Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros11Dossier - Histoire culturelle des...Ideological Classification System...

Dossier - Histoire culturelle des bibliothèques

Ideological Classification Systems for the Creation of 'Homo Sovieticus' in Latvian Libraries during the Second Soviet Occupation, 1944–1990

Systèmes de classification idéologique pour la création de l’ « Homo Sovieticus » dans les bibliothèques lettones pendant la deuxième occupation soviétique (1944–1990)
Jana Dreimane

Résumés

Durant l’occupation soviétique de la Lettonie (1940–1941 et 1944–1990), les bibliothèques ont fait l’objet d’un processus intense de soviétisation, adoptant les normes organisationnelles, juridiques et idéologiques de l’Union soviétique. Transformées en instruments du pouvoir occupant, elles ont vu leurs principes directeurs et leurs stratégies profondément remaniés. Ce changement contrastait fortement avec la période d’indépendance de la République de Lettonie (1918–1940), durant laquelle les bibliothèques – pour la plupart placées sous la tutelle des municipalités ou des associations – jouissaient d’une large autonomie et orientaient leurs activités en fonction des intérêts de leurs tutelles et de leurs lecteurs.

Cette étude analyse les manifestations de la soviétisation dans la pratique bibliothéconomique, avec un accent particulier sur l’organisation et la classification des connaissances. Elle montre comment, sous la contrainte idéologique, les systèmes de classification des bibliothèques lettones ont été transformés d’outils supposés professionnellement neutres en mécanismes de structuration du savoir dictés par une doctrine politique unique. L’analyse porte d’abord sur l’adaptation de la classification décimale universelle (CDU) réalisée par Lev Tropovski au début de la réoccupation soviétique, puis sur la transition vers une nouvelle classification bibliographique (Bibliotechno-Bibliograficheskaya Klassifikatsiya), élaborée par les principales bibliothèques russes et fondée sur les principes du marxisme-léninisme.

L’introduction obligatoire de ce système en Lettonie illustre l’importance accordée par le régime à l’éducation politique et au contrôle idéologique. S’appuyant sur des données sociologiques de l’époque soviétique, l’article examine également l’attitude du public envers les bibliothèques en prenant la fréquentation de ces dernières comme indicateur clé.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1The Soviet Union (1917–1991) maintained its existence not only through the political repression of actual or potential opponents, extensive social control, censorship, and the centralization of power but also through the constant and widespread propaganda of communist ideology, which aimed to secure the populations unwavering support for the ruling regime.

  • 1 Pavel, Kolář, “The party as a new utopia: reshaping communist identity after Stalinism”, Social His (...)

2The prescribed worldview for Soviet citizens was required to be strictly partisan, recognizing the fundamental antagonism between the socialist and capitalist systems, between “insiders” (allies) and “outsiders” (enemies), and as well as a firm adherence to historical materialism, class struggle and atheism, all propagated by the Marxist-Leninist doctrine and the USSR leadership.1

3The entrenchment of this worldview also had to be promoted by libraries, which were required to subordinate all areas of their work to this goal, including the classification of printed materials. Within the professional library community, classification systems are often considered neutral, purely technical tools. However, they also embody an ideological dimension, as they serve to organise global knowledge ‒ a dimension that becomes particularly evident in the context of the political transformations of the twentieth century. When Latvia fell under Soviet occupation, libraries were first required to implement an adapted version of the Universal Decimal Classification, and subsequently a classification system of Soviet origin.

  • 2 Daina, Bleiere, “Padomju otrreizējā okupācija Latvijā” [Second Soviet occupation of Latvia], Nacion (...)
  • 3 Daina Bleiere, “Vispārējās izglītības sovetizācija Latvijā: padomju cilvēka veidošana mācību proces (...)

4However, periods of the first Soviet occupation of Latvia (1940–1941) and the more than four decades of the second Soviet occupation (1944–1990) were not consistent eras.2 When the Republic of Latvia was occupied and incorporated into the Soviet Union in 1940 under the leadership of Joseph Stalin (1878–1953), the country underwent intense Sovietization, accompanied by widespread political repressions. The outbreak of war between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany on June 22, 1941, interrupted Sovietization for several years, as Latvia was occupied by Nazi Germany. Sovietization resumed in 1944–1945, when Latvia was reincorporated into the Soviet Union. After Stalin's death, Latvia, like the rest of the Soviet Union, experienced a brief period of liberalization, during which attempts were made to loosen the political system, economy, foreign policy, and the republic's relationship with the central authorities in Moscow. In Latvia, the relative ‘thaw’ was halted by the rise of conservative communists in July 1959, who ensured near-unconditional submission to Moscow's dictates. Until the mid-1980s, Latvia continued to undergo intensified industrialization, leading to a rapid influx of immigrants from Russia and Belarus and significant changes to its ethnic composition. Agriculture was predominantly based on collective farms, which were often inefficient and resulted in shortages of certain foodstuffs. The main goal of educational and cultural institutions remained the creation of “a new Soviet man ‒ a builder of communism ‒ whose consciousness would be firmly rooted in loyalty to communist ideals, Soviet patriotism (i.e., allegiance to the Soviet state as the best form of political and social organization), and collectivism”.3

  • 4 This duplicitous attitude towards Soviet power was also evident in other republics of the Soviet Un (...)

5But in the 1960s–1980s, a period of stagnation, the population had already adapted to Soviet rule, treating its ideology “in an utilitarian way, as inevitable evil that one can ignore and base one's real life on quite different principles”. Thus, many inhabitants of occupied Latvia were characterised by a dual attitude towards authority: they had mastered Soviet rhetoric very well, which they used in their official public life, yet in their private and family life they could afford a certain degree of individual freedom.4 Regarding library classification, to what extent were the Russian efforts successful to impose their ideology? On the other side, how did Latvian society respond to this policy espacially in terms of resistance, circumvention or collaboration?

6In the following text, a brief overview of library classification practices in Latvia prior to the Soviet occupation is provided, followed by a description of the introduction of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) and its ideologized modifications in Soviet Russia, as they were subsequently implemented in occupied Latvia. The article then examines the process of introducing the ideologically adapted UDC and, later, the Library Bibliographic Classification in Latvia. Finally, it outlines the return to the classification system used during the independent Republic of Latvia at the end of the Soviet occupation, illustrating efforts to rebuild public trust in librarianship.

Library Classification Systems in Latvia before the Soviet Occupation

  • 5 This is evidenced by articles in the Latvian press about public libraries in the USA and elsewhere (...)

7The necessity for a comprehensive, interregional, and versatile classification system in Latvian library literature was firstly identified at the beginning of the 20th century, coinciding with the expansion of the public library movement and an increased interest among librarians in global trends and advancements in the field5.

  • 6 Teodors Līventāls, Kā nodibināt un iekārtot bibliotēku?, Rīga, A. Golts, [1913], p. 58.

8At that time, the selection of classification systems for printed works in Latvian libraries was primarily guided by practical considerations, namely to ensure that information retrieval from collections, systematic catalogues, and bibliographic indexes was both convenient and accurate. Teodors Līventāls (1882–1956), the author of the first manual for Latvian librarians, “Kā nodibināt un iekārtot bibliotēku” [How to Establish and Organise a Library] (1913), recommended the adoption of the Decimal Classification, first published in 1876 by the American librarian Melvil Dewey (1851–1931). The principal justification for adopting this system was its international recognition and its seamless extensibility to accommodate new subject areas.6

  • 7 UDC: Universal Decimal Classification: Standard Edition, Vol. 1 – Systematic tables, British Standa (...)

9In this classification system, the principle of decimal division was applied, whereby the entire corpus of human knowledge was divided into ten main classes, each of which was further subdivided into ten subclasses, and so forth. In 1895, the newly established “Institut International de Bibliographie” in Brussels, with Dewey's permission, undertook the translation of the classification into French. This translation was accompanied by a transformation of the system: while retaining its purely enumerative structure – where each subject had a designated place and index – it was enhanced with elements that allowed the creation of new, previously undefined index combinations by integrating interrelated subjects. The first edition of the Universal Decimal Classification in French “Manuel du Répertoire Bibliographique Universel” were published in 1905.7

  • 8 The State Library of Latvia published a regular index of new publications “Valsts bibliotēkas biļet (...)

10In the independent Republic of Latvia (1918–1940) the popularity of the UDC increased. This development was facilitated by national bibliographic publications compiled by the State Library of Latvia (now the National Library of Latvia), in which information was systematically organized according to the UDC.8 Each subdivision was already assigned an UDC index, further reinforcing the system's use and recognition.

  • 9 Voldemārs Caune, Decimālā klasifikācija: saīsinātas tabeles [Decimal Classification: abridged table (...)
  • 10 Voldemārs Caune, Bibliotēkas iekārta [Setting up a library], Rīga, Valtera un Rapas akc.sab., 1929, (...)

11The first edition of the Decimal Classification tables in Latvian was published in 1920.9 It was compiled by Voldemārs Caune (1899–1944), Head of the Bibliography and Cataloguing Department of the State Library, who highlighted the four main strengths of the UDC, noting that it is universal, encompassing all disciplines, applicable in libraries of various types and sizes, practical in its logical and convenient structure, and internationally disseminated.10

12Until the first Soviet occupation of Latvia, the abridged tables of the “Decimal Classification” with the alphabetical subject indexes, were published three times. These were intended for small public libraries, which formed the basis of Latvia's extensive library network, while the large research libraries utilised the UDC's voluminous universal or special editions.

Library classification in the Soviet Union

  • 11 Nathalie Delougaz, “Adaptations of the Decimal Classification for Soviet Libraries”, The Library Qu (...)
  • 12 Eduard Sukiasyan, Knowledge Organization in Russia: Problem-related and Historical Aspects. URL: ht (...)
  • 13 Desyatichnaya mezhdunarodnaya klassifikatsiya knig. Sokrashchennyye tablitsy, sostavlennyye Osoboy (...)
  • 14 Yevgeniy Shamurin, Ocherki po istorii bibliotechno-bibliograficheskoy klassifikatsii [Essays on the (...)
  • 15 In the Soviet Union, the term 'mass library' (massovaya biblioteka) was used to refer to public lib (...)
  • 16 E. Sukiasyan, Knowledge Organization in Russia, op. cit

13The UDC was introduced in the Russian Empire at the beginning of the 20th century.11 Its use continued in the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR), with editions compiled by various authors. In 1921, at the recommendation of Nadezhda Krupskaya (1869–1939), the wife of Vladimir Lenin (leader of the Russian Bolshevik Party) and head of the Main Political and Educational Committee of the People's Commissariat for Education of the RSFSR (Glávnyy polítiko-prosvetítel'nyy komitét Narkomprosa RSFSR, abbreviated as Glavpolitprosvet), the UDC was made compulsory in all Russian libraries.12 In the same year, an abridged version of the UDC, prepared by the Special Committee of the Glavpolitprosvet, was published in a print run of 40,000 copies13, followed by at least two more Glavpolitprosvet editions. The UDC was also introduced into the structure of the “Knizhnaya letopis” [Book annals], the Russian national bibliography, which contributed to the spread of the system in Russia, as every printed work was assigned a UDC index. However, at the First All-Russian Librarians' Congress held in 1924, it was decided that the use of the UDC in its unaltered form would not be deemed suitable in Soviet libraries and that the tables should be revised.14 At Krupskaya's request, the responsibility for this task was assigned to bibliographer and book scientist Lev Tropovsky (1885–1944), who prepared several abridged versions of the UDC for so-called mass15 libraries. These tables were published seven times between 1934 and 1946.16 In addition to Tropovsky, Nikolay Rusinov (1874–1940) and Evgeny Dobrzhinsky (1864–1938) also compiled modified versions of the UDC.

Classification system in Latvian libraries at the beginning of the Soviet re-occupation

  • 17 For more details, see: Aina Štrāle, “Bibliotēka un propaganda (1940.–1941. gads): Latvijas bibliote (...)

14The Sovietisation of Latvian libraries began during the first Soviet occupation (1940–1941). The authorities purged the libraries of literature deemed ideologically unsuitable and replaced it with Soviet Russian and local communist publications. Library staff were replaced with Soviet collaborators in responsible positions, and the network expanded through the conversion of branches and children's departments into autonomous institutions. The main focus of the libraries became the political education of the population in the spirit of communism.17 However, by the summer of 1941, when Nazi rule began, most of the changes imposed by the Soviets had been reversed.

  • 18 Silvija Sardiko, “Cenzūra bibliotēkā (1940–90)” [Censorship at the Library (1940–90)], Latvijas Nac (...)

15Following the Soviet reoccupation in 1944–1945, library Sovietization efforts resumed with renewed intensity. Any printed material that might have aroused criticism of the Soviet regime had to be removed from publicly accessible library collections. It included almost the entire press of the independent Republic of Latvia (with the exception of ideologically aligned communist publications), its legislative documents, materials featuring state symbols, information on presidents and other prominent political figures, works by authors who had been persecuted by the Soviet authorities or had gone into exile, and anti-Soviet literature. The ban also applied to the Nazi occupation-era press and other materials from that period which criticised the Soviet Union or satirised its officials. Consequently, this literature was withdrawn from circulation and sent for recycling. However, a select number of copies were preserved and made available to privileged readers within the so-called “specfonds”.18 The remaining empty shelves were replenished with ideologized Soviet literature.

  • 19 Levs Tropovskis, Īsas decimālās klasifikācijas tabulas nelielām bibliotēkām, Rīga, VAPP, 1946, 102 (...)
  • 20 Kārlis Egle, “Grāmatas bibliotēku jautājumos” [Books on library matters], Skolotāju Avīze, No. 51, (...)
  • 21 Levs Tropovskis, Īsas decimālās klasifikācijas tabulas nelielām bibliotēkām [Short decimal classifi (...)
  • 22 Zaharijs Ambarcumjans, Bibliotekārā klasifikācija, two volumes, Rīga, Latvijas Valsts izdevniecība, (...)

16However, this was insufficient. A new classification principle was needed to systematize the collections according to the communist educational agenda. In May 1945, a committee of library professionals was established for the preparation of a Latvian version of Tropovsky's tables. The first edition, entitled “Īsas decimālās klasifikācijas tabulas nelielām bibliotēkām” (Short decimal classification tables for small libraries) was published in 1946.19 In the same year, the first translation of Alexander Klyenov's “Īss vadonis bibliotekas technikā” (A Short Guide to Library Technique), originally written in Russian as “Kratkoye rukovodstvo po bibliotechnoy tekhnike”, was published. These guides were the first to “introduce Soviet library theory and practice to employees who wished to refresh their knowledge or skills but have not yet mastered the Russian language.”20 In 1948, an expanded translation of the Latvian edition of Tropovsky's tables followed.21 A year later, the publication of the lecture course “Bibliotekārā klasifikācija” (Library Classification) by Zaharii Ambartsumyan (1903‒1970), the leading authority on library classification in the USSR, followed.22 During the four years (1946‒1949), seven books on the Soviet library theory and praxis were published in Latvian, including three devoted to the problems of classification, which shows its important role in the transformation of libraries. All new publications were translations of works by Soviet Russian authors.

  • 23 Each publicly available library in the USSR was affiliated with a specific methodological centre wh (...)

17Libraries should reclassify their collections and systematic catalogue within a few months. It was not possible to refuse or avoid this due to strict oversight. Mass libraries were monitored not only by local authorities and Communist Party cells, but also by specialists from the capital's libraries, who were responsible for so called methodological management, which included supervising the ideological activities of subordinate libraries, organizing professional training, and offering guidance. The major research libraries, on the other hand, were subordinated to the sectoral supervisory bodies, both at the level of the Latvian SSR and the All-Union level. The State Library of the Latvian SSR was bound not only by the directives of the Ministry of Culture of the LSSR, but also by those of the Ministry of Culture of the USSR and the V. I. Lenin State Library of the USSR. 23

  • 24 Z. Ambarcumjans, op. cit., Vol. 1, p. 96–97.

18Despite the inadequacy of the Tropovsky tables in their abridged form for research libraries ‒ which initially employed the UDC developed by Rusinov and published by the All-Union Book Chamber in 1944 ‒ humanities and social sciences literature were mandated to be indexed according to the Tropovsky tables.24 Furthermore, the special auxiliaries for the administrative-territorial division of the USSR had to be used. Both the systematic cataloguing and the arrangement of the collection had to follow the basic principles: the Marxist-Leninist classics were to be placed at the beginning of each section, Soviet editions were to be separated from pre-Soviet literature, and the literature of the people's democracies was to be placed first among foreign publications, followed by the works of capitalist authors. The resolutions of the Communist Party and the government should be gathered in a separate section.

Justification of the new Soviet Library and Bibliographic Classification

  • 25 Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 85.
  • 26 Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 34.
  • 27 Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 40.

19Tropovsky had already declared that the UDC was to be used only temporarily, as the Soviet state needed its own classification system.His successor, Zaharii Ambartsumyan, who continued to adapt the UDC to align with communist ideology, contended that “none of the systems then used in Russia and abroad could fully meet the tasks of libraries [...] Even the most recent systems reflected in their construction the narrow bourgeois worldview of their creators and were based on an idealistic classification of the sciences.”25 For Ambartsumyan, the main drawback of decimal classification is that its “basis is subject to a conditional, formal principle of dividing each science into no more than ten parts”26. The classification system of the US Library of Congress has been equally harshly criticised as “proving the utter inability of bourgeois library science to solve the main problems of library classification. The division and sequence of classes are arbitrary and illogical”.27

20Tropovsky's system maintained the order of the basic UDC classes, but placed Medicine as a separate section between Natural science and Technology, although its index (61) was retained. There was also a recommendation that the catalogue drawers for history (class 9) should be next to drawers for socio-political science (class 3). This deprived the system's main value – logical sequence. New subdivisions were introduced for Soviet realities such as the Stakhanovite movement, collective farms, etc. In addition to numbers, revised or new subdivisions have been given Latin letters (Table 1).

Table 1. Main classes (with some subclasses) of library classifications, used in Latvian libraries, 1920–1982

Decimālā klasifikācija: saīsinātās tabeles [Decimal classification: short tables], compiled by Voldemārs Caune (1920)

Īsas decimālās klasifikācijas tabulas nelielām bibliotēkām [Short Decimal Classification Tables for Small Libraries], compiled by Lev Tropovsky (Translation from Russian, 1946)

Bibliotekārā un bibliogrāfiskā klasifikācija: tabulas masu bibliotēkām [Library and Bibliographic classification: Tables for Mass Libraries] (Translation from Russian, 1982)

00 Generalities. Newspapers and journals, magazines

0 Generalities.

Science

Periodicals

Bibliography

Libraries

10 Philosophy, psychology and ethics

1 Philosophy. Dialectical and Historical Materialism. Psychology

1 Marxism–Leninism A

20 Religion

2 On religion and anti-religious propaganda

2 Natural science ‒ without a letter designation

30 Social sciences

3 Socio-political and economic literature

3K Marxism–Leninism

3 Technology. Technical sciences Ж/О

40 Linguistics

4 Linguistics.

4K Russian language

4L Latvian language (included by the editor of the Latvian translation)

4 Agriculture and forestry П

50 Mathematics and natural science

5 Natural science and mathematics

5 Health protection. Medical sciences Р

60 Applied sciences. Medicine.Technology. Industries and crafts

6 Technology

6/8 Social sciences and humanities ‒ without a letter designation

61 Sciences about the human body

70 The arts

7 The arts. Games. Sport

71/79 Culture. Science. Education Ч

80 Literature. History and literary criticism

8 Literary science and criticism

80/84 Philology Ш

85 The arts. Art history and theory Щ

86 Atheism. Religion Э

90 History and geography. Biographies

9 History

9 PS History of the USSR

9 PSL History of the Latvian SSR (included by the editor of the Latvian translation)

91 Geography.

92 Biographies

9 Bibliographic resources. Reference publications. Journals Я

21Marxism-Leninism, Communism and Socialism (3K) was placed at the forefront of the social sciences, and within this division, separate sections were devoted to the works of Karl Marx (1818‒1883), Friedrich Engels (1820‒1895), Vladimir Lenin (1870‒1924) and Joseph Stalin, which were further subdivided by publication type. The religion division was transformed into an anti-religion division. The subclasses on the history of the USSR and the All-Union Communist (Bolshevik) Party were detailed, while those on political economy and the territorial auxiliaries of the USSR underwent revision. A letter “B” should be given to literature on foreign countries.

  • 28 E. Sukiasyan, Bibliotechno-bibliograficheskaya klassifikatsiya (BBK), op. cit., p. 5.
  • 29 Ibid., p. 6.

22The Tropovsky tables marked the shift toward the new Soviet classification system, the development of which began in the 1930s. A group of specialists from the largest Russian libraries (the Lenin State Library of the USSR, the Library of the USSR Academy of Sciences and the Saltykov-Shchedrin State Public Library) was set up under the leadership of Evgeny Shamurin (1889‒1962), Professor of the Moscow Institute of Libraries.28 A draft classification scheme was sent out for discussion in 1951, albeit on a limited scale, but was rejected by both library professionals and the Communist Party. Shamurin had not consulted with Ambartsumyan, who had for many years continued Tropovsky's work in adapting the UDC to the requirements of the Soviet authorities. The UDC, as modified by Tropovsky and Ambartsumyan, was regularly published and taught in librarian training institutions. In addition, it had already been introduced in many libraries.29

  • 30 Ibid., p. 67.
  • 31 LPSR Valsts Grāmatu palāta, V. Lāča Latvijas PSR Valsts bibliotēka, Bibliotekārā un bibliogrāfiskā (...)
  • 32 Ibid.
  • 33 Ibid., p. 11.
  • 34 Ibid.

23In 1959, the requirement for a new Soviet classification system once again emerged. This proposal was endorsed by both the Russian Ministry of Culture and the USSR Academy of Sciences, thereby facilitating the rapid development and publication of the schedules.30 In 1960, the first volume of the Soviet Library Bibliographic Classification (LBC) was published, and by 1968, a total of 25 books across 30 volumes had been released. It was first intended for large research libraries, so abridged versions for mass libraries came later. 219 persons from fifteen organisations were involved in the compiling of the first edition, and some 800 scholars were involved in the detailed preparation of the chapters and subchapters. In 1969, a decision was taken to number the main chapters. However, the principal innovation of the LBC was the foregrounding of Marxism–Leninism as the only accurate doctrine for the development of nature and society.31 The LBC expressed certain ideological positions that allowed for the distinction between theories such as Leninist political economy and pre-Marxist or Marxist political economy.32 The periodization of history was also revised, with the October coup d'état, referred to in the Soviet period as the Great October Socialist Revolution, highlighted as a pivotal event in world history.33 The doctrine of classes, the role of class struggle in the development of antagonistic formations, and the irreconcilability of socialist and bourgeois ideologies were all extensively reflected.34

The introduction of the Soviet Library and Bibliographic Classification in occupied Latvia

  • 35 LPSR Valsts Grāmatu palāta, V. Lāča Latvijas PSR Valsts bibliotēka, op. cit., p. 2.
  • 36 LBC tables project for mass libraries: materials of the meeting of the State Library of the Latvian (...)
  • 37 Ibid., p. 168.

24Only one library in Latvia – the State University Library of the Latvian SSR – chose to implement the new system with the first issue in 1960, acting on its own initiative.35 Other libraries were introduced to the LBC only in October 1970, when the Ministry of Culture of the Latvian SSR disseminated a draft classification tables to mass libraries. A discussion of the project was organised, yielding a predominantly negative evaluation.36 The employees of mass libraries distanced themselves from the LBC, expressing confusion over its necessity, as both librarians and patrons had been accustomed to the UDC for decades. Concerns were raised about the complexity and obscurity of the LBC, which was perceived as cumbersome and difficult to navigate. Librarians asserted that training both library staff and users would necessitate a significant investment of time, compounded by the extensive reclassification of collections and catalogues. The organisation of joint catalogues in the UDC system for research and mass libraries, initiated several years ago, served as a counterargument against the implementation of the LBC. To mitigate the perception that the new classification was entirely superfluous, librarians advocated for its adoption within research libraries, which, “given their staffs, will still somehow manage to revise the catalogues after the publication of future editions of the LBC; in mass libraries it is completely out of the question”.37

  • 38 Notes from the State Library of the Latvian SSR on the LBC tables project for mass libraries (in Ru (...)

25The State Library's specialists were more constructive in their criticism, with concrete suggestions for improvement.38 They noted that the LBC does not respect the basic principles of classification: 1) logical, gradual scheme of disciplines – from the general to the particular, from the broader to the narrower concept; 2) equivalent headings should be given indices with the same number of digits. It was pointed out that the basic classes of sciences should be designated by easily memorable numerical indices rather than by letters of the Russian alphabet and a long series of digits. Later, to ensure the usability of the classification system throughout the Soviet Union, where different writing systems were in use, numerals were also introduced in the discipline's designations along with the letters of the Russian alphabet in 1969.

26The staff of the State Library also mentioned a curiosities in the classification scheme, for example, “Household” was placed under “Manufacture of other consumer goods”. Paradoxically, the structure of the socio-political sections was the worst. This is probably due to the attempt to raise Marxist-Leninist ideology to the level of a universal scientific theory, which was impossible.

  • 39 Vera Zinkina, “Zinātniskais un bibliogrāfiskais darbs” [Research and bibliographical work], Bibliot (...)
  • 40 LPSR Valsts Grāmatu palāta, V. Lāča LPSR Valsts bibliotēka, op. cit.
  • 41 Anna Mauliņa, “Saules aptumsums tomēr nesākās” [The solar eclipse didn't begin], Bibliotekārs, No.  (...)
  • 42 V. Lāča LPSR Valsts bibliotēkas administrācijas pavēle Nr. 11 par padomju BBK tabulu ieviešanu bibl (...)
  • 43 Daina Bleiere, “Perestroika”, Nacionālā enciklopēdija, 2023. URL: https://enciklopedija.lv/skirklis (...)

27The State Library initially decided not to adopt the new classification system. However, in the early 1970s, it was forced to reorganise the most ideologically saturated sections of its systematic catalogue according to the LBC ‒ namely, Marxist-Leninist, historical, and economic literature. The second-largest library in Latvia, the Fundamental Library of the Academy of Sciences of the Latvian SSR (now incorporated into the Library of the University of Latvia), also began using the LBC39. This indicates that the professional views of librarians were not taken into account. The Soviet government's plans remained unalterable, and the LBC's development continued. In 1982 the tables for mass libraries were published in Latvian40, and their implementation became practically obligatory for this type of libraries. However, a number of libraries have taken their time and have only reclassified one or more parts of the collection.41 On 18 October 1985, the USSR Ministry of Culture issued an order “On the introduction of Library and Bibliographic Classification into the work practice of state republican, regional, and district universal libraries”, which meant a compulsory and complete transition to LBC also in the State Library of the Latvian SSR.42 This demonstrates that the ideological role of libraries remained in force in the mid-1980s, and that perestroika, proclaimed in 1985 by Mikhail Gorbachev (1931‒2022), General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, did not initially include any freedom of information.43

  • 44 Lilija Grīnfogele, Sistemātiskā kataloga organizācija pēc BBK [Systematic catalogue organisation ac (...)
  • 45 Anna Mauliņa, “Ceļā uz Nacionālo bibliotēku” [On the road to the National Library], Latvijas Jaunat (...)

28In 1989, the State Library then undertook the preparation and publication of methodological instructions for mass libraries, which were entitled “Sistemātiskā kataloga organizācija pēc BBK” [Organization of a Systematic Catalog according to the LBC].44 At that time, the majority of society was already living in the atmosphere of the Awakening, and returned to the previously used UDC. The Collective Council of the State Library, which included many classification specialists, abandoned the LBC only on 29 January 199045. The reintroduction of the UDC in libraries was a symbolic step, marking a return to the traditions of the independent Latvian Republic and to the democratic European culture from which Latvia had been forcibly separated for nearly 50 years.

  • 46 LBC is still Russia's national library classification system, even though its structure has changed (...)

29The implementation of the ideologized UDC and later the new LBC did not raise public loyalty to the Soviet power, but on the contrary – widened the gap between the library as a place of the Soviet “ideological front” and Latvian society. A key reason why the LBC was negatively evaluated and rejected in Latvia was that it had not been chosen by the librarians themselves but was imposed by the occupying power to deepen the ideologization of society.46 Moreover, the LBC, whose scheme was incompatible with the UDC by foregrounding one particular political ideology (Marxism-Leninism), fostered the isolation of the Soviet Union and the nations included in it from democratic Europe and the USA, which had always served as a source of inspiration for the library development in Latvia.

  • 47 V. Lāča LPSR Valsts bibliotēka, Grāmata un lasītājs: socioloģisks pētījums lauku rajonā [The book a (...)
  • 48 Jana Dreimane, “Officially non-existent: storage and use of banned literature in the Soviet Latvia (...)
  • 49 Until then, library usage had not been analyzed from this perspective. Library sector reports only (...)
  • 50 Stefānija Vilciņa, “Masu bibliotēka un lasītājs laukos” [Public library and the reader in the count (...)

30During the Soviet occupation, the low prices and extensive print runs of books enabled the majority of the Latvian population to acquire nearly all newly published materials for personal use. Even books that were in short supply and therefore not easily purchased were first sought in the private libraries of relatives, neighbours, and friends. A substantial proportion of the population (more than 40%) maintained extensive and expanding personal book collections, with many holding over 200 books.47 Personal libraries could be assembled and curated with relative freedom according to individual preferences and practical capabilities. It is also noteworthy that hard-to-find foreign or pre-Soviet literature (much of which was classified as “obsolete”) and and even illicitly reproduced texts could be obtained through private vendors or on unauthorised markets operating in several locations in major cities.48 This phenomenon contributed to a diminished reliance on public libraries. The first sociological study of reading in Latvia, conducted in the early 1970s, indicated that fewer than a quarter of rural and small-town residents utilized public libraries49, with an even smaller percentage seeking fiction, which was easily available in bookstores.50 However, the authorities overseeing the library system ignored the increasing societal alienation from public libraries. The ideological dictate continued, as demonstrated by the insistence on the mandatory implementation of the LBC.

  • 51 Latvijas bibliotēku darba rādītāji 1990 [Indicators of libraries in Latvia, 1990], Rīga, Latvijas N (...)
  • 52 A similar situation also existed in the neighboring country of Estonia, which, like Latvia, experie (...)
  • 53 Susannah Quick, Gillian Prior et al., “Users' perceptions of the benefits of ICT in public librarie (...)

31In 1990 – the year when Latvia regained its independence ‒ a significant decline occurred, with only 19% of the population using public library services, despite the existence of a highly extensive network of more than 1,000 public libraries.51 Thus, several generations grew up without needing to visit public libraries.52 The society reluctance to engage with these institutions, coupled with the low status of librarianship, was a primary challenge confronting the sector in Latvia following the restoration of state independence ‒ one that took several decades to overcome. Due to substantial support from local and national sources, as well as foreign grants, the Latvian public library sector had, by the beginning of the 21st century, reached the level of the most developed European countries in terms of accessibility, usability, and service quality. This was reflected in the fact that, by 2013, all Latvian public libraries (including those in rural areas) provided free internet access and were used by 30% of the population.53 The libraries have earned the public's trust as democratic cultural institutions that prioritise the interests of their readers.

32Supported by the project “Book and Society in Latvia: European Dimension and Cultural Transformations” LZP-2023/1-0263.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Baumanis Arturs, Rogers, Robert A., “Soviet Classification and Cataloging”, Library Quarterly, No. 3, Vol. 28, Jul., 1958, p. 172‒186.

Kolář Pavel, “The party as a new utopia: reshaping communist identity after Stalinism” Social History, No. 4, Vol. 37, November 2012, p. 402‒424.

Lotman Piret, “Estonian Public Libraries in the Twentieth Century”, in Piret Lotman, Tiina Vilberg, The 20th century libraries in the Baltic Sea region, Tallinn, Eesti Rahvusraamatukogu, 2004, p. 100‒124, URL: https://www.digar.ee/viewer/en/nlib-digar:289070/264829.

Sukiasyan Eduard, Bibliotechno-bibliograficheskaya klassifikatsiya (BBK) – Natsional'naya klassifikatsionnaya sistema Rossiyskoy Federatsii=Library-Bibliographical Classification (LBC) the National classification system of the Russian Federation. Moscov, Russian State Library, 2015, URL: http://www.iskoi.org/doc/lbc-en.pdf.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Pavel, Kolář, “The party as a new utopia: reshaping communist identity after Stalinism”, Social History, No. 4, Vol. 37, November 2012, p. 405.

2 Daina, Bleiere, “Padomju otrreizējā okupācija Latvijā” [Second Soviet occupation of Latvia], Nacionālā enciklopēdija, 2025. URL: https://enciklopedija.lv/skirklis/22220-padomju-otrreizej%C4%81-okup%C4%81cija-Latvij%C4%81, consulted the 13/11/2025.

3 Daina Bleiere, “Vispārējās izglītības sovetizācija Latvijā: padomju cilvēka veidošana mācību procesā (1944–1964)” [Sovietisation of general education in Latvia: forming the Soviet personality within the educational process (1944–1964)], Latvijas Vēstures Institūta Žurnāls, No. 1, 2013, p. 104.

4 This duplicitous attitude towards Soviet power was also evident in other republics of the Soviet Union. See: Elena Zdravomyslova, Viktor Voronkov, “The Informal Public in Soviet Society: Double Morality at Work”, Social Research, No. 1, Vol. 69, 2002, p. 49–69.

5 This is evidenced by articles in the Latvian press about public libraries in the USA and elsewhere at the beginning of the 20th century. See for example: Kristaps Alksnis, “Tautas lasītavas Anglijā” [Public reading rooms in England], Dienas Lapa, No. 271, 1901, p. 2; Jēkabs Janovskis, “Tautas bibliotēkas un lasītavas Vācijā” [Public libraries and reading rooms in Germany], Rīgas Avīze, No. 134, 1902, p. 1; Jānis Stalažs, “Bērnu bibliotēka Amerikā” [Children's library in America], Rīgas Avīze, No. 124, 1903, p. 1.

6 Teodors Līventāls, Kā nodibināt un iekārtot bibliotēku?, Rīga, A. Golts, [1913], p. 58.

7 UDC: Universal Decimal Classification: Standard Edition, Vol. 1 – Systematic tables, British Standard Institution, 2005, p. vii.

8 The State Library of Latvia published a regular index of new publications “Valsts bibliotēkas biļetens: Latvijas bibliogrāfijas žurnāls” [State Library bulletin: Latvia's bibliography journal] (1927‒1943) and index to Latvian periodicals “Latviešu zinātne un literatūra” [Latvian Science and Literature] (1920‒1940).

9 Voldemārs Caune, Decimālā klasifikācija: saīsinātas tabeles [Decimal Classification: abridged tables], Rīga, Izglītības ministrija, 1920, 20 p.

10 Voldemārs Caune, Bibliotēkas iekārta [Setting up a library], Rīga, Valtera un Rapas akc.sab., 1929, p. 45.

11 Nathalie Delougaz, “Adaptations of the Decimal Classification for Soviet Libraries”, The Library Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 2, 1947, p. 148.

12 Eduard Sukiasyan, Knowledge Organization in Russia: Problem-related and Historical Aspects. URL: https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/0943-7444-1993-4-189.pdf, consulted the 13/11/2025. See also: Eduard Sukiasyan, Bibliotechno-bibliograficheskaya klassifikatsiya (BBK) – Natsional'naya klassifikatsionnaya sistema Rossiyskoy Federatsii=Library-Bibliographical Classification (LBC) the National classification system of the Russian Federation, Moscov, Russian State Library, 2015, p. 3, URL: http://www.iskoi.org/doc/lbc-en.pdf, consulted the 08/11/2025.

13 Desyatichnaya mezhdunarodnaya klassifikatsiya knig. Sokrashchennyye tablitsy, sostavlennyye Osoboy komissiyey pri Glavpolitprosvete dlya obyazatel'nogo upotrebleniya v bibliotekakh RSFSR [Universal Decimal Classification of Books. Abbreviated tables compiled by the Special Committee of the Glavpolitprosvet for mandatory use in libraries RSFSR], Gomel', Gos. izd-vo, 1921, 54 p.

14 Yevgeniy Shamurin, Ocherki po istorii bibliotechno-bibliograficheskoy klassifikatsii [Essays on the history of library and bibliographic classification], Tom II, Moskva, Izd-vo Vsesoyuznoy knizhnoy palaty, 1959, p. 404.

15 In the Soviet Union, the term 'mass library' (massovaya biblioteka) was used to refer to public libraries. It was apparently introduced to emphasise their accessibility to all and to distinguish them from public libraries in the bourgeois system.

16 E. Sukiasyan, Knowledge Organization in Russia, op. cit

17 For more details, see: Aina Štrāle, “Bibliotēka un propaganda (1940.–1941. gads): Latvijas bibliotekārā darba sovetizacijas daži aspekti” [The Library and Propaganda (1940–1941): Some Aspects of the Sovietisation of Latvian Library Work], Latvijas Zinātņu Akadēmijas Vēstis. A, Vol. 56, No. 1, 2002, p. 1–9.

18 Silvija Sardiko, “Cenzūra bibliotēkā (1940–90)” [Censorship at the Library (1940–90)], Latvijas Nacionālās bibliotēkas raksti, Vol. XIX, 1994, p. 75–78.

19 Levs Tropovskis, Īsas decimālās klasifikācijas tabulas nelielām bibliotēkām, Rīga, VAPP, 1946, 102 p.

20 Kārlis Egle, “Grāmatas bibliotēku jautājumos” [Books on library matters], Skolotāju Avīze, No. 51, December 15, 1948, p. 5.

21 Levs Tropovskis, Īsas decimālās klasifikācijas tabulas nelielām bibliotēkām [Short decimal classification tables for small libraries], Rīga, Latvijas PSR Valsts bibliotēka,1948, 66 p.

22 Zaharijs Ambarcumjans, Bibliotekārā klasifikācija, two volumes, Rīga, Latvijas Valsts izdevniecība, 1949.

23 Each publicly available library in the USSR was affiliated with a specific methodological centre whose responsibility it was to ensure that the library's activities aligned with the current policies of the Soviet authorities. The centre responsible for public libraries in Latvia was the State Library of the Latvian SSR (now the National Library of Latvia). The hierarchy of methodological management of libraries in the USSR is explained in this book: Isidor Frumin, Bibliotechnoye delo: organizatsiya i upravleniye, Moskva: Кniga, 1980, p. 218‒227.

24 Z. Ambarcumjans, op. cit., Vol. 1, p. 96–97.

25 Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 85.

26 Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 34.

27 Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 40.

28 E. Sukiasyan, Bibliotechno-bibliograficheskaya klassifikatsiya (BBK), op. cit., p. 5.

29 Ibid., p. 6.

30 Ibid., p. 67.

31 LPSR Valsts Grāmatu palāta, V. Lāča Latvijas PSR Valsts bibliotēka, Bibliotekārā un bibliogrāfiskā klasifikācija: tabulas masu bibliotēkām [Library and bibliographic classification: tables for mass libraries], Rīga, Avots, 1982, p. 10.

32 Ibid.

33 Ibid., p. 11.

34 Ibid.

35 LPSR Valsts Grāmatu palāta, V. Lāča Latvijas PSR Valsts bibliotēka, op. cit., p. 2.

36 LBC tables project for mass libraries: materials of the meeting of the State Library of the Latvian SSR and mass library staff (in Russian), Latvian State Archives of the Latvian National Archives (LNA LVA), Fund 678, Description 3, File 802, p. 165–169.

37 Ibid., p. 168.

38 Notes from the State Library of the Latvian SSR on the LBC tables project for mass libraries (in Russian), LNA LVA, Fund 678, Description 3, File 802, p. 170–175.

39 Vera Zinkina, “Zinātniskais un bibliogrāfiskais darbs” [Research and bibliographical work], Bibliotēka ‒ zinātnei = Biblioteka ‒ nauke, Rīga, Zinātne, 1973, p. 121.

40 LPSR Valsts Grāmatu palāta, V. Lāča LPSR Valsts bibliotēka, op. cit.

41 Anna Mauliņa, “Saules aptumsums tomēr nesākās” [The solar eclipse didn't begin], Bibliotekārs, No. 4, November 1990, p. 2.

42 V. Lāča LPSR Valsts bibliotēkas administrācijas pavēle Nr. 11 par padomju BBK tabulu ieviešanu bibliotēkas darba praksē [Order No 11 of the Administration of the State Library of the LSSR of Vilis Lācis on the implementation of the Soviet LBC tables in the library's working practice] 18.02.1986. LNA LVA, 235. f., 8. apr., 149. l., p. 9‒10.

43 Daina Bleiere, “Perestroika”, Nacionālā enciklopēdija, 2023. URL: https://enciklopedija.lv/skirklis/3859-perestroika, consulted the 13/11/2025.

44 Lilija Grīnfogele, Sistemātiskā kataloga organizācija pēc BBK [Systematic catalogue organisation according to the BBK], Rīga, LPSR Valsts bibliotēka, 1989.

45 Anna Mauliņa, “Ceļā uz Nacionālo bibliotēku” [On the road to the National Library], Latvijas Jaunatne, 1990, No. 22, p. 2.

46 LBC is still Russia's national library classification system, even though its structure has changed. See: E. Sukiasyan, Bibliotechno-bibliograficheskaya klassifikatsiya (BBK), op. cit., p. 2.

47 V. Lāča LPSR Valsts bibliotēka, Grāmata un lasītājs: socioloģisks pētījums lauku rajonā [The book and the reader: a sociological study in a rural area], Rīga, Zinātne, 1978, p. 143‒144.

48 Jana Dreimane, “Officially non-existent: storage and use of banned literature in the Soviet Latvia in the 1970s‒1980s”, Knygotyra, 2017, Vol. 68, p. 151‒157.

49 Until then, library usage had not been analyzed from this perspective. Library sector reports only provided information on the dynamics of library readership over a two-year period in one system: the mass library system.

50 Stefānija Vilciņa, “Masu bibliotēka un lasītājs laukos” [Public library and the reader in the country-side], Bibliotēku zinātnes aspekti, I (VI), Rīga, Zvaigzne, 1977, p. 56 ; V. Lāča LPSR Valsts bibliotēka, op. cit., p. 97.

51 Latvijas bibliotēku darba rādītāji 1990 [Indicators of libraries in Latvia, 1990], Rīga, Latvijas Nacionālā bibliotēka, 1991, p. 5.

52 A similar situation also existed in the neighboring country of Estonia, which, like Latvia, experienced Soviet occupation. See: Piret Lotman, “Estonian Public Libraries in the Twentieth Century”, in Piret Lotman, Tiina Vilberg, The 20th century libraries in the Baltic Sea region, Tallinn, Eesti Rahvusraamatukogu, 2004, p. 121‒122, URL: https://www.digar.ee/viewer/en/nlib-digar:289070/264829, consulted the 13/11/2025.

53 Susannah Quick, Gillian Prior et al., “Users' perceptions of the benefits of ICT in public libraries in Latvia: Final report”, 2013. URL: https://digital.lib.washington.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/6f55797c-c6aa-4cba-86da-3b782c247399/content, consulted the 13/11/2025.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Jana Dreimane, « Ideological Classification Systems for the Creation of 'Homo Sovieticus' in Latvian Libraries during the Second Soviet Occupation, 1944–1990 »Revue d’histoire culturelle [En ligne], 11 | 2025, mis en ligne le 15 décembre 2025, consulté le 10 février 2026. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/rhc/16432 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/15fd8

Haut de page

Auteur

Jana Dreimane

Dr. philol. Jana Dreimane is a senior researcher at the National Library of Latvia, specializing in library history. Her research interests include censorship, Latvian libraries during the Soviet and Nazi occupations, and the development of regional libraries. She is the compiler of Valsts bibliotēkas darbinieki, 1919–1944: biogrāfiskā vārdnīca (Employees of the State Library, 1919–1944: A Biographical Dictionary; published in 2021) and the collective monograph Latvijas Bibliotekāru biedrība simts gados, 1923–2023 (One Hundred Years of the Library Association of Latvia, 1923–2023; published in 2023).

Jana.Dreimane@lnb.lv

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont susceptibles d’être soumis à des autorisations d’usage spécifiques.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search