My article in The Sunday Times.
It’s easy to understand why the Moscow Metro is one of the jewels in the crown of Russian and Soviet architecture. Let’s look at some numbers to begin with: the network runs 320km and comprises 200 stations that are used by more than 2.4 billion passengers each year. Plans are under way to add 80km this year, which should tie in nicely with the centenary celebrations of the October Revolution.The spellbinding beauty of many of the metro stations is what truly boggles the mind though; their elegance captures even the most cultured eye and lingers in the imagination. These cathedrals of the underworld, ‘people’s palaces’ as they became known, were built with such regal ambitions and resources that the Moscow Metro remains unsurpassed by any other public transport system in the world. Muscovite pride in their metro is tangible too, for even today you will find no graffiti or vandalism in any of the stations. They remain pristine.
The history of the Moscow Metro is both fascinating and somewhat abstruse to outsiders, like many elements emanating from Russian or Soviet Union life. How did a public transport system develop such a distinct identity? A useful understanding of its diversity and radical heritage can be found in an impressive coffee table book Hidden Urbanism: Architecture and Design of the Moscow Metro 1935–2015 by DOM publishers, which is edited by Soviet architecture experts Philipp Meuser and Anna Martovitskaya. The publication is graced with impressive contemporary photographs by Alexander Popov and provides a rich source of archival material in terms of designs, plans and maps. In true socialist fashion, there is also a section devoted to the workers who maintain the metro. Hidden Urbanism’s writing has a straight-no-chaser quality to it, and is selective in its history of the metro, with little in the way of any contentious issues such as the forced labour used in much of its building. A good companion volume worth investing in is Landscapes of Communism by Owen Hatherley, which takes in much of the same landscape, but with the English writer’s sharp judgment and muscular prose.
The Moscow Metro project began in 1935 under Joseph Stalin’s imperative for a public symbol befitting the benefits and progressiveness of the socialist system. Stations soon took on characteristics of religiosity and propaganda though, paying homage to the cult of the leader with bombastic icons. At Komsomolyskaya Station (1952), for example, a mosaic panel depicting Vladimir Lenin finds pride of place, while the interior is based on the triumph of the Soviet people in the Great Patriotic War. The station surroundings are palatial all the same: with marble arches, chandelier lighting, and richly coloured stuccoed walls.
The Moscow Metro first opened with 13 stations (11.2km network) with many foreign engineers involved in its development. Stations were built on islands, their style being utilitarian to begin with. This philosophy evolved into more artistically expressive designs as time moved on: from neo-classical to avant-garde and art deco aesthetics – we can see the dramatic difference between Kropotkinskaya Station in 1935, to 1944’s Elektrozavodskaya Station, for example.
It is remarkable how the history of the Soviet Union can be tracked through the metro stations: partisans and great generals are paid tribute with statues or testaments on walls; at Avtozavodskaya Station a quote reads ‘All this is the fruit of Stalin’s wisdom’. Under Stalin’s reign there was willing sacralisation of stations, yet a marked shift can be seen in the metro building of the Nikita Khrushchev era. In 1955 the Central Committee of the Communist Party issued the snappy-sounding resolution ‘No.1871 On Elimination of Superfluity in Design Work and Construction’. No longer would the USSR pour vast resources into public transport; instead money was to be funnelled towards mass housing developments and the incipient space race. Khrushchev brought the first surface-metro station, the first elevated-metro line, and the first station made from prefabricated reinforced concrete – from this point on there was the significant disavowing of Stalinist grandeur to the functionalism of the so-called centipede stations.
The likes of Taganskaya Station (1950) provides a looking glass on the upheaval running through Soviet society at that time: originally the station was fitted with a grandiose panel entitled ‘The People’s Gratitude to their Commander and Leader’, with Stalin placed centre stage, being lauded by citizens. By the end of the fifties however, Stalin was gone, (in every sense) and in 1966 the panel was dismantled completely to create a passageway. Soon after, the station was fitted with decorative designs of cosmonauts, as attempts were made in every aspect of public life to show a willing reinvention of Soviet society and a softening of the regime.
The 1970s of Leonid Brezhnev saw Moscow Metro mixing modernism and a return to some form of monumentalism – see Pushkinskaya Station, Proletarskaya Station, or ‘The Tree of Friendship of Soviet Nations’ mural at Borovitskaya Station, for example. But from the 1980s on, through the break up of the USSR, there was a significant decline in both design and investment in comparison to what went before in the metro’s great tradition. A new programme of expansion was put in place five years ago by the city’s Mayor though, which has created new stations and added yet another tentacle to the great living organism that is the Moscow Metro. A modern perspective has taken hold to reflect to the outside world a Russian society in rude health – glass pavilions, bright colour schemes or achromatic single-vaults define the new age. The buildings may not carry the weighty social statements of those built in the pre-eminent years of 1930s-1950s, but then what does nowadays?
“Why did I fix fights?” the boxing manager Charles Farrell asks, as he lands the first glove in his essay in The Bittersweet Science. “Because it was the smart thing to do.” This rhetoric is the crooked arrow shooting right to the heart of darkness that is boxing, as fifteen very different writers, from differing perspectives, measure the sport’s pulse in this up-and-down collection. “Sport” is a strange label for boxing to begin with, as you don’t “play” when it comes to this discipline; it’s called “The Hurt Business” for legitimate reasons. And anyone that follows or is involved in boxing knows that something somwehere is being fixed, in all likelihood; and even if we don’t know, the suspicion lurks in the back of our minds, usually encapsulated in the image of some cartoonish Machiavellian manager or cartel.
It is nigh on impossible to raise the subject of boxing writers without one person chiming in with the familiarity of a ringside bell – A. J. Liebling, whose final fight piece for the New Yorker appeared more than fifty years ago, is still considered the doyen of pugilistic prose. Liebling’s The Sweet Science (1949) remains the bible for anyone with an interest in boxing.
This new collection gives a literal and spiritual twist to Liebling’s title (coined by the English journalist Pierce Egan), and while it never reaches the levels of élan laid out by Liebling, the book has plenty of moments that sing: from Rafael Garcia offering a different slant debunking certain language and ideas attached to boxing – Ernest Hemingway’s ‘moral’ and Norman Mailer’s ‘religion’ – which have long fed into the romanticism of the sport; to Sarah Deming writing about the female boxer Claressa Shields’s path from poverty in Flint, Michigan, to successive Olympic gold medals in London and Rio, while at the same time taking a swipe at Joyce Carol Oates’s book of mediations, On Boxing (1987) (”Oates uses fighters for her own peculiar project: in her case, one of establishing a position for herself alongside such serious, masculine names as Mailer and Hemingway.”).
Carlo Rotella, on the American boxer Bernard Hopkins, meanwhile, writes the stand-out piece in the book on how the former inmate of Graterford Prison managed to beat the system of the fight game by coming out the other side with his health and wealth intact; ”your intelligence come up” is George Foreman’s likeable phrase for how veteran fighters can evolve. Elsewhere, Robert Anasi’s essay is a close second as he looks back on his debut bout with its heady mixture of fear and fulfilment.As the editors Carlo Rotella and Michael Ezra say in the introduction, we may come to understand the workings behind the violent whirlwind of boxing, but we will never truly get to the bottom of it. There lies the fathomless, irreducible appeal of the fight business.
No Way Out: The Irish in Wartime France 1939-1945 by Isadore Ryan
Mercier Press £19.99 pp351
The cover of Isadore Ryan’s book suggests a pacy, historical thriller might lie within. It looks like a film poster, with “No Way Out” emblazoned across a monochrome photograph of a cobbled street looking towards the Eiffel Tower. Nazi insignia flags draped along a wall give an atmospheric effect. Instead of a Thomas Keneally-style tale, however, readers get the product of some exhaustive research by Ryan into the lives of Irish people living in France during the Second World War.
One of the most interesting revelations is that Ireland’s diplomatic representative in Paris, Gerald O’Kelly de Gallagh, sold booze from his wine business to Hermann Göring. There were far worse crimes and misdemeanours carried out in occupied France, and O’Kelly did claim, after France was liberated, that he never sold “the good stuff” to the Nazis.
By contrast, Killarney-born Janie McCarthy was awarded the Croix de Guerre for her work with resistance networks in sending reports to London during the occupation. When not dodging the Germans, McCarthy taught English in Paris. Dubliner Robert Vernon played a valuable role as a radio operator for a resistance network in the south of France. On the other side of the conflict, Michael Farmer and Dennis Corr are the only known Irish residents in France who ended up in court after the liberation. Corr, from Dundalk, and his French wife were said to have shown collaborationist tendencies while living in Biarritz. He was eventually found guilty of damaging national defence, sentenced to six months’ imprisonment and fined 3,000 francs.
Farmer sounds like a character from an F Scott Fitzgerald novel. A handsome fellow, originally from Cork, he was left $9m by an elderly American lady who had “wished to adopt him as a son”. There followed some deluded dabbling in the film industry, a tempestuous marriage to Hollywood star Gloria Swanson, and alleged consorting with the Nazis. After the war Farmer convinced French authorities that he had done nothing more than partake in debauched drinking sessions with the local gestapo and charges against him were dropped.
Ryan highlights the role the Catholic church played in occupied France, especially St Joseph’s on the Avenue Hoche run by Irish Passionists, and a convent on Rue Murillo. Irish people were guaranteed food and a bed for the night, while St Joseph’s played a crucial part in getting downed airmen out of the country.
Among those stranded in France was the disinherited Irish nationalist Lord Ashbourne, who ended up housebound and surrounded by his favourite Irish paraphernalia, such as a Celtic cross and a flag of the Red Hand of Ulster. He died in 1942, and was laid out in a kilt with a “Sinn Fein ring on the collar of his shirt”. It was Ashbourne’s mentally ill sister Violet Gibson who tried to assassinate Mussolini in Rome in 1926, but her bullet merely grazed Il Duce’s nose.
This is a worthy book, properly indexed and with an impressive bibliography, but too much of the writing lacks flair. It can tend to feel like a long list of tiny factual details. Of course the writer can work only with what’s in the archives, and Ryan admits that among the Irish residents in France “examples of fully committed members of the armed resistance are hard to come by”. Meanwhile, the two collaborators’ contributions to the German war effort “can confidently be estimated at virtually nil”. Disheartening words to find at the beginning of a book on a specialist subject.
This does not diminish the stories collected here which are linked together — Farmer, aside — by penury, making them all the more moving. That Ireland had little heft, diplomatically or financially, to alleviate its citizens’ circumstances was to be expected. While revelations about Irish diplomats spending time on the golf course or at the racetrack cleave to the stereotype of the work ethic of the ambassadorial classes, it is disturbing to learn about Irish passports being issued so casually and liberally.
At one point it was mooted that 200 Jewish families in an internment camp at Vittel be granted Irish entry visas, and that a ship be chartered to bring Jewish children to Palestine. Both ideas came to nothing; not helped, as Ryan says, by “the cautious approach of Irish officialdom”. Ultimately the Irish in wartime France is a footnote in history, but it reminds us of where Ireland feared to tread in 1939-1945.
My Recent Articles
Enjoying mystery, crime and suspense in all media
Reading classics and hard books, and spouting rhubarb about them
Writer and multimedia journalist
Virtual meets real adventures in digital heritage, culture, community and place
An archaeologist finds herself writing fiction — what stories will she unearth?
A Historic England Blog
scríobh | eat | sleep
Maria Johnston, Poetry Critic
Exploring the world of heritage, art and culture
A blog on pub crawling, and beer generally, in London
Boxing News & Opinion
Images of People Photoblog