I wish to commence this review by expressing my sincere gratitude to the editors of Slavic Review for the opportunity to engage with the Festschrift dedicated to the distinguished historian of Stalinism, Lynne Viola, whose work has long been a source of admiration for me. The articles within this collection, aptly titled “The Devil’s Advocate,” stand as a testament to Viola’s profound scholarly influence, having been authored by her students and gathered in her honor.

This collection, inspired by Lynne Viola’s scholarship, brings together diverse themes and case studies to reevaluate approaches to Stalinism. The contributors engage with Viola’s foundational ideas, presenting fresh insights into the complexities of Stalinism. Viola’s work, characterized by empirical rigor and nuanced examination of social strata, has had a lasting impact on the field. Her dedication to primary sources and rigorous analysis is evident in her academic evolution, which ultimately earned recognition despite initial skepticism. Viola’s body of work remains a cornerstone in Stalinism studies, offering unparalleled understanding of the era. As a revisionist social historian, Viola meticulously chronicles the implementation of Stalin’s policies at the local level. Viola’s arguments, supported by exhaustive archival research, have had a lasting impact on the study of Stalinism, providing a foundational understanding of the era.

The volume is organized into three thematic sections, exploring “agencies,” “gray zones,” and non-state narratives. The first section focuses on the subaltern, featuring an article by Denis Kozlov that analyzes the relationship between author Aleksandr Iashin and his audience. Kozlov reveals that Soviet readers critiqued Iashin’s portrayal of rural life, interpreting this disjunction as indicative of “contemporary colonization” within the context of Russian literary tradition. This raises questions about Iashin’s authorial stance and his relationship to the Russian intelligentsia.

Heather DeHaan’s chapter delves into the paradoxical legacy of Mirza Ibragimov, a working-class Azerbaijani writer who embodied both Soviet modernity and potential anti-colonial resistance. DeHaan analyzes Ibragimov’s socialist realist stories, revealing how they navigated the intricate cultural tensions and controversies of the time. By examining Ibragimov’s work for instances of “deliberate cultural slippage,” DeHaan uncovers a complex interplay of compliance and resistance to Soviet norms, underscoring the interpretative challenges inherent in subaltern studies.

Tracey McDonald’s article examines the Leningrad Zoo’s wartime narrative, revealing a paradoxical relationship between zookeepers and animals characterized by both care and subordination. This duality reflects the contradictions of modernity, where zoos serve as instruments of human dominance. McDonald’s analysis sheds new light on Stalinist society, offering a novel perspective through the lens of zoos and animal studies.

Wilson Bell’s study explores the intersection of poet Nikolai Klyuev’s life with the NKVD, examining the complex dynamics of secrecy and visibility in NKVD operations. Bell’s analysis highlights the agency’s dual identity and the multifaceted nature of Klyuev’s persecution, revealing the complexities of historical subjects and their legacies. Dan Healey’s chapter critically analyzes memoirs by female doctors in the Gulag healthcare system, exploring the complexities of complicity and resistance in the “gray zone.” Healey emphasizes the importance of localized perspectives in understanding the Gulag experience. Seth Bernstein’s chapter compares NKVD interrogation protocols with oral histories, arguing that a close reading of these sources can provide valuable insights into the application of torture and psychological coercion during the Great Terror.

Steve Maddox’s chapter delves into the intricate history of World War II punitive battalions composed of Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians, who perpetrated atrocities against Soviet civilians. Maddox uncovers the deliberate efforts of Soviet authorities to obscure the diverse composition of these battalions, instead attributing their actions to German Nazi aggression. This narrative distortion serves to mask the complex dynamics of Sovietization in the Baltic region. Maddox’s analysis underscores the necessity of a nuanced approach, integrating diverse sources and careful contextualization to fully grasp this intricate historical phenomenon. By doing so, Maddox offers a fresh perspective on Sovietization in the Baltic region.

Zenon Wasyliw’s article examines the intersection of Ukrainian nationalism and Soviet Ukrainization efforts, focusing on the role of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church in shaping nationalist sentiments. Wasyliw argues that the “Ukrainian village” maintained its religiosity while adopting a “modernized national identity” within a national-communist and culturally tolerant context. However, the article’s portrayal of a homogeneous “Ukrainian village” warrants further examination, as it may oversimplify the regional and ethnic complexities of rural Ukraine.

Marilyn Campeau and Maris Rowe-McCulloch’s chapter explores citizen voices and perspectives during World War II, challenging official narratives. Through a hybrid methodology combining local documentation and military art, they reveal a complex dialogue between local and central authorities, highlighting the agency of ordinary citizens in shaping collective memory and exposing editorial biases of the Soviet center.

This collection of articles reflects the influence of contemporary American sociology and postcolonial theory, evident in the authors’ methodological approaches. While the authors strive to decolonize their perspectives, the application of modern theoretical frameworks to historical events may risk oversimplification. Such theoretical lenses could obscure the complexities of the past, emphasizing the need for a nuanced analysis. The use of terms such as “vydvizhentsv” may not adequately encapsulate the roles or experiences of individuals. The representation of historical events, such as the Leningrad Zoo’s wartime narrative, necessitates meticulous contextual consideration.

Overall, the volume offers significant contributions to Stalinism studies, providing fresh perspectives on the era’s complexities. While further examination of historical context and regional complexities could enhance understanding, the collection showcases rigorous archival research and innovative perspectives, reflecting Lynne Viola’s scholarly legacy. It serves as a valuable resource for scholars, likely influencing future research and discussions.