The nature of travel and tourism in Stalin’s Russia presents modern historians with a unique and utterly ambiguous concept. Travel and tourism under the Soviet emerged as a strictly regimented pursuit, which in line with the rest of Stalin’s Russia, came under heavy scrutiny and strict control, though it was strongly encouraged from the 1920s onwards and became officially regarded as a type of sport in 1949. The seemingly simple practices of leisure and travel under the Stalinist model presents readers with a paradox; as a system based on the labor theory of value, the USSR emphasized production as the foundation of wealth, personal worth, and the path to a society of abundance for all. However, the state began to encourage the practice of travel and tourism for its workers in particular which were complemented by the new advances leading to an eight-hour workday, a weekly day off from work, and an annual vacation that ‘constituted the triad of restorative and healthful rest opportunities in the emerging Soviet system of the 1920s and 1930s’. From numerous sources it is evident that both travel and tourism had become institutionalised under the Soviet planning methods and were heavily controlled to the extent that tourists and travellers were distinctively limited up to the very minimal aspects of their travel itineraries. With travel being largely confined to within the Soviet itself and an ever-growing hostility to all things foreign, travel and tourism under Stalin reflected a ritualistic practice that encouraged both physical and mental exertion in groups; to imbue the Soviet travellers with greater experiences and to reinforce Soviet ‘patriotic identity’ as opposed to the sort of individualism that allegedly flo... ... middle of paper ... ...e Soviet Union: The conflict between Public and Private decision-making in a planned economy (London, 1984). 14. Rappaport, Helen, Joseph Stalin: a biographical companion (California, 2000). 15. Shaw, Denis J. B., ‘Achievements and Problems in Soviet recreational planning’, in J. Brine, M. Perrie and A. Sutton (eds.), Home, School and Leisure in the Soviet Union (London, 1980), pp.195-214. 16. Tucker, Robert C., Stalin in Power: The Revolution from Above 1928-1941 (New York, 1992). 17. Urry, John, The tourist gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies 2nd Ed (London, 2002). 18. Yanowitch, Murray, ‘Soviet Patterns of Times Use and Concepts of Leisure’, Soviet Studies 15:1 (1963), pp.17-37. 19. Zavisca, Jane, ‘Contesting Capitalism at the Post-Soviet Dacha: The Meaning of Food Cultivation for urban Russians’, Slavic Review 62:4 (2003), pp.786-810.
Mau, Vladimir. " The road to 'perestrokia': economics in the USSR and the problem of
Rosalie Schwartz analyzes tourism during the Twentieth Century in Cuba. She focuses mainly on the 1920s, 1950s, and then ending with the 1990s. In the introduction, Schwartz briefly describes and makes the point that her research is based not on the history of tourism, but that tourism as history is the focal point. She looks at tourism from the aspects of behavior, attitudes, and cultures that influenced tourism in Cuba. Schwartz’s historical issue gives attention to the impact that Cuba’s tourism had on the social change that would leave an everlasting impact on the culture, behavior, and country as a whole.
Life in Russia during the early 1900’s was exceedingly repulsive, especially for the peasants, of which my ancestors presumably were. The conditions my ancestors lived in can be described as arduous, burdensome, poor, and unhygienic. The house of which peasants lived were cramped and lacked insulation. This made the peasants, moreover my ancestors, prone to diseases such as pneumonia, which was immensely lethal at the time. For those of the lowest social class...
The Soviet citizens during the 1930s, particularly the younger ones, believed “they were participants in a history process of transformation, their enthusiasm for what was called ‘the building of socialism’” (68). The Soviets built hotels, palaces, and had blueprints displayed all throughout “that was supposed to set a pattern for urban planning throughout the country and provide a model of the socialist capital for foreigners” (69).
Many individuals would define leisure as time free from paid work, domestic responsibilities, and just about anything that one would not do as part of their daily routine. Time for leisure and time for work are both two separate spheres. The activities which people choose to do on their spare time benefit their own personal interests as well as their satisfactions. While some people may enjoy one activity, others pay not. Leisure is all about personal interests and what people constitute having a good time is all about. Some may say that the process of working class leisure can be seen to contribute their own subordination as well as the reproduction of capitalist class relations. Self-produced patterns of working class leisure can lead to resistance to such reproduction. This leads to social class relations and inequalities, and the fact that it they can never be completely reproduced in the leisure sphere. This film Home Feeling: Struggle for a Community, gives some examples of the role of leisure within a capitalist society dealing with issues such as class inequalities, and how they are different among various societies.
Russia’s social society as a whole is very different from that of other countries that surround it. Russia is physically the largest country in the world, and because the people are so widespread the social norms vary from place to place. Also, there are social characteristics that are evident in the cities that are drastically different than those seen in the small villages scattered throughout much of Russia’s rural countryside. The family structure and women’s roles are different in the urban areas than they are in the rural areas. Expectations and responsibilities vary so to study Russian family and gender roles one must find the similarities in rural and urban ways and also find the aspects that make them different. The same concept must also be used in looking at popular recreation in this large country.
It presents the reality of the free time, leisure and recreation in several Latin American countries, from studies that allow to understand how leisure time, leisure time and recreation were and are constructed socially, politically and historically in the countries that make up Latin America, and also understand how they are lived in everyday life and they have been treated by scholars and professionals interested in the subject. In this way it makes it possible to start a reflection on the role played by the free time, leisure and recreation in each society, about the obstacles faced, future possibilities and overcome challenges.
The article gives consideration to the different cultural context around the globe. To show the differing qualities of our social orders, cases are presented particularly from three socially one of kind settings in this paper. A few illustrations are drawn from other social gatherings in worldwide and global connections, especially, in non-western settings. This research by Iwasaki helped me to work and analyze my research paper regarding the context of the meaning of leisure.
On the planet over, individuals esteem leisure as a basic piece of their way of life and convention. Leisure is considered as an imperative and fundamental piece of each society. Indeed, it is a vital piece of the each person. What a few individuals consider being leisure however may end up being hostile or irritating to others. Synonyms for the term leisure incorporate the words decompression, ease, rest, unwinding, and rest. Subsequently what I consider leisure may not so much be leisure to someone else. This paper depicts my own personal leisure philosophy. It addresses my inspirations for my personal leisure and what is going on in the field of recreation and leisure.
Sayers, S. (1989). Work, Leisure and Human Needs. In T. Winnifrith, & C. Barrett, The Philosophy of Leisure (pp. 34-53). London: MacMillan.
"Plekhanov and the Origins of Russian Marxism." Readings in Russian History. Ed. Sidney Harcave. Vol. 2. New York: Crowell, 1962. 80-90. Print.
The problem of modern leisure has, throughout the years, been a well-discussed topic among many sociologists. Sociability, in this case, is one of the most universal forms of leisure that will be discussed in this essay. The theoretical framework for this discussion is provided by the sociological insights of Georg Simmel (1858-1918) as he argues that the “tumult of the metropolis” (cited in Frisby 1989, p80) creates inner barriers between people and suggests that “sociability” can surpass this problem. According to Frisby (1989), Simmel states that the city life has transformed the struggle with nature for livelihood into a struggle with other human beings for gain. This is further discussed as Frisby (1989) and Giulianotti (2005) describes how sociability can transcend this problem according to Simmel’s sociability theory.
There is not really a universally accepted definition of tourism. In 1994 the World Tourism Organization (WTO) revised its definition. It says the tourism comprises of 'the activities of persons travelli...
Parker added a sociological perspective in ‘Leisure and Worker’ (1983) to the predominately psychological writing on leisure at the time. He presented the interaction between the systems of work and leisure, and in the tradition of male theory he sees leisure in relation to work and generally defines leisure as non-obligatory time and activity ‘chosen for its own sake’ (1983: 10). Parker sees the problem of leisure as also the problem of work; people who are exploited in their work may find it hard to avoid being subjugated in their leisure and he sees the quantity of leisure time as increasing because working time is getting less. He is concerned not that people may be acquiring too much leisure but that leisure time may be unsatisfactory or of sub-standard quality. For him, both ‘work and leisure are necessary to a healthy life and a healthy society’ (1993:
Janos, Andrew C. “What was Communism: A Retrospective in Comparative Analysis.” Communist and Post- Communist Studies Volume 29 (1996): 1-24. Print.