Faculty Database History Arts & Sciences Duke University |
||
HOME > Arts & Sciences > History > Faculty | Search Help Login |
| Publications of Anna Krylova :chronological combined listing:%% 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}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0424.12209}, 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}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ahr/121.5.1567}, 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}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071022.2017.1327640}, 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}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18763324-04303002}, 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}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/S086956870006376-4}, 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/}, 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}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ahr/rhad230}, 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}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18763324-04303002}, 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/}, 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} } | |
Duke University * Arts & Sciences * History * Faculty * Staff * Grad * Reload * Login |