Authors

Discussion

This paper examines the divergent responses of Western observers to Soviet ‘revolutionary art’ in the 1920s, when the country witnessed acute debates over proletarian aesthetics that ultimately led to the decline of the avant-garde project. The study focuses on Western commentators who debated the artistic merit and ideological implications of the cultural transformation caused by the October Revolution. Drawing on newspaper reports, exhibition reviews, art criticism, and travelogues, the paper analyses how Western observers navigated between aesthetic judgement and political positioning when confronting Soviet visual culture.

From the beginning of cultural contacts with Soviet Russia, the art and culture of the new state were perceived through the prism of ideological commitments and provoked sharply opposed evaluations: whilst some celebrated Soviet experimental art and state support for the newest artistic movements, others provided scathing assessments of ‘revolutionary-proletarian art’ as ‘inartistic kitsch of the worst sort’ and noted the dire material conditions of artists deprived of support from private collectors. A separate category comprises left-wing Western artists who themselves struggled to find the way towards creating genuinely ‘revolutionary art,’ and therefore oscillated between implementing modernist tendencies and adapting to the dominant narrative and genre-painting conventions in Soviet art.

At the same time, the efforts of Soviet cultural diplomacy were largely directed towards dismantling Western myths (propagated in part by the émigré press) about Bolshevik barbarism. This was facilitated both by presentations of Soviet art at international exhibitions and by showcase tours organised for foreigners visiting the country, demonstrating Soviet power's efforts to preserve cultural heritage and raise the cultural level of the population.

Focusing on the testimonies of external witnesses to the cultural and artistic processes occurring in Soviet Russia, as well as to the efforts of Soviet cultural diplomacy during this period, allows us today to produce a more accurate mapping of the balance of forces between different artistic groupings and cultural actors within the country. This includes challenging prevailing understandings of the role and significance of the ‘revolutionary avant-garde’ as either a critical or affirmative phenomenon in its attitude towards the post-revolutionary Soviet state.

This paper examines how factors including political sympathy, prefigured expectations and aesthetic preferences, and exposure to different artistic movements shaped Western interpretations. By analysing these competing narratives, the paper illuminates how Western observers constructed their understanding of Soviet culture through their own ideological and aesthetic frameworks, contributing to broader debates about the relationship between art, politics, and revolution in interwar Europe.