© Getty Images

Socialist realism -

In the Russian context, state and culture have long been intertwined. From visual art to music, ‘socialist realism’ has been a fixture of historical Soviet culture.

© Getty Images

Ostracization and arrest -

This wasn’t exactly optional. Artists “who veered from the official aesthetic line faced ostracization, public condemnation, arrest, or even execution.”

© Getty Images

List of targeted artists -

It was Stalin himself who had a direct hand in the list of targeted artists. An example was his aversion to Dmitri Shostakovich’s ‘Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk.’

© Getty Images

Years of fear -

Allegedly, Shostakovich lived in fear for years, awaiting arrest or some sort of other punishment that, ultimately, never came.

© Getty Images

Cultural domination -

Although Putin and Stalin share a similar approach to cultural domination, their methods are not the same. Even so, cultural production in Russia, both historically and today, is an extension of the state for a number of reasons.

© Getty Images

Source of funding -

Most cultural funding comes from the state. This in itself limits how cultural operations can function and their respective flexibility.

© Getty Images

Access to public funding -

For example, Russia’s public theaters, like most in Europe, are highly dependent on access to public funding.

© Getty Images

State covers most theaters -

Without public funding, they simply cannot operate. In Russia, state theaters receive over 65% of funding from the state.

© Getty Images

Relationship between the state and art -

There’s an intrinsic dilemma when considering the relationship between the state and art. But it’s not just in Russia. Ukraine’s cultural institutes, too, face a similar dynamic between the state and culture.

© Getty Images

State criticism and social issues -

In Ukraine and Russia, both states avidly practice censorship of any state criticism, as well as other social issues, such as LGBTQ+ themes.

© Getty Images

Cultural department -

In the city of Moscow, the cultural department is responsible for approving each potential exhibition that takes place in the city.

© Getty Images

Arbitrary decision-making -

These decisions can be quite arbitrary. For example, one exhibition was denied for being “too depressing.”

© Getty Images

No political risk -

Artists often argue their positions, attempting to demonstrate that there is no issue of political risk. Sometimes it’s successful, other times, not so much.

© Getty Images

No official censorship -

But cultural officials claim there is no censorship of cultural spaces and production. In some ways, they’re right.

© Getty Images

Self-censorship -

There is no specific regulation that artists can consult. Instead, Russian institutions engage in forms of “self-censorship."

© Getty Images

Resistance to censorship -

There is, of course, resistance to this kind of censorship in Russia. For example, Garage, one of Moscow’s well-known contemporary art spaces, has ceased any new exhibitions.

© Getty Images

Charade is over -

The space “didn’t want to participate in this charade that everything is fine and life goes on as before.”

© Getty Images

Censorship as protest -

In this way, censorship is a method that the state exercises to control its citizens, but it’s also a way citizens can protest against their governments.

© Getty Images

Russian cinema -

According to The New Yorker, cinema in particular is subjected to a great deal of censorship, as sanctions have isolated the Russian market.

© Getty Images

State funding -

As of 2025, the majority of film productions are overwhelming dependent on state funding and all the subsequent licensing that comes with film production.

© Getty Images

Blacklisted artists -

Many Russian artists (and their Ukrainian counterparts) have left their respective countries to continue their careers, for a myriad of reasons. Pictured is blacklisted Russian artist, Boris Grebenshchikov.

© Getty Images

Distinguishing censorship approaches -

One of the biggest distinguishing factors between Stalin’s approach to censorship in comparison to Putin's is exactly what is being censored—Stalin aimed to censor the art, while Putin censors the artist.

© Getty Images

The individual -

Stalin focused on the cultural product, but Putin is more concerned with the individual producing the work. The individual’s politics are to him more of an issue. Pictured is blacklisted Russian singer, Andrey Makarevich.

© Getty Images

Terrorists and foreign agents -

Dissident artists who, for example, oppose the Ukraine-Russia war, either domestically or abroad, are considered terrorists and "foreign agents." Pictured is blacklisted Russian actress, Masha Mashkova.

© Getty Images

Boris Akunin -

This was the case for Russian writer Boris Akunin (pictured), one of Russia’s well-known contemporary authors who attended a fundraiser in support of Ukraine.

© Getty Images

Foreign agent -

The Russian state placed him on a terrorist watch list and categorized him as a foreign agent, and therefore, a threat to the state.

© Getty Images

Targeting the individual -

The content of Akunin’s books is irrelevant as he writes detective novels. The Russian state isn’t censoring his art. Instead, they are censoring the artist.

© Getty Images

Concealed -

In Russia, cultural products by “foreign agents” are legally required to be concealed and marked only appropriate for those 18 years old and up.

© Getty Images

Russia's cultural sector at risk -

The crackdown on Russian artists is an international feat, but it’s also domestic. With nowhere to go, what will become of the representatives of Russia’s cultural sector?

Sources: (The New Yorker)

See also: Vandal expressionism: attacks on famous works of art

© Getty Images