Life in Stalins Russia

20th March 2006

Which Of the Following Sources Are Most Useful When Trying To Find Out What life really Was Like in Stalin’s Russia

In the following essay I will read the three sources (source A, source B and source C) and then use them to try and answer the question: Which Of the Following Sources Are Most Useful When Trying To Find Out What life really Was Like in Stalin’s Russia. I will analyze each source using a technique called PONC. For each source I will look at the purpose and find out why it was created. Then I will find out its Origin to see where it is from and who created it. The next step is to find the nature; this will show us what type of source it is. Lastly I will look at the content of each source, this is what the source shows or tells us. After studying these points I will be able to tell how reliable a source is. I will then be able to judge which of the sources is most useful, taking into account its content.

This is a preview of the whole essay

I will now start by looking at Source A and how useful it is. Source A is a Russian poster from 1938; at the bottom it says “Long live the great Stalin.” Its purpose was to show how good Stalin was as a leader (propaganda.) We know it was painted by a person who was pro-Stalin. The nature of the source is a poster. The purpose of this source greatly affects its reliability because Stalin probably told the painter what he wanted to look like (to advertise himself and make him look great) this makes it biased. The person who painted the poster was also in favour of Stalin so he would be more likely to draw something that makes Stalin look good. As the nature is a propaganda poster it was only made to show just the good side of life in Stalin’s Russia. All of the information in the poster was probably filtered by Stalin so overall it is not at all very reliable. The content of the poster shows Stalin in a white suit in the centre. In the background there are youth organisations, aeroplanes, buildings and soldiers. The poster does show some points like people were willing to go to youth organisations and that Stalin may be planning for war. However it does not show much about life for the people of Russia so Source A is not very reliable.

Source B is an extract from a book “Hope Against Hope” written in 1971. The book was written to inform and let people know so there would be little reason to lie. The source was written by a Russian man so he should know pretty much what life was like seeing as he lived there. The nature of the source is from a book extract, but it only puts forward one person’s views out of millions others and the writer could be biased. He filters his own information and puts his own views across so there is no reason to lie. However this is 20 years after Stalin’s death so his memories could be hazy. The source only shows one aspect of life in Russia, the terror, but is likely to be reliable.

Now I will move on to analyzing the last source, source C. this source is British and its purpose is to inform students so it is probably reliable. Britain was neutral to Russia so unless the writer was biased the source was quite reliable. Seeing as the source was from a textbook there is no reason why it should be biased. Overall this source should be very reliable as there is not really any reason why the writer would lie. The source talks about a range of ideas from like living conditions, pay, employment, health and education, not just one aspect of life. This source is overall very useful because it tell us about a wide range of aspects and has no reason to lie.

I think that source c was the most useful when answering the assessment question because it shows no reason to lie and I think it is very reliable.

BY ROHAN SHAH