title: Response to Roundtable Comments
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Neuberger, J.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2021-06-07T16:13:23Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2021-06-07T16:13:23Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2021-03
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Neuberger J. ‘Response to Roundtable Comments’, Modern History of Russia, vol. 11, no. 1, 2021, pp. 252–259.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu24.2021.120
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/29234
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: In her response, Neuberger elaborates and extends a few of her key arguments as discussed by Brandenberger,
  Kleiman, Petrone, Platt, and Tsivian. She focuses on questions involving Eisenstein’s exceptionality,
  the general reception of Ivan the Terrible, Stalin’s response to the film and its homoeroticism, and fundamental
  questions about Eisenstein’s interpretation of Ivan and his reign, its application to the present and to all rulers.
  She clarifies fundamental questions about Eisenstein’s conception of dialectics, and shows his commitment to
  dialectics as something more than more than binary conflict. Eisenstein not only saw all phenomena as “unities
  of opposites”, but contrasted the dialectical contradictory with a unitary definitive, giving us neither a simpler
  dualism nor a permanent state of contradiction. The categorical doesn’t cancel out the contested (or vice versa):
  together the categorical and the contested create another level of complexity, making it possible to see Ivan the
  Terrible as a film that repeatedly poses questions about power, violence, and human perception, and a film that is
  a radical critique of Stalinism and Soviet ideology. The author underlines, that in This Thing of Darkness she tried
  to show that the search for “meaning” in Eisenstein (and in my reading of Eisenstein) was no simple path toward
  a definitive truth, but is something like the way we experience films: seeing, hearing, intuiting, sensing, learning,
  feeling, wondering, learning a little more, and eventually thinking through what we have seen and experienced in
  order to make it meaningful for us.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Modern History of Russia;Volume 11; Issue 1
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Eisenstein
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Ivan the Terrible
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Stalin
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: cinema
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Soviet
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: power
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: homoeroticism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: reception
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: dialectics
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Response to Roundtable Comments
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 252-259.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/29234/1/252-259.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 1,54 MB