SUMMARY:

This article discusses the methodological problems of Gulag studies and suggests directions for future research. While the older tradition of viewing the Gulag primary as a repressive institution has been left behind, this conceptual framework continues to influence contemporary academic conceptualizations and representations. Current studies often fail to appreciate the social complexity and cultural diversity of the Gulag, as well as the mobility of the system. The application of such outdated categories of analysis contributes to the constant mythologizing of the Gulag.
The problem of the Gulag’s social complexity is often underappreciated in the academic literature, because the unique social and cultural milieu that existed in the camps and that consisted of many interesting subcultures – such as the criminal culture dating back to Odessa of the 1910s and 1920s, peasant culture, the “high” culture of the Soviet artistic elite, and finally, ethnic subcultures – has been reduced to a vision formed mainly on the basis of the memoirs of a few prominent political prisoners.
In order to get beyond the old mythologies, Klimkova argues that we must bring to the forefront many previously unheard voices. Arguing that we must connect the study of Gulag culture to both the broader framework of Soviet modernization and the narrower framework of “Soviet society in a microcosm,” Klimkova outlines possible approaches (from oral history and cultural studies) that, in light of the critical review of the current literature and sources, might be used to enrich the social and cultural history of the Gulag. The article suggests how such a cultural study of the Gulag – embedded with a more comparative approach as well as a broader understanding of the Gulag as an inherent part of the history of Soviet civilization – can contribute to the study of the driving forces of the Soviet modernization project.