Publications of Anna Krylova
%% Books
@book{fds241681,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {Soviet Women in Combat: A History of Violence on the Eastern
Front (Cambridge University Press)},
Year = {2010},
Key = {fds241681}
}
%% Journal Articles
@article{fds220278,
Author = {A. Krylova},
Title = {“Soviet Modernity: Stephen Kotkin and The Bolshevik
Predicament"},
Journal = {Contemporary European History},
Year = {2014},
Month = {May},
Key = {fds220278}
}
@article{fds220279,
Author = {A. Krylova},
Title = {“Soviet Modernity: Stephen Kotkin and The Bolshevik
Predicament”},
Journal = {Contemporary European History},
Year = {2014},
Month = {May},
Key = {fds220279}
}
%% Papers Published
@article{fds241684,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {Beyond the Spontaneity-Consciousness Paradigm: “Class
Instinct” as a Promising Category of Historical
Analysis},
Journal = {Slavic Review},
Volume = {62},
Number = {1},
Pages = {1-23},
Publisher = {Cambridge University Press (CUP)},
Year = {2003},
Month = {Spring},
ISSN = {0037-6779},
url = {http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000181413900001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=47d3190e77e5a3a53558812f597b0b92},
Abstract = {<jats:p>Anna Krylova questions whether the
spontaneity-consciousness paradigm, the standard
interpretive approach toward Bolshevik thought in the field
of Soviet studies, offers an exhaustive account of Bolshevik
discourse. To do that she examines the centrality of V I.
Lenin's<jats:italic>What Is to Be Done?</jats:italic>(1902)
in Bolshevik thought and points to the 1905 revolution as
the formative event in the Bolshevik conception of the
worker. Krylova introduces an overlooked Bolshevik notion of
“class instinct”<jats:italic>(klassovyiinstinkt,
klassovoe chut'ie)</jats:italic>and argues that the notion
of “class instinct” centrally informed the Bolshevik
vision of the worker, structuring her article as a dialogue
between scholars of Soviet history and their historical
subjects. In the conclusion, she suggests the consequences
that such a broadened notion of the Bolshevik conception of
proletarian identity—beyond the spontaneity-consciousness
paradigm—has for interpretations of Bolshevik and
Stalinist culture. In “A Paradigm Lost?” his response to
Krylova's essay, Reginald E. Zelnik welcomes Krylova's
“class instinct” thesis as a fresh enrichment of and
supplement to the spontaneity-consciousness paradigm, but,
he argues, if we place this language in its early historical
context, we cannot avoid the conclusion that with or without
the introduction of “instinct,” Lenin and the Bolsheviks
still had to face the same kind of contradictions in their
conceptualization of the role of workers in the
revolutionary movement. The revolutionary value of
particular consciousness or particular instinct still had to
be judged in accordance with an external point of reference,
the nature of which remained and remains elusive. Igal
Halfin, in his response, “Between Instinct and Mind: The
Bolshevik View of the Proletarian Self,” argues that the
Bolshevik notion of the self indeed deserves careful
scrutiny. Focusing on how the official Soviet language
characterized the interaction between workers’ bodies and
workers’ souls, Halfin argues that the synthesis of the
affective and the cerebral was key to this construction of
the New Man in the 1920s and 1930s.</jats:p>},
Doi = {10.2307/3090463},
Key = {fds241684}
}
@article{fds318226,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {Gender binary and the limits of poststructuralist
method},
Journal = {Gender and History},
Volume = {28},
Number = {2},
Pages = {307-323},
Publisher = {WILEY},
Year = {2016},
Month = {August},
Abstract = {In contemporary gender history, the story about the making
of the gender category is inseparable from the concept of
‘gender binary’. It at once signifies a research agenda
and constitutes a persistent problem pervading feminist
analysis itself. On the one hand, it points to the massive
historical record of persistent inequality between the
sexes. On the other hand, the concept of ‘gender binary’
undergirds gender history’s analytics, which empowers
historians to pursue, expose and deconstruct the binary
organisation of gendered – woman/man – identities as
well as social relations and discursive formations that
produce them. In both capacities, the concept carries a rich
repertoire of connotations, which informs and influences the
gender category: those of radical distinction, opposition,
mutually exclusive and exhaustive differentiation,
hierarchy, domination, oppression – in all their myriad
historical forms. As a result, it captures the entanglement
of gender – in theory, an open-ended category – in
binary, that is, negatively and positively determined
connotations of feminine and masculine and, consequently, in
a particular, historical form of heterosexual subjectivity,
the one structured like a binary system. The entanglement of
gender history’s foundational category – gender – in
the binary systems of assigning difference has had many
critics. What has been left unexamined however and what
gives this article its focus is the poverty of gender as a
binary device to analyse those gendered identities that
constitute heterosexual relations but do not fit the binary
matrix. The goal in this article is to enable the conditions
for the continuous development – not abandonment – of
the gender category and our theoretical framework. To do
that, I explore how the gender category became a binary
category, tightly identified with connotations of asymmetry
and hierarchy, by undertaking a deconstructive rereading of
a foundational work by one of the discipline’s most
influential poststructuralist theorists – Joan Scott. I
conclude by arguing that in order to address the problem of
gendered, heterosexual identities that do not fit the binary
matrix we need to revisit the concept of dichotomy and
differentiate it from binary connotations of difference
found in heteronormative gender systems.},
Doi = {10.1111/1468-0424.12209},
Key = {fds318226}
}
@article{fds325842,
Author = {Goswami, M and Hecht, G and Khalid, A and Krylova, A and Thompson, EF and Zatlin, JR and Zimmerman, A},
Title = {History after the end of history: Reconceptualizing the
twentieth century},
Journal = {American Historical Review},
Volume = {121},
Number = {5},
Pages = {1567-1607},
Publisher = {Oxford University Press (OUP)},
Year = {2016},
Month = {December},
Doi = {10.1093/ahr/121.5.1567},
Key = {fds325842}
}
@article{fds241678,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {Identity, Agency, and the First Soviet Generation},
Pages = {101-121},
Booktitle = {Generations in 20th Century Europe},
Publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan},
Editor = {Lovell, S},
Year = {2007},
Key = {fds241678}
}
@article{fds327587,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {Imagining socialism in the soviet century},
Journal = {Social History},
Volume = {42},
Number = {3},
Pages = {315-341},
Publisher = {Informa UK Limited},
Year = {2017},
Month = {July},
Abstract = {Much of the current conversation about social justice,
economic responsibility and individual self-realization is
informed by an explicit or implicit comparison between
capitalist and socialist modernities. The Soviet Union’s
variety of socialism understandably serves as a critical
master referent in this conversation. In this regard, a
dominant historical narrative that ties the history of
Soviet socialism to the Bolshevik origins imposes serious
limitation to available depictions of socialism and
histories of the twentieth century. This article turns the
Bolshevik fundamentals assigned to the Soviet project into a
problem of historical analysis and argues that the Soviet
experience has more than one normative vision of socialism
to offer. The goal is to foreground the divergence of
normative conceptions of the socialist society and
individual by historicizing the two principal and presently
closely identified ideological-educational undertakings:
those of the New Man and the ‘New Soviet Person’. By
tracing the histories of the two projects, the article shows
how the collectivist ethos of the Bolshevism of the
1910–1920s that rejected the ontological differentiation
between the individual and his or her social milieu failed
to retain its ideological, institutional, and cultural
currency even during the 1930s, not to mention throughout
the Soviet period.},
Doi = {10.1080/03071022.2017.1327640},
Key = {fds327587}
}
@article{fds241675,
Author = {Kylova, A},
Title = {In Their Own Words? Autobiographies of Women Writers,
1930-1946},
Pages = {243-276},
Booktitle = {A History of Women's Writing in Russia},
Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
Editor = {Barker, A and Gheith, J},
Year = {2002},
Key = {fds241675}
}
@article{fds335513,
Author = {Krylova, A and Osokina, E},
Title = {Introduction: The Economic Turn and Modern Russian
History},
Journal = {Soviet and Post Soviet Review},
Volume = {43},
Number = {3},
Pages = {265-270},
Publisher = {BRILL},
Year = {2016},
Month = {January},
Doi = {10.1163/18763324-04303002},
Key = {fds335513}
}
@article{fds359466,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {Legacies of the Cold War and the future of gender in
feminist histories of socialism},
Pages = {41-51},
Booktitle = {The Routledge Handbook of Gender in Central-Eastern Europe
and Eurasia},
Year = {2021},
Month = {July},
ISBN = {9781138347755},
Key = {fds359466}
}
@article{fds241672,
Author = {Kylova, A},
Title = {Revoliutsionnyi diskurs},
Booktitle = {Oktiabr’ 1917: Smysl I znachenie},
Publisher = {Moscow: Gorbachev-Fond},
Editor = {Loginov, VT},
Year = {1998},
Key = {fds241672}
}
@article{fds241680,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {Soviet Modernity: Stephen Kotkin and The Bolshevik
Predicament},
Journal = {Contemporary European History},
Volume = {23},
Pages = {167-192},
Year = {2014},
Month = {May},
Key = {fds241680}
}
@article{fds348380,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {Soviet sociality and the problem of historical
reconstruction. Thinking together with elena
zubkova},
Journal = {Rossiiskaia Istoria},
Volume = {2019},
Number = {5},
Pages = {31-34},
Year = {2019},
Month = {September},
Doi = {10.31857/S086956870006376-4},
Key = {fds348380}
}
@article{fds241683,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {Stalinist Identity from the Viewpoint of Gender: Rearing a
Generation of Professionally Violent Women Soldiers in 1930s
Stalinist Russia},
Journal = {Gender and History},
Volume = {16},
Number = {3},
Pages = {626-653},
Publisher = {WILEY},
Year = {2004},
Month = {November},
url = {http://www.duke.edu/%20krylova/Stalinist_Identity_from_the_Viewpoint_of_Gender_2004.pdf},
Abstract = {Over the course of the Great Patriotic War, 1941-1945, over
800,000 Soviet women volunteered to the front and served in
the field army. Among them were thousands of snipers,
riflewomen, machine-gunners and mortar women. Thousands of
women were trained to serve as commanders and commissars of
rifle, machine-gun and mortar subdivisions. Women also
mastered fighter planes, dive bombers and night bombers as
well as light and heavy tanks. I pursue three questions in
the article: how did this women's entitlement to fighting
become thinkable in the first place, acceptable in the
second, and thirdly, realisable in Soviet society? I argue
that the conceivability of women's compatibility with
combat, war and violence was a product of the radical
undoing of traditional gender differences that Stalinist
society underwent in the 1930s. By the late 1930s, combat
duty in wartime became an acknowledged option for women in
Stalinist political culture. The construction of alternative
gender personalities enjoyed both public articulation in
press and military expert approval. The alternative
femininity encompassed and redefined the traditionally
incompatible qualities: maternal love and military violence,
feminine charm. © Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
2004.},
Doi = {10.1111/j.0953-5233.2004.00359.x},
Key = {fds241683}
}
@article{fds241671,
Author = {Kylova, A},
Title = {Teaching Cultural History: Russian and Soviet Literature as
Historical Documents},
Booktitle = {Urgent Problems of Teaching Russian History in Russian and
American Universities},
Publisher = {Samara State University},
Editor = {Kabytov, P},
Year = {1998},
Key = {fds241671}
}
@article{fds371702,
Author = {Krylova, AY and Sewell, W and Walkowitz, J and Eley, G and Zimmerman, A and Tejada, V},
Title = {The Agency Dilemma},
Journal = {American Historical Review},
Volume = {128},
Number = {2},
Pages = {883-937},
Year = {2023},
Month = {June},
Doi = {10.1093/ahr/rhad230},
Key = {fds371702}
}
@article{fds318227,
Title = {The Economic Turn and Modern Russian History},
Journal = {Soviet and Post-Soviet Review},
Volume = {43},
Number = {3},
Pages = {265-270},
Publisher = {Brill Academic Publishers},
Editor = {Krylova, A and Osokina, E},
Year = {2016},
Doi = {10.1163/18763324-04303002},
Key = {fds318227}
}
@article{fds241685,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {The Tenacious Liberal Subject in Soviet Studies},
Journal = {Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian
History},
Volume = {1},
Number = {Winter 2000},
Pages = {119-146},
Year = {2000},
Month = {Winter},
url = {http://www.duke.edu/%20krylova/The_Tenacious_Liberal_Subject_in_Soviet_Studies_2000.pdf},
Key = {fds241685}
}
@article{fds241677,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {’Dancing on the Graves of the Dead’ or Building a World
War II Memorial in Post-Soviet Russia},
Pages = {83-102},
Booktitle = {Memory and The Impact of Political Transformation in Public
Space},
Publisher = {Duke University Press},
Editor = {Walkowitz, DJ and Knauer, LM},
Year = {2004},
Key = {fds241677}
}
@article{fds241686,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {’Healers of Wounded Souls’: The Crisis of Private Life
in Soviet Literature and Society, 1944-46},
Journal = {Journal of Modern History},
Volume = {73},
Number = {2},
Pages = {307-331},
Publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
Year = {2001},
Month = {June},
ISSN = {0022-2801},
url = {http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000169240900003&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=47d3190e77e5a3a53558812f597b0b92},
Doi = {10.1086/321026},
Key = {fds241686}
}
@article{fds241673,
Author = {Kylova, A},
Title = {’Saying Lenin and Meaning Party’: Subversion and
Laughter in Late Soviet Society},
Pages = {243-265},
Booktitle = {Consuming Russia: Popular Culture, Sex and Society since
Gorbachev},
Publisher = {Duke University Press},
Editor = {Barker, A and Ramet, S},
Year = {1998},
Key = {fds241673}
}
@article{fds241674,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {’Ved ne mozhesh’ ty vechno zhit’ moeii zhizniiu:’
Lichnow I lichnost’ v predvoennoi sovetskoi literature I
obshchestve},
Booktitle = {Sotsialisticheskii Kanon},
Publisher = {St. Petersburg: Akademicheskii proekt},
Editor = {Giunter, H and Dobrenko, E},
Year = {2000},
Key = {fds241674}
}
@article{fds241679,
Author = {Krylova, A},
Title = {“Neither Erased nor Remembered: Soviet “Women
Combatants” and Cultural Strategies of Forgetting In
Soviet Russia, 1940s-1980s"},
Pages = {83-101},
Booktitle = {Histories of the Aftermath: The European Postwar in
Comparative Perspective},
Publisher = {Berghahn Books},
Editor = {Biess, F and Moeller, RG},
Year = {2010},
Key = {fds241679}
}