Abstract
Abstract Aleksandr Bogdanov’s theory of culture has been outlined in a number of key works on his life and work. See Sochor (1998); Mally (1990); White (2019b). The purpose of the present article is to situate his ideas on the social function of the arts within the framework of his theory of culture. I point out that, whereas in his general theory of social consciousness Bogdanov acknowledged his indebtedness to Marx, he considered that in respect of the arts he had improved on Marx, who had viewed the arts as a mere “embellishment of life”. I argue that for Bogdanov, “proletarian culture” was not the working class “mentalité” of his time, but a state of mind that with the assistance of his brainchild, the Proletarian Cultural-Educational Organization, would evolve in the direction of a collectivist, “all-human”, culture. I explain that the didacticism of this approach antagonized a number of writers of proletarian origin. This article is based on works by Bogdanov, few of which have been re-published in post-Soviet Russia and most of which are not available in other languages. It will enable culturologists and other scholars to include Bogdanov in the history of the sociology of the arts, an exercise that has hitherto been impeded by Soviet censorship of his works, under-tuition of the Russian language, and a scarcity of relevant translations.
Highlights
Writing on the relationship between thinking and economic activity, Friedrich Engels, in a letter to Joseph Bloch of 1890, pointed out that Marx’s understanding of this relationship was not to be understood as a form of uni-directional determinism
I point out that, whereas in his general theory of social consciousness Bogdanov acknowledged his indebtedness to Marx, he considered that in respect of the arts he had improved on Marx, who had viewed the arts as a mere “embellishment of life”
When it came to the social function of the arts he disagreed with Marx, who, he alleged, had viewed art as a mere “embellishment of life”
Summary
It was in 1906 that Bogdanov for the first time outlined his understanding of the progression of social formations – from “authoritarian”, through “individualistic”, to “collectivist”, in the 7th edition of his Short Course on Economic Science (Bogdanov 1906). There followed a process of spontaneous regulation (regulirovanie) by society, through the explicit, conscious criticism of the work of art from a class point of view.24 Bogdanov made this point concisely in his speech to the First All-Russian Conference of the Proletkult on 20 September 1918: “The artistic talent is individual, but creation is a social phenomenon: it emerges out of the collective and returns to the collective, serving its vital purposes.”. Bogdanov made this point concisely in his speech to the First All-Russian Conference of the Proletkult on 20 September 1918: “The artistic talent is individual, but creation is a social phenomenon: it emerges out of the collective and returns to the collective, serving its vital purposes.”25 Bogdanov insisted that he was not merely applying Darwin’s theory of natural selection to the social sphere. He tells us, should not be prescriptive, but this did not meant that the critic should be a mere reporter: the critic should “monitor (reguliruet) the development of art”, and give warning whenever “young art” succumbed to “alien influences”.31 What criteria did Bogdanov wish to be applied in the course of “tektological selection”? Did he think that “regulation” would be carried out by proletarians themselves, or by others on their behalf?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
