• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13

Source related questions on Joseph Stalin

Extracts from this document...


Humanities Coursework Stalin Balraj Singh 11BCC Does the Cartoonist Who Drew Source A Think Stalin is a Good Leader? Explain Your Answer Using Source A And Your Own Knowledge. Source A is a cartoon drawn by David Lowe and was published in the London Evening Standard on the 27th November 1930. David Lowe was a British illustrator who had no remorse for Stalin. As David Lowe lived in Britain, he was able to write negatively about Stalin and get away with it. Had he have done this cartoon in Russia, there would be no doubt that David Lowe would have been murdered. The cartoon shows Stalin standing in a prison with a gun set up to kill him if he pulls a string. The cartoon was drawn in the 1930's and in the bottom right corner says 'prophecies for the future'. Therefore, you get the idea that David Lowe has drawn what he expects to happen in the future. David Lowe has also written 'Old Low's almanac' in the bottom left corner. This adds humour, as people who viewed the cartoon would have heard of 'Old Mow's Almanac', a book released every year telling people of prophecies for the following year. 'Old Low's Almanac' is David Lowe's prophecies for the future and is also a play on words. As well as having Stalin in a prison cell with a contraption set up to kill himself, there are also two ministers dead in the corner. To add to that, there is also a group of 3 reporters, looking terrified as they report on what they are viewing. Behind the gun Stalin has set up, there is a stool with books on top and a statue of Karl Marx on top of them. The statue has been set up in such a way that it seems as though Marx is killing Stalin. Finally, there is a caption to the cartoon at the bottom of the picture in the centre. ...read more.


Source B is very biased, whereas source C gives a slightly more balanced approach. H Ward does not have any reason to lie or hide the truth, as she will not face any repercussions. A difference between the two sources is that source B gives a positive view of Stalin's policies (the 5 year plan) whereas source C tries to give a more balanced view of Stalin's policies. A reason for the difference is that Dr Hewlett Johnson, the author of Source B had limited resources and as a result of this was unable to give the full story. However H Ward knows what happened and can give a balanced account as a result of this. To add to that, it could also have been due to circumstances. Dr Hewlett Johnson agreed with Stalins idea of communism and was going to be in favour of Stalin as a result of it, where as this is not likely with H Ward. Another difference is the fact that source b does not mention Stalin, whereas source c does not mention him. A reason for this could be due to the repercussions Dr Hewlett Johnson may face if he published Stalins name. Also, Stalin may have used censorship to get his name out of the article. Source C uses his name, as the author will not face any repercussions and can write what she wants without having to worry about any censorship issues. Another difference is that source B is a primary source and source C is a secondary source. Therefore, the author of source B would receive limited information, where as the author of source C can write looking in hindsight. Finally, to conclude and referring back to the essay title, I believe the interpretation of events is different as the author of Source c had more information to work with compared to the author of source B. ...read more.


Source D also disagrees with the statement in the question as it shows that people are happy to see Stalin and they have welcomed him. It also shows that they respect Stalin for his collectivisation policy. Source G suggests that Stalin has improved everything regarding the USSR. From food to technology, everything has improved and has been improved in a very short period of time. Source G believe that Stalins policies worked and were very successful. This interpretation is supported with examples from my own knowledge. The diagrams in the 'Socialism in One Country' booklet show a rapid improvement in the production of essential materials such as iron and steel. As there is a lot more of these metals available, more weapons can be made to backlash German troops. During World War 1, Russia had to surrender to Germany. They were very embarrassed of what had happened and so during World War 2, they put up a stronger fight as they were determined not to fail again. Finally, John Scott liked the policies when he first arrived in USSR and he went there as he felt it was a society a step ahead of his own. Before immigrating to USSR, John Scott lived in America, were the great depression was occurring. So, to conclude I believe Stalin was an evil dictator but he did help USSR. I believe this because he did kill millions of people, but he achieved the target which he had set out to achieve. Stalin wanted the USSR to catch up with the capitalist world and become the dominant force it once was. Stalin killed many people through collectivisation, but he did also increase the amounts of essential materials produced such as coal and oil. Overall, I believe that Stalin was an evil dictator who had a one track mind and killed anyone who got in his way. Therefore I agree with the statement in the question in a sense, because Stalin was an evil dictator, but he did actually improve the USSR. ?? ?? ?? ?? Balraj Singh - 13 - ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 essays

  1. 'The Five Year Plans brought glory to Stalin and misery to his people.' How ...

    In 1929 Stalin took serious austere action, speeding up the process and making it compulsory to join collectives. Some Peasants were refusing to share their labour, whilst others took to burning their crops and animals rather than sell them to the state.

  2. Russia 1905-1917 exam questions with mark schemes.

    And another reason was that the Tsar appointed Stolypin as the prime minister to stay in power. Stolypin appointed him because he used the carrot and stick method. The carrot system meant to do some good things. For example, he improved the education in Russia; he made it easier for the peasants to buy lands and also cleared their debts.

  1. How successful were Stalins Economic Policies?

    ways of farming, which improved efficiency when growing food, as well as when the quota from each farm was being collected by the government - it was much easier to collect one quota from a big farm than tiny amounts from each individual peasant.

  2. How did Stalin control Russia from 1924-1953?

    He was never in the army, but it sent out the message that he would fight for his country. This made him admirable, and showed he was patriotic and proud of his country. Children were used in his propaganda to make him look like a caring father figure.

  1. 'The Five Year Plans brought glory to Stalin and misery to his people' - ...

    The fear of foreign invasion and uncertainty over the survival of communism was due to Russia's backward economy which provoked Stalin to plan ways to quickly industrialise so he could earn praise and glory from his fans in Russia and around the world in the process.

  2. Source based questions on Stalin.

    The source however is not useless by any means because it shows how his regime involved so much dishonest propaganda and egocentric advertisement. It shows in a way his own recognition that he could be seen as a cruel man and his need to tone down his characteristics in the public's eye.

  1. Use source A and your knowledge of the period to explain why some people ...

    It could be argued that laws when established have to be passed on paper before being enforced as a whole to the country, which we could see, is happening in Russia at the time. The Bolsheviks are giving rights to women they want the women of Russia to work and

  2. Source based questions on the Russian revolutions.

    Some investigations have claimed that these are bullet holes from the murder, but anyone can easily come into a room and shoot randomly at the wall and produce the same effect, maybe to fake a murder. The photograph has no date and so could have been taken long after the murder, maybe 5 or even 10 years.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work