I am still reflecting on the Soviet Bunker program — both personally and professionally. The whole experience raises interesting questions about how people (and I myself) respond to social pressure and how we as individuals and society remember and understand the past.
My friend, who is a writer, and I took different approaches to the program. She decided to fully engage in the experience. I, the academic, immediately put myself in the position of observing and analyzing the various elements of the program and how the participants responded. Of course, I still had to do everything with the group so I wasn’t standing on the sidelines.
The first challenge was switching to Russian. While I have been reading Russian-language reports in the archives, my speaking and oral comprehension skills are rusty. I was able to adjust fairly quickly and understood most of what was going on. And when I didn’t, I just watched what others were doing since most of the participants in my group spoke Russian. It helped that my Russian-language vocabulary is heavily weighted towards the Soviet-era given my research!
There was a range of reponses by the participants in my group. They were primarily young Lithuanians in their 20s and 30s. Some seemed to treat the whole experience as a game; they were the same ones who actively participated in the program. Others responded only when directly engaged by the actors. Two young women who didn’t speak Russian appeared confused and intimidated most of the time.
Although I followed all the instructions, I didn’t do anything to draw attention to myself. I was trying to focus on taking mental notes about how the rooms were set up, what kinds of experiences were being emphasized, how the participants reacted and what all of this might mean about how people remember the Soviet years. However, I had to dive into the experience during the KGB interrogation. The interrogator asked me a question that I didn’t immediately understand. When I said in Russian that I didn’t understand, he asked what language I spoke. Upon hearing that I spoke English and was from America, he immediately asked what I thought of the glorious USSR. I decided to play along and said that it was so much better here than in the capitalist countries. As a “reward,” I had to drink a full glass of kvass (a fermented beverage made from black bread). I really hate that stuff! My friend, on the other hand, was sent to the isolation chamber during her group’s KGB interrogation for refusing to become an informer.
During the meal at the end of the program, I was sitting next to a man in his 50s who had come with his wife and son. He said that he and his wife wanted their son to understand what life was like during the Soviet years. I asked if he thought the program was successful in doing that and he responded, “yes.” I was a bit surprised because I wasn’t so sure. Of course, I never lived in the Soviet Union so my opinion is that of an outsider. While the program perhaps accurately presents the more intense aspects of Soviet life, it seems to me that much of the pressure of Soviet life was in the day-to-day difficulties that wore people down — constant shortages, closed social circles because of lack of trust, incessant propaganda, and general lack of freedom. Could a two hour program really show what that was like? Leaving the Soviet bunker that evening, I mostly felt depressed.
In part I was depressed because I chose the “easy” path when confronted during the KGB interrogation section. I could have said, truthfully, that I thought the Soviet system was horrible — and ended up in isolation like my friend did. At the time, I didn’t want to be sent out of the room because I wanted to make sure I saw all parts of the program. In order to analyze the program, I needed to see all of the segments, what they included and how participants reacted. While I don’t necessarily think my response is an indicator of my moral fortitude, it did make me realize how easy it is to justify one’s actions and choose to protect oneself instead of standing up for moral values. And that experience did give me a greater understanding of the difficult choices Lithuanians faced during the Soviet years. I can say that in 1986, when confronted by real Soviet border guards with large guns as I was smuggling Bibles into the Soviet Union, I stood my ground and didn’t cave in. Maybe I’m indulging in more self-justification, but it was a lot more threatening than the Soviet Bunker program.
As I watched the young people leave the bunker, laughing about the experience as they got into their German and Japanese-made cars, I wondered if they had a better understanding of what was life was like for their fellow Lithuanians only 25 years ago. That also made me feel a bit depressed. However, as I was describing the experience to another American friend, I realized that, instead of being depressed, I should be glad if these young people didn’t understand what it was like to live in the Soviet Union. After all, this was the whole goal of the independence movement in the late 1980s — to be independent and democratic so that future generations of Lithuanians wouldn’t have to live in the Soviet system. While Lithuania has a number of problems, these young people do have a better life and more opportunities than the generations who came of age during the Soviet years. At the same time, it is important to understand Lithuania’s Soviet past because it continues to have an effect on the present. Perhaps the Soviet Bunker does is one way to do that.
Amanda in Lithuania 2009 
6 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 13, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Litlocal
“…it seems to me that much of the pressure of Soviet life was in the day-to-day difficulties that wore people down — constant shortages, closed social circles because of lack of trust, incessant propaganda, and general lack of freedom…”
Well, no, those difficulties you’re thinking of were sort of a present crisis, a bit different one, but sort of similar anyway. You think as if you was under the impression of some Hollywood movies ;). That daily life was nothing special, at some point even more easy than today, but it was dotted with some potential circumstancies, like, say, army things and some other, i.e. with “the more intense aspects of Soviet life” you either can escape them or you can’t escape them. In this show you’re put in a situation, when you can’t escape your fate, so to speak ;). Many things we know today we didn’t know, especially about the strategic purposes of the Bolsheviks, pretentiousness and secrecy of tactics, all their secrets (which now are not a secrets at all) were known very obscurely, if known at all. So the daily life was like a life during some stupid crisis when the government consists only of idiots, and the only hope is that those idiots either will die out sooner or later, or they finally understand their own stupidity haha 🙂 . Simply you had to know the limits while expressing your attitude. So that’s regarding the daily life in Soviet Union. The difference between the current crisis and the Soviet regime is that the crisis is a natural phenomenon, and the Soviet regime was an artificial one and based on narrow imagination of some individuals 😉 .
May 13, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Tim Wright
As a kind of middling-class historian, I would suspect that the Soviet experience was not a monolithic one—although most people shared common experiences. What I find interesting is the narrow range of those experiences that the bunker portrays, the “dehumanizing” aspects of life under a Soviet regime.
So, I wonder, what about the other side of the coin, or, perhaps, more accurately the other facets of the diamond? What about those who would refuse to go to the bunker because it is all “propaganda,” who look back on a simpler, more secure time? What kind of bunker would they have constructed, and why?
As an American historian, albeit not a 20th century one (although I dabble), I am amazed about how popular the Great Depression has become. People want to know about how people got by? How did they survive? What kind of communities did they form? Essentially they want to know what they can learn from it that will tell them how to cope with today’s crisis and, importantly, what comes next. Along the way they are relearning the lessons about unrestrained capitalism, the need (at least in my view) of government intervention on behalf of the poor and middle-class, and that consumerism has a painful downside.
Spinning this idea out somewhat, imagine for a moment you were creating a Great Depression Historical Theme Park. What would it look like? Would the experience that you crafted be different from that of your grandparents? Would it be different than that of your students at UW? Now imagine you were Rush Limbaugh designing the park…..
I think what I’m coming to, is that I suspect that the bunker experience has less to do with how Lithuanians are remembering their past than how they understand their present and believe they are constructing their future. To do so they need to construct a past that explains the trajectory of the present and the near future. The bunker, I think, a historical artifact of 2009 rather than 1989.
This is not an original idea or a particularly complex one, but one that might be useful and illuminating.
Cheers!
May 14, 2009 at 6:23 am
amandaswain
I knew that if I wrote about my initial — and mostly emotional — reaction to the Soviet Bunker program I would get good comments! I have two busy days ahead of me but I will be thinking about these comments and look forward to writing in response to your thoughts over the weekend.
May 18, 2009 at 11:50 am
amandaswain
First, I’ll admit that my perspective is that of an outsider and an American — but I believe that my understanding of life in the Soviet Union is less influenced by Hollywood than by traveling to the Soviet Union regularly in the late 1980s, living in “post-Soviet” Lithuania in 1992-1994, talking about Soviet times with Lithuanians, and reading a lot of histories, memories and literature about the Soviet Union. 🙂
That said, I agree with both Tim’s and Litlocal’s comments that the Soviet Bunker presents an experience of one particular aspect of life in the Soviet Union. I appreciate Litlocal’s observation that daily life then wasn’t necessarily more difficult than daily life today (and I would add, probably less difficult in the late Soviet period than daily life in the immediate post-Soviet years). Tim’s observation that the experience of life under the Soviet system wasn’t monolithic is certainly true. Ordinary people did find ways of living their lives within a system that was, I believe, inherently oppressive. I think the challenge, both for historians and for Lithuanians today, is to understand the oppressive nature of the regime, the spaces that people found in which to engage in independent thought and action, and the ways in which people adapted to the Soviet system.
I’ve certainly encountered “nostalgia” on the part of Lithuanians. One of my favorite quotes from the post-Soviet years…”at least under Brezhnev, we knew what bribes to pay, now we don’t know to whom and how much we should pay.” As Tim points out, this view of the past reflects a view of the present — a sense of betrayal that, despite a new political and economic system, corruption still persists.
I’m particularly struck by Tim’s comment that the Soviet Bunker is an historical artifact of 2009. I definitely see ways in which history is used to “construct a past that explains the trajectory of the present and the near future” and how that has led to differing interpretations not just of the Soviet years but also of World War II and the inter-war republic. I am now wondering about how the Soviet Bunker program may have changed over time, as well as if there were similar types of programs immediately after independence and how they were similar or different to this one. I think that it would be very interesting to interview the creators of the Soviet bunker project and hear from them why they chose the elements they chose and what they want people to gain from this experience. Hmm, I might have to take a detour from my dissertation research and do just that.
May 18, 2009 at 7:48 pm
scootage81
The Soviet bunker experience reminds me somewhat of the Museum of Communism in Prague. I found it to be interesting mostly for the collection of random statuary and reproductions of propaganda posters (almost exclusively Czech). There were some recreations of a classroom, a shop display and an interrogation room, all presumably to give something of the flavor of what life was like under communism, though there wasn’t a whole lot in the way of explanation.
But I also found the presentation left much to be desired, particularly as a historian. The museum narrative was, quite clearly and unequivocally, “communism bad.” Things like the shop display were to show how little variety there was in consumer goods, and there was plenty of mention of how awful the secret police were, and how terrible Soviet domination was.
Yet, again, as a historian who’s gone through the museum multiple times, I kept thinking, “Well, if communism was so clearly and unambiguously awful, I wonder why it ever came to Czechoslovakia and lasted there for forty-one years.” It was disappointing that there were no exhibits describing, for instance, how many Czechs viewed the Communists as liberators, or were sympathetic to the Communist vision of a rebuilt country, or how many people at least went along with things because communism guaranteed their material existence, even if it wasn’t up to Western European standards.
Then again, while this was disappointing, it was hardly surprising. The museum is owned by an American entrepreneur, so it reflects his outsider perspective. But it’s also reflective of the attitude many Slovaks and Czechs present to foreigners when the Communist era comes up, which is basically that it was bad for various reasons. I’ve even had former party members(!) claim as much.
But, as you mention, nostalgia seems to be the surest way to get the people who lived under communism to convey some sense of what they might’ve liked about it. The archivist in Bratislava would describe the fees he had to pay for some medical procedure or another (a fraction of what it’d cost an American with insurance) and would recall wistfully the days when he wouldn’t even have to pay that modest sum.
Anyway, as someone who does museum studies and traffics in some of those same history and memory issues, you should write an article about the Soviet bunker experience for some publication or other, since I think it’d be really fascinating to a wider audience.
May 19, 2009 at 11:33 am
amandaswain
I haven’t been to Grutas Park yet. It is a privately-run “museum” about an hour from Vilnius which has a park full of Soviet-era statues and a Soviet-style dining hall serving Soviet-style food. Now that the weather is nice, I need to talk one of car-owning friends to take me out there. I am really curious to see how Soviet times are presented there.