Circus

I think that the two "Socialist Realist" films that we have seen thus far were characterized by an emphatic idealism. All of the Soviet characters in the movies embodied- what the Soviet government must have felt - the ideal way that communist citizens should act. For example, the Soviet government undoubtedly would have ideally liked all of their citizens to have a strong sense of nationalism and go out and march in parades glorifying the Soviet Union just as the members of the circus did in the latter of the two movies. Both movies also contained characters that had qualities that the Soviet Union wished make people believe that all Russians have. In Chapaev, the Bolshevik characters were brave, friendly, and humane. Circus also portrayed all of the Soviet characters as being accepting, honest, and funny. Basically, both films were heavily laced with propaganda that portrayed the Soviet Union as a land of people that observed brotherhood and acceptance.

The main point of Circus was to portray the Soviet Union as a country of diverse people that were accepting of all people. This was perhaps best conveyed toward the end of the movie when people in the crowd were passing the baby around and singing to him. There were people of all different ethnicities and ages that sang the baby a lullaby and held him in their arms. Two of the main characters of the movie did not have a chance to hold the baby because they were too busy fulfilling the "Socialist Realist" ideal of brotherhood. Raya and Skamejkin did not know Marion Dixon very well but they were willing to be part of a plot to unite her with Petrovich that pitted them in a struggled against Von Kneishitz. Raya and Skamejkin were the embodiment of brotherhood in this film because they helped a fellow human being simply to help her.

Movies under the restrictions of "Socialist Realism" were seemingly limited by being forced to conform to Soviet ideology. Directors had to create characters that had the ideal Soviet traits and make films that were riddled with nationalistic messages. I found irony in the fact that around this time Russians were just beginning to see film as an artform and yet directors were limited in their artistic creativity by the Soviet Union. According to The Film Factory, Lenin saw cinema as an artform but also as a vital way to generate propaganda. Stalin obviously shared Lenin's sentiments but went to the extreme to make sure that propaganda was heavily included. I would place both Circus and Chapaev near the propaganda corner of the triangle.

Clearly, the depiction of Americans and Germans in Circus did not do them justice. In my opinion, not all Americans and Germans are racist and some Russians are. Circus portrayed the Germans and Americans (excluding Marion Dixon) as having negative traits while Russians were depicted as having positive traits. This was probably because the United States and Germany were the countries that the Soviet government felt most threatened by. After all, American movies were popular everywhere by this time and America was seen as the land of the free and the land of acceptance. The Soviet government did not want citizens to have the desire for democracy any more than they wanted them to have the wish to live under a facist government. This was probably why a German was the villain of the movie. By 1936, the Soviet government was already seemingly worried about the Nazi's in Germany. Englishmen or Frenchman were not included in the movie because they were not viewed as a threat to communism.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of Circus to me was the "Charlie Chaplin esque" character that accompanied Von Kneishitz. He had no speaking lines in the entire movie. I was not sure if he was actually Charlie Chaplin but I am willing to bet that he was not. Interestingly, Charlie Chaplin made a film called The Circus in 1928. I would be interested to know if Alexandrov had seen this movie and had been a fan of Charlie Chaplin. He clearly had a sense of humor as evidenced by the funny jokes that made this comedy entertaining to watch. However, I could not tell whether he was paying tribute to Charlie Chaplin or trying to ridicule him.