Marina Dmitrieva ist Kunsthistorikerin in Leipzig. Ihre Forschungsgebiete umfassen die transnationelle visuelle Kultur und die Kunstgeschichte Mittel- und Osteuropas.Kristina Jõekalda ist wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin an der Estnischen Kunstakademie, Tallinn.Krista Kodres ist Professorin für Kunstgeschichte an der Estnischen Kunstakademie, Tallinn, und wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin an der Universität Tallinn.Kristina Jõekalda ist wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin an der Estnischen Kunstakademie, Tallinn.Krista Kodres ist Professorin für Kunstgeschichte an der Estnischen Kunstakademie, Tallinn, und wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin an der Universität Tallinn.Kristina Jõekalda ist wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin an der Estnischen Kunstakademie, Tallinn.Krista Kodres ist Professorin für Kunstgeschichte an der Estnischen Kunstakademie, Tallinn, und wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin an der Universität Tallinn.Michaela Marek war Professorin für Kunstgeschichte Osteuropas an der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.Dr Robert Born is an art historian specializing on Eastern Europe and works as a research fellow at the Federal Institute for Culture and History of the Germans in Eastern Europe in Oldenburg.Ada Raev ist Professorin für Kunstgeschichte an der Universität Bamberg.

How did the Eastern European and Soviet states write their respective histories of art and architecture during 1940s-1960s? The articles address both the Stalinist period and the Khrushchev Thaw, when the Marxist-Leninist discourse on art history was 'invented' and refined. Although this discourse was inevitably 'Sovietized' in a process dictated from Moscow, a variety of distinct interpretations emerged from across the Soviet bloc in the light of local traditions, cultural politics and decisions of individual authors.

How did the Eastern European and Soviet states write their respective histories of art and architecture during 1940s-1960s? The articles address both the Stalinist period and the Khrushchev Thaw, when the Marxist-Leninist discourse on art history was 'invented' and refined. Although this discourse was inevitably 'Sovietized' in a process dictated from Moscow, a variety of distinct interpretations emerged from across the Soviet bloc in the light of local traditions, cultural politics and decisions of individual authors.

How did the Eastern European and Soviet states write their respective histories of art and architecture during 1940s-1960s? The articles address both the Stalinist period and the Khrushchev Thaw, when the Marxist-Leninist discourse on art history was "invented" and refined. Although this discourse was inevitably "Sovietized" in a process dictated from Moscow, a variety of distinct interpretations emerged from across the Soviet bloc in the light of local traditions, cultural politics and decisions of individual authors. Even if the new "official" discourse often left space open for national concerns, it also gave rise to a countermovement in response to the aggressive ideologization of art and the preeminence assigned to (Socialist) Realist aesthetics.