures, and a cultural environment conducive to development. However, they still have the opportunity to become specialized professionals. Although they may be poor doctors or engineers, they are still different from simple technicians and paramedics. Importantly, such people often possess a strong will and a desire to shape their lives, which allows them to find their place in society. In his book, "New Russia," G.P. Fedotov examines complex issues concerning Russia's fate and historical mistakes. The author analyzes key moments that influenced the country's development and offers a critical perspective on its current state. His work examines in detail the problems facing Russia and possible solutions. Fedotov emphasizes the importance of understanding the past in shaping the future. This book will be a useful resource for anyone interested in Russian history and its cultural heritage.
Contrary to Fedotov's opinion, diligence in Soviet higher education allowed peasants to achieve significant academic achievements, including the title of academician, although such cases were rare. Workers and peasants highly valued the opportunity to receive an education, which underscores how significant this opportunity was for them. It is not surprising that many workers' faculties (rabfaks) students referred to their educational institutions as their "alma mater," demonstrating their deep respect for the knowledge they received and the value of education in their lives.
In 1922 Pitirim Sorokin, who himself came from a peasant background and became a private lecturer in 1916, shared his observations of the student movement and the workers' faculty students. Despite the students' difficult living conditions, he noted their continued pursuit of knowledge. The situation was different than in the pre-war years, but the thirst for true knowledge remained intense and contributed to remarkable changes. Even workers' faculty students and many communists, having entered higher education institutions and learned "from the Holy Spirit," quickly adapted and became serious professionals. Sorokin emphasized that power may propose, but fate disposes. This view of education and social change in Russia at that time remains relevant today, emphasizing the importance of pursuing knowledge under any circumstances.
Besides studying, there was an alternative path to successful advancement in higher education—active socio-political activism. By participating in such events, students could not only simplify the admissions process, but also easily pass exams and receive more favorable placements after graduation. Active participation in the life of the university contributed not only to personal growth, but also to the expansion of professional connections, which is an important aspect for a future career.
Read Also:
Revolutionary pride as a powerful incentive to learn
In the historical context, revolutionary pride became an important factor contributing to the pursuit of knowledge and self-development. This feeling, awakened in the context of social and political changes, formed a special motivation for learning. People, inspired by the ideas of freedom and equality, sought new knowledge and skills, striving to participate in the transformation of society. As a result, education became not only a means of self-realization, but also a tool for active participation in the life of the country. Revolutionary pride contributed to the creation of new educational initiatives and programs aimed at developing critical thinking and civic responsibility. Thus, this phenomenon had a significant impact on the level of education and cultural progress.
The opinion of communist students played a key role in the life of higher education institutions in Russia. In 1921, a decree of the Council of People's Commissars on higher educational institutions of the RSFSR was adopted, which prescribed the mandatory participation of students in the management of universities. Students served on subject committees, faculty councils, and even university boards. Preference was given to candidates with the "right" social status. It should be noted that party organizations at universities were largely composed of students, since, as Tatyana Favorskaya noted, there was virtually no party affiliation among the faculty at Leningrad State University in the 1920s. This emphasized the influence of young people on educational processes and university governance during that period.
Who were called "Zhorzhiks"
"Zhorzhiks"—a term derived from the French name Georges—was previously used in slang to refer to fashionistas and dandies, as well as the sons of the intelligentsia and representatives of "alien" classes, such as the bourgeoisie, white-collar workers, bohemians, and NEPmen. Another nickname for these people was "white-lined men." This term originated in the lexicon of the late 19th century, when it referred to students from wealthy families who wore uniforms with white silk linings. People's Commissar for Education Anatoly Lunacharsky also used this term in his statements.
The students in question typically had a higher cultural and educational level than traditional workers. Many of them had managed to receive an education at imperial gymnasiums, were homeschooled if their parents' finances allowed, or had enrolled in higher education before the Revolution. These young people were distinguished by their broad knowledge, spoke foreign languages, and actively participated in literary circles and debates, indicating a commitment to intellectual pursuits. In their families, higher education was considered a standard life strategy. However, despite their achievements, they faced the risk of failing the entrance exams, particularly due to a lack of knowledge of Marxist tenets or the works of the revolutionary poet Demyan Bedny. This underscores the importance of adapting to the new ideological conditions and challenges faced by educated students of the time.
Sergei Golitsyn, a member of a princely family who did not emigrate after the revolution but concealed his origins, shared in his memoirs his fear of the entrance exam in political economy. He repeatedly recited information about party congresses, including dates and events related to the conflict between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. Thanks to diligent preparation, he managed to pass the exam.
Representatives of this group of students were initially perceived as hostile to the proletariat and revolutionary movements. In everyday life, they faced various forms of pressure and often lost their rights. However, they continued to persistently strive to enter higher education institutions, overcoming all obstacles. Many of them chose less popular humanities majors, different from the preferences of proletarian students, in order to obtain higher education and improve their chances for the future.
Remade Text:
Check out our content to help you better understand the topic at hand. We offer up-to-date information that will be useful for your studies. Our materials are carefully selected to provide you with the most accurate and practical data.
Read also:
The student population of the early 1920s became one of the most vibrant and significant phenomena in a difficult era. This period was characterized not only by the desire for knowledge, but also by the active social position of young people. Students strove for change, sought new ideals, and shaped their vision of the future. They became catalysts for social change, inspiring participation in political and cultural movements. In a context of instability and change, student fraternity united young people, creating an atmosphere of hope and striving for a better life.
To be admitted, it was necessary to present oneself in a favorable light: concealing one's true origins in questionnaires and autobiographies, forging documents, and obtaining various certificates of compliance with Soviet standards. Some went to work in factories to gain the status of true proletarians, while others had to renounce their parents. It was a difficult choice, requiring significant sacrifices and compromises to comply with the system's demands and achieve the desired result.
Some applicants resorted to tricks to imitate the style and mannerisms of working-class people in order to deceive admissions committees. One such student, Moskvin, described this process wryly: "The more 'proletarian' you look, the coarser your speech, and the more primitive your answers, the higher the likelihood of being admitted." This situation highlights the importance of external factors and biases in the educational system.
Copying did not imply adopting an ideology: students who took advantage of the opportunities provided by the Bolshevik regime generally did not become sincerely committed communists.
Young people who did not strive to imitate the proletarians in appearance developed their own unique visual style. Young men favored traditional pre-revolutionary attributes, such as uniforms, caps, and European suits. Young women strove to appear stylish and elegant, focusing on European rather than Soviet fashion standards. Instead of addressing each other as "comrade," non-proletarian students preferred to call each other "colleague," emphasizing their desire for individuality and differentiation from accepted norms.
Non-proletarian students, as a rule, demonstrated a serious attitude toward their studies and were respected by experienced teachers. However, the party and Komsomol cells did not hide their disdain for them.
Dear Mommy, the professors are not afraid of the communists. Professor Solonin, who teaches us chemistry, openly declares his bourgeois views and criticizes the communists. He asserts that there are no leaps in nature and that without competition, true economic development is impossible. Amidst the rudeness and unbridledness, it is pleasant to see people like Professor Solonin. They are truly becoming true heroes in our time.
In the early 1920s, students representing non-proletarian strata, together with representatives of the old professors, actively resisted the communist reforms. In 1920–1921, a wave of student demonstrations, strikes, and riots swept the country, engulfing both the main capitals and all major cities. These events marked an important stage in the struggle to preserve the old values and academic traditions in the face of new political realities. Students found a variety of ways to express their dissatisfaction with the new order, in addition to demonstrations. There were recorded cases of classrooms being flooded with water or chemicals being used to damage property. At the Moscow Higher Technical School (today Bauman Moscow State Technical University), during the spring session of 1921, students refused to take exams in protest against the removal of the democratically elected rector. At the meeting, they also insisted on the restoration of university self-government, as many educational institutions had been deprived of this autonomy in the early years of Soviet power. Some students distributed anonymous anti-Bolshevik appeals and poems, and drew cartoons on the walls of restrooms, demonstrating a high level of civic engagement and a desire to defend their rights.
In 1922, the Politburo adopted a resolution "On Anti-Soviet Groups Among the Intelligentsia," which strictly limited the admission of applicants who did not belong to the proletarian class. This decision was a result of the authorities' desire to control the intellectual elite and prevent the influence of anti-Soviet sentiments among students. Restricting access to higher education for intellectuals from other social strata has had a significant impact on the educational system and the development of science in the country.
Read also:
During the Soviet era, higher education institutions proliferated like mushrooms after a rain, providing mass education. However, over time, many of these institutions began to disappear. This phenomenon can be attributed to several factors, including changes in the political and economic environment, as well as societal needs. Universities, once symbols of progress and educational accessibility, faced the challenges of adapting to new conditions. Some institutions were unable to maintain their relevance and closed, while others transformed to meet modern requirements. These changes reflected not only the crisis of the education system but also the broader sociocultural processes taking place in the country.
Not everyone indulged in rebellious activity. Many remained apolitical, trying to adapt to new conditions while maintaining their old habits and manners within their circles. For example, Sergei Golitsyn noted in his memoirs that the youth of his circle, composed of noblemen who had not emigrated, continued to organize something similar to the old balls. However, instead of waltzes, they gathered for the popular foreign foxtrot, which proletarian morality sharply condemned. This schism also manifested itself in differing attitudes toward faith and Orthodox traditions. In old-regime families, traditions were still observed, while the new regime condemned and banned them, forcing the "former people" to conceal their views. Students from the "former people" group realized that their way of life contradicted the new social norms, and this caused them a constant feeling of fear. They experienced pressure from society, which increased their anxiety and uncertainty about the future. Some proletarian students, who for various reasons did not fit the "ideal" model, were sometimes mistakenly classified as "Zhorzhiks." For example, a worker's faculty student could earn the nickname "white-lined" simply because he wore a tsarist-era student uniform, even though it was too big for him and borrowed, and he had no other clothing. Such cases highlight how stereotypes can influence perceptions and shape false notions about people.
Among young people of bourgeois origin, there were also those who sincerely supported the revolution and the Bolsheviks. For example, one such student, who had become close to the proletariat, volunteered for the front. She became a machine gunner and held a command position, living for several years among the Red Army soldiers and wearing a Red Army uniform. Although she was not proletarian by birth, her connection with the working class was unbreakable.
How students from the "old" and "new" studied together
Proletarians viewed university education as their legitimate and earned right, perceiving it as a symbol of the highest justice. The words from The Internationale—"he who was nothing will become everything"—were not empty words for them. Inspired by the power of the working class and peasants, students from proletarian backgrounds actively resisted any attempts to equate them with representatives of the old regime. As Moskvin wrote, "He is not a student who says: 'Give it.' A proletarian student thunders: 'Give it!'" One of the students studying at the workers' faculty indignantly asked the editors of a student magazine a question about the university admissions process. Proletarian education became a symbol of new opportunities and a desire for equality, reflecting changes in society.
Didn't any of the authors of the regulations consider the need to establish a clear directive according to which workers, peasants, and their children, who passed all the tests, should have the right to unconditional admission to higher education institutions? Other categories of applicants could only occupy the remaining vacancies.
Rabfakovets. For the proletarian composition of the new admissions. Red Students, 1928/1929, No. 18.
This source examines the importance of forming a proletarian composition in new educational institutions. Emphasis is placed on the need to attract students from the working classes to create a more just and equal educational environment. It is emphasized that only by taking into account the interests and needs of the proletariat can real changes be achieved in the education system. Attracting new students from the working class will contribute not only to the expansion of educational opportunities but also to the formation of an active civic position among young people. The article emphasizes the role of education in social mobility and the need for its accessibility for all social classes.
The idea of class purity likely had a rational basis: the fewer students from non-professional backgrounds in universities, the lower the overall level of knowledge of students and the lower the expectations placed on them. This is precisely why it was advantageous for members of the working class to displace students from more affluent backgrounds from universities. In turn, they also experienced significant discontent and hostility.
Sergey Golitsyn shares a story about his sister Maria, who applied for a tuition reduction in her first year of university. After the revolution, tuition and exam fees were temporarily abolished, but these measures were soon reinstated. In the Golitsyn family, the father was the only working person, and there were many dependents. The application for a tuition reduction was reviewed by a committee of course activists, and at the beginning of its consideration, Maria's application was granted. This story highlights the importance of supporting students from large families in conditions of economic instability.
It is worth clarifying that the practice of submitting such applications was quite common. Along with Maria Golitsyn, other of her classmates also submitted similar applications. Former noblemen found it extremely difficult to find work in conditions of high unemployment. Moreover, they faced additional difficulties due to the negative reputation associated with their origin. For a time, the families survived by selling off their remaining household items, but overall, they were barely able to make ends meet. Therefore, tuition fees became a significant financial burden for such families.
A few days later, an activist second-year student entered the classroom and caused a scandal: "You are demonstrating class unconsciousness. You have all sorts of princes and counts, and you are lowering their tuition."
The excuse that Maria and Sergei Golitsyn's father did not possess significant property and worked in various jobs throughout his life, with his only "sin" being his princely title, did not lead to the desired results. The fee reduction benefit was revoked, highlighting the strict financial commitment requirements in this situation.
In 1929, a group of 16 students representing "foreign" classes responded to criticism from "new" students. They wrote an anonymous letter addressed to a worker's faculty member outlining their position and arguments. This incident became a significant event, reflecting the tensions between different social groups in the educational environment of the time. Student debates and conflicts within educational institutions often raised important questions about class inequality and access to education, which remains relevant in modern society.
If bourgeois England has no concerns about opening higher education institutions to talented workers, then why don't you consider creating a special university for gifted foreigners? Even from a narrow class perspective, this would be a reasonable step. You could attract the creative minds you so desperately need, which the proletariat cannot provide.
Class struggle in higher education and the tasks of the Komsomol are important aspects that require deep analysis and understanding. In a changing society, higher education is becoming an arena of class contradictions, where the interests of various social groups clash. The Komsomol, as a youth organization, plays a key role in this process, striving to defend the interests of workers and promote the ideas of socialism.
The importance of the Komsomol's active participation in the life of higher education institutions is undeniable. It contributes to the formation of students' consciousness, calling on them to take an active position in the class struggle. The tasks facing the Komsomol include not only the organization of the educational process but also the development of active citizens prepared for changes in society.
Thus, the interaction between the Komsomol and higher education is an important element in the struggle for social justice and equality. Understanding these processes allows us to better appreciate the role of youth in shaping the country's future.
Students from non-proletarian backgrounds sometimes boycotted local communists, refusing to communicate with them or even shake their hands. Boris Lossky, son of the philosopher Nikolai Lossky, recalled heated debates between proletarian students and the so-called "white linings". At the end of these meetings, different songs were played: on one side, the "Internationale", on the other, the "Down with the Slave Song", as well as the well-known "Gaudeamus". The tension between the "old regime" Students and workers' faculty students, who also studied at universities and often occupied the best lecture halls, led to real conflicts and brawls.
By the mid-1920s, as Lossky noted, the idea of "Slave Song" and Gaudeamus had lost its relevance. At this time, the GPU was already actively suppressing any attempts at discontent and rebellion at universities, which made it impossible to discuss such issues. The situation in educational institutions became extremely harsh, and fear of repression cooled the initiatives of students and faculty.
Large-scale "purges" of students took place at higher education institutions in 1922, 1924, 1925, and 1929. The main reason for this was the financial burden that the state could not bear, supporting a large number of students. Officially, the weakest students were to be expelled, but in practice, those with the "wrong" background were expelled from universities. The expulsion process was accompanied by humiliating interrogations, which were carried out on anyone whose profile aroused suspicion. These events became an important part of the history of education in the country and reflected the complex social and political realities of that time.
Prince Golitsyn and his sisters also became involved in this process. He recalled with irony how their classmate Andrei Durnovo, who was a relative of the minister, hid this fact. After the interrogation, he emerged with a smile and said: "Nothing serious, they only asked me to take off my foreign tie, and they didn't even mention the minister."
Not everyone was as lucky as Andrei Durnovo. The intercession of professors, which some students resorted to, most often brought no results. Sergei's older sister, Sofia Golitsyna, was expelled from the university in the first wave of purges. Along with other expelled girls from the "former" group, she went around to the professors and collected numerous letters of praise, but this had no effect on her fate. During this time, the professorial ranks were also being purged, making the situation even more difficult for students trying to regain their positions at the institution.
Read also:
Institutes of the Red Professors: History of Creation and Closure
The Institutes of the Red Professors were founded at the beginning In the 1920s, institutes of the Red Professors were established in Soviet Russia to train qualified specialists for the new education system. These institutions played a key role in shaping the staff of Soviet universities and the educational system as a whole. Amid the post-revolutionary chaos and the need for new approaches to education, the Red Professors' Institutes became centers of scientific thought and pedagogical practice. The process of opening these institutes began in 1921, when the need arose to retrain teachers and create new educational programs. These institutes emphasized Marxist ideology and the social sciences, which met the demands of the time. They trained not only future teachers but also researchers who later made significant contributions to the development of Soviet science and education. However, over time, due to changes in the political situation and educational policy, the Red Professors' Institutes began to lose their relevance. In the late 1930s, under the influence of Stalin's repressions and tightened controls over scientific activity, many of these institutions were closed or transformed. As a result, many qualified specialists found themselves unemployed, and the education system experienced a shortage of trained personnel.
The closure of the Red Professorship Institutes became a symbol of changes in the Soviet educational system, where other approaches and ideologies came to the fore. This event reflected not only the political realities of the time but also significant changes in approaches to education and scientific research in the USSR. The history of the Red Professorship Institutes serves as an important lesson about how political and social factors can influence the education system and the training of personnel.
Sergei Golitsyn studied for only two years at the Higher State Literary Courses (VGLC), which opened in 1925. This educational institution attracted many young people from "former" families, but in 1929 the decision was made to close it. The liquidation of the VGLC affected not only students from the upper classes but also proletarian students, who were also left without the opportunity to continue their education. This decision reflected growing tensions in society and changes in educational policy at the time.
The exact scale of expulsions from universities in the country remains unknown. However, after the 1922 reform, for example, 7 of the 97 universities inspected ceased to exist. Students expelled during these events lost the opportunity to pursue higher education. Punishment could be meted out even for critical statements about the new order made in private conversation, for example, for dissatisfaction with the introduction of the Dalton Plan method into the educational process at universities.
Communist students often initiated "purges," using this opportunity to deal with personal enemies. The expulsion of representatives of the "former people" was accompanied by mass demonstrations organized by proletarian youth. These events highlighted not only the students' political activism but also their desire to assert their ideals in society, creating an atmosphere of tension and conflict. Expelled students actively exercised their right to appeal their expulsion, and some succeeded in having their students reinstated. They also organized into groups. At major universities, collectives of expelled students were formed, complete with elected representatives, financial funds, and other attributes. In Moscow, two thousand people joined such an organization. However, its activities were soon terminated, and its leadership was arrested. Despite their differences, there were common threads uniting students from various groups in the 1920s. Both "muzhiks" and "zhorzhiks" faced food shortages and lived in extremely poor living conditions. Furthermore, they were forced to collaborate during their studies. This was necessitated by the introduction of the team-laboratory method of work, which united students into groups for joint practical activities while simultaneously reducing the number of lectures. Students readily exchanged notes, which facilitated their interaction and collaboration.
Sergey Golitsyn recalled an interesting episode from his life. One day, a good friend from their circle drew an image of an angel, reminiscent of the Annunciation icon, in his notebook with lecture notes. His classmate Danilov often used these notes. After this event, interesting changes occurred in their communication and perception of the educational process.
I paid no attention to this drawing and returned the notebook to Danilov on Saturday. On Monday, when returning the notebook, he coolly pointed to the drawing. This reminded me of the importance of paying attention to details, because even the most inconspicuous things can have significance. The drawing became a symbol of the omission and misunderstanding that we often ignore in everyday life.
Soviet students should not forget that we will never reject our heritage. It is important to remember that connections to the past shape our future and enrich the education of modern students. Preserving historical memory and respect for traditions play a key role in shaping the personalities and values of young people. Students must understand the importance of studying history to better understand their roots and avoid the mistakes of the past.
I retreated in panic, flushed with fear, tore out that ill-fated sheet of paper and flushed it down the toilet. The following Saturday, Danilov, as always, took the notebook from me and continued to do so until the end of the school year.
Please revise the text, preserving the main theme. Optimize it for search engines and supplement the content if necessary. Avoid using emoticons and unnecessary characters. Do not divide the text into paragraphs. Please use only plain text.
Source: Golitsyn S. Notes of a Survivor: A Novel.
Gradually, the "muzhiks" and "Zhorzhiks" began to learn to tolerate each other, which led to the interpenetration of the two cultural worlds. Students from proletarian backgrounds began to adopt intellectual manners and sought to remain in the city after completing their studies. Meanwhile, students from non-proletarian families sought to emigrate to the provinces, seeking to conceal their "foreign origins." This process contributed to a shift in the social structure: former representatives of the "upper" and "lower" classes exchanged places. As a result of this interaction, not only personalities but also social stereotypes were transformed, which created new opportunities for social development.
In the 1920s, students were characterized by striking contrasts, such as "zhorzhiki" and "muzhiki." However, not all students were strictly classified. A significant portion of the student body belonged to an intermediate group, consisting of the children of employees, doctors, and engineers. These young people were neither rude nor excessively mannered. They had a good, and sometimes quite decent, school education and sincerely believed in the ideas of communism. Their interactions with "zhorzhiki" and "muzhiki" created a bridge between these two extremes, facilitating the exchange of opinions and views. This interaction formed a unique student environment where different social and cultural strata intersected.
Vera Florenskaya, a native of Krasnoyarsk, was the daughter of an agronomist and the granddaughter of a priest. Although the children of priests were persecuted, their grandchildren enjoyed more privileges, especially if their parents held "suitable" positions. Vera's great-grandfather was descended from serfs, yet she was able to receive a quality education, graduating from the local gymnasium. Her childhood friend and future husband was Leonid Ginzburg, who came from a family of a doctor and a nurse. He also attended the gymnasium and was admitted despite the quotas for Jews at the time, thanks to an acquaintance. As a teenager, Leonid became interested in Marxism, like many young people of the early 20th century, and sought to interest Vera in this ideology. In 1918, they both entered Tomsk University, and later, in the early 1920s, they transferred to Moscow University. Leonid Ginzburg later became a teacher, continuing his career in education. Vera Florenskaya was not a well-known figure, but her memoirs are interesting as a testimony to the era. She remembers her student years as filled with confusion over the schedule and curriculum, constant financial difficulties, and the search for ways to earn extra money. The teachers also struggled with funding and were just as confused as the students. Her memoirs contain numerous episodes that illustrate the atmosphere of that time.
My friend and I were having a hard time in our "Economics in Transition" class. We studied the material diligently, but when it came time to take the exam, we had to spend weeks searching for a teacher to help us take it. When we finally met, he asked, "Have you read it?" We answered affirmatively. Then he clarified, "Did you understand?" We answered hesitantly, "We did." The teacher seemed displeased and, saying, "I read it and didn't understand anything," simply asked for our grade books. This case vividly illustrates the difficulties students face when studying complex topics in economics.
Vera Florenskaya didn't classify her classmates into types and only briefly mentioned her acquaintances, such as a friend from a family of former gold miners who remained loyal to the Soviet regime, and another friend who worked as a pastry chef's assistant before the revolution, then served in the Red Army and subsequently joined the GPU. This young man, without a high school education, managed to graduate from law school, where he was sent to observe the mood of the students. Both of these friends didn't surprise Vera and her fiancé, Leonid, reflecting the nature of the times and the social realities of that era.
With each new intake of "Zhorzhiks," the number of participants dwindled, and the two camps increasingly merged. By the 1930s, the differences between them had virtually disappeared.
The Methodologist Profession from Scratch to PRO
You will improve your skills in developing curricula for online and offline courses. Master modern teaching practices, structure your experience, and become a more sought-after specialist.
Find out more