Introduction
The topic of healthcare has always been relevant in the USSR, and during Stalin’s reign, this sector started developing significantly. During the Soviet era, people had an opportunity to undergo wellness treatment in specialised places called sanatoriums, and free trips to such facilities were offered. Particular attention was paid to water procedures as essential health programmes. The cult of bathhouses became a symbol of the Soviet era, which speaks about citizens’ love to hygiene and their respect for traditions and habits, and these customs took their roots in the birth of Christianity and were associated with purification.
As a result of the Stalinist plan for the development of medicine, a large number of sanatoriums were opened from 1933 to 1936 during the restoration of Sochi as the main Soviet resort, and the trend of wellness was common (Geisler 18). The healthcare system in the USSR was largely based on using water procedures for the treatment and prevention of various ailments, and a special attitude to water became part of not only the physiological but also the psychological profile of the Soviet citizen.
Trend of Using Natural Resources for Treatment
The Soviet healthcare system was famous for its commitment not to contemporary developments in the field of rehabilitation but to traditional healing technologies. According to Geisler, physicians in the USSR adhered to the strategy of using natural resources as valuable sources for the prevention of various diseases (2). As a result, the trend of naturalness became a cult trend in the country, and most people considered it their duty to trust specialists promoting such methods of treatment. Therefore, promoting water procedures was one of the key areas in the healthcare system of the state.
During the renovations of Soviet resorts, one of the most important procedures was the adoption of radon baths as a traditional way of healing. Veselova agues that this trend was maintained both in the era of the Soviet Union and in modern times, although in many spas, new and modern treatment methods have developed (497). Soviet citizens’ physiological need for water was natural and due to not only the desire for hygiene but also some other motives, in particular, religious beliefs. According to Vujosevic, the Orthodox Church has always encouraged the cleansing of not only the soul but also the body, and regular washing was a psychological characteristic of both Soviet citizens and their ancestors who lived in this territory (2).
Natural resources were used in the USSR as those few and affordable means of healing because, at all times of its development, the country had difficult relationships with many powers. The isolation of the state explains why borrowing from foreign wellness practices was limited (Geisler 39). Therefore, the development of local sets of procedures by using water as one of the most accessible natural elements was a reasonable prerequisite.
In order to meet the needs of Soviet people in water procedures, the government built resorts on sea coasts. Conterio remarks that the renovation of Sochi during the Stalinist period was justified by the convenient location of the city in the subtropical zone and access to the sea (92). The author compares the work in this region with that carried out in Miami to build recreation centres and notes that the south of the USSR was the most promising region for the development of wellness tourism (Conterio 92). Geisler notes that Soviet geography was so diverse and boundless that the local government had an opportunity to build sanatoriums in different areas (39).
However, the development of the country’s southern regions was identified as a priority. As Omidi states, in accordance with the Stalinist plans of the first and second five-year plans, renovations in the field of wellness rehabilitation led to the fact that “by 1939, 1,828 new sanatoriums with 239,000 beds had been built.” This outcome allows talking about the significant interest of the local government in the development of this industry and meeting citizens’ needs in desirable water procedures.
Cult of Bathhouses
Even before the USSR, the ancestors of Soviet people were anxious about body hygiene and spent much time with water, taking part in various customs associated with baths. These procedures, as a rule, had a religious background and were connected with purification as one of the main covenants of the Orthodox Church (Vujosevic 3). The most accessible and easiest place to access the water was in banyas, or bathhouses, small insulated buildings where the temperature was brought to high degrees due to the glow of stones (Vujosevic 1).
Steam was one of the essential elements of washing in banyas. This cult overgrew with traditions quickly, and in the future, Soviet citizens began to use these places not only for washing but also as a tribute to the rituals maintained for many generations (Lissitzky 48). According to Vujosevic, at the initial stage of the country’s inception, this trend was maintained, but after the end of World War II, when the power’s economy was in decline, people were puzzled by other problems (1). Banya traditions started losing their relevance, and even after the stabilisation of public life, less attention was paid to this recreation.
However, in the era of mass shortages and bans in the USSR, interest in banyas began to revive. Pollock remarks that the government needed to restore an independent economy that experienced significant problems, and in 1970, at the congress of the Communist Party, it was decided to upgrade the status of bathhouses and other municipal institutions to supplement the country’s budget (225). Despite an extended time period that passed since the change in attitude to baths, Soviet people took this initiative positively, and it became a tradition to spend free time in many city bathhouses.
In addition to municipal institutions, private banyas were also built actively, and, according to Klett, every self-respecting landowner considered it one’s duty to construct a bathhouse (264). Although many old bathing ceremonies gave way to a more modern pastime, some traditions were preserved and maintained, and their violation was unacceptable. Such a passion for bathhouses proves that during difficult times in economic and social life, the country’s population did not lose interest in such a phenomenon as joint bathing. Thus, the renewal of traditions became a natural aspect proving people’s love for hygiene.
In addition to the craving for water procedures as an integral principle of spiritual and physical purification, some other principles and unwritten laws were promoted in the bathhouses of the USSR. For instance, Klett mentions the “no women” rule and notes that gender-separate visits to bathhouses were mandatory for Soviet citizens who adhered to strict moral principles and, at the same time, respected patriarchal foundations (264). Jargin notes that, despite the healthy nature of steam therapy, in Soviet traditions, visiting a banya was closely associated with alcohol consumption, which was an integral attribute of bathing, and today, this tradition is maintained in many post-Soviet countries (1).
People were ready to spend their weekends time in bathhouses, and in the views of many citizens, they perceived this pastime as a healthy and pleasant holiday and considered it extremely necessary. Moreover, various bathing technologies existed, and specially trained people held the positions of professional bathhouse attendants who steamed others and controlled temperature conditions (Pollock 110). All these aspects prove the traditional character of Soviet banyas that have changed little over many decades and remained an integral element of the life of citizens.
Building Sanatoriums to Preserve Traditions
The large-scale construction of sanatoriums during the Stalinist period of rule was associated not only with the trend for wellness but also with the attempt of the Soviet authorities to preserve the traditions of recreation within the country. Assipova and Minnaert argue that, in accordance with the state law, all citizens of the state had the right to leisure and rest (217). Nevertheless, when analysing the history of the USSR, one can note that the government had a strict course to prevent the penetration of Western culture, and to attract the interest of citizens, the construction of rest houses and sanatoriums was maintained. In addition, it was not easy for an ordinary Soviet person to leave the country, which was favourable for promoting local recreational areas. The arrangement of resort complexes in the area of ​​water resources was of great importance for citizens because, based on the aforementioned religious and healing practices, spiritual and physical cleansing was perceived inextricably.
In the context of the country’s development, the availability of sanatoriums was an important aspect. Geisler notes that Soviet medical practices relied heavily on the social determinants of public health, which became the fundamental course determining the local healing system (2). The country that was rich in thermal and mineral waters used this potential to the full extent (Ile and Ţigu 75).
The desire of the authorities to maintain a course towards wellness allowed them to ensure that the number of people wishing to visit sanatoriums and rest homes increased constantly. According to Assipova and Minnaert, in 1983, 45 million Soviet citizens spent their holidays in these establishments, although in 1975, this figure was 30 million (218). Such excitement proves the success of the chosen wellness strategy and confirms that rest in conditions of proximity to water resources was extremely widespread and in-demand in the state.
Although the health system was a significant sector in the context of the economic development of the USSR, the level of rest was different from that promoted in many foreign resorts. Koenker gives the concept of proletarian tourism that was modest in its manifestation and did not differ in a wide variety of services (53). Conversely, narrow-profile procedures, as a rule, were promoted in the country’s sanatoriums, and many of them were preserved for decades.
This constancy can be interpreted as the desire of the government to protect citizens from the penetration of foreign culture into the masses and support the unique health-improving practices that were characteristic of specific regions. Such procedures as mud baths, bathing in mineral waters, and other integral components of traditional medicine made it possible to maintain public interest in local health sites (Geisler 115). Thus, the preservation of wellness traditions was associated with political motives and the government’s desire to provide people with access to national healing practices with an emphasis on water resources.
Soviet Holiday Customs and Sanatorium Vacation
The attitude of the Soviet people towards weekends was special in view of the political reforms promoted by the government. According to Frost, in 1929, the ruling Communist Party led by Stalin decided to abolish a single day off (Sunday), setting up a special schedule for workers and supporting continuous production in factories. Since the course towards industrial development was strict in that era, such a measure was considered effective for improving economic performance. However, this reform was not effective and was perceived negatively. As a result, ultimately, it was abolished in 1940 (Frost).
The country retained Sunday status as an official day off that which many citizens preferred to spend with their families. At the same time, visiting public banyas was common on Saturdays, which became a tradition among people and was perceived as a natural pastime.
The Stalinist course towards a policy of wellness was perceived positively among the population, which led to the intensified construction of recreational complexes and the establishment of a vacation system for trips. Voon remarks that during World War II, many establishments of this plan were destroyed or remodelled as hospitals. However, in the future, the course for renovation was laid, which was the beginning of the era of the mass wellness policy.
Mcguire argues that spending holidays in Soviet sanatoriums was possible due to “a state-funded voucher system” that included full or partially paid vacations in specialised recreational facilities. As the author states, significant funds were invested in the construction of such rest homes since these buildings were distinguished by innovative architectural solutions and increased comfort for visitors (Mcguire). The proximity to the water was encouraged; therefore, the resorts of the southern regions of the USSR were greatly appreciated.
Access to sanatoriums was promoted in a variety of ways, including both financial incentives and transportation facilities. Cowan notes that the USSR government encouraged the creation of a unified system of railways leading to most popular resorts. Rest in sanatoriums was considered a privilege and a valuable opportunity for many citizens to spend time with benefit. Water treatments were in demand, and, as Cowan remarks, even government elites used the services of some recreational facilities.
The author calls the entire system of Soviet wellness utopian but emphasises that it was stable and appreciated by people for an opportunity to travel around the country and receive affordable medical services for free (Cowan). Thus, the peculiarities of weekends and holidays in the USSR were closely associated with a healthy lifestyle, and the state plan for the mass construction of sanatoriums confirms the relevance of this type of vacation among Soviet citizens.
Uniqueness of the Soviet Wellness System
The uniqueness of the Soviet wellness system consisted not only in its attachment to traditions but also in addressing those ailments that were not only of a chronic origin. As Geisler argues, in the USSR, the issue of social diseases was acute, in particular, tuberculosis, nervous disorders and other illnesses caused by the close interaction of people (4). An opportunity to help people with these problems through a unified system of assistance as a rest allowed strengthening the faith of the population in the power of the government and its favour for citizens. Although Orthodox religious trends were condemned by the authorities, increased access to water procedures encouraged the preservation of the traditional practices of spiritual purification, along with the education of the population (Migacheva and Frederick 161).
Unlike many Western countries, local wellness institutions were based solely on domestic healing practices, in particular, utilising the useful power of water and its valuable components. Such a traditional nature was intentional, but strict adherence to it was unique for such a large country.
The government of the USSR managed to not only create a wide network of recreational complexes throughout the country but also promote a healthy lifestyle successfully. According to Starks, “the healthy body became the manifestation of socialist triumph,” and the widespread slogan about the unity of a body and mind was evidence of the impact on people’s self-awareness (1720). In addition, as Geisler notes, nature was an integral part of this course, and adherence to traditional healing practices proves this assumption (13).
The use of water as one of the main components for the treatment of local and general health problems confirms had its objective reasons, and Soviet scholars’ research programmes were aimed at searching for the alternative ways of utilising this natural resource for medical purposes (Smith 365). While considering the size of the USSR, such attention to water was strange for many foreign countries, where various anti-ageing and wellness treatments were offered. However, Soviet citizens supported domestic wellness practices and wanted to get access to water constantly either at resorts or in local urban environments, in particular, bathhouses.
While taking into account the social isolation of the USSR, the collective principles of wellness were not unique to this communist state. Nevertheless, socialist tourism, as Rosenbaum argues, allowed creating unified leisure habits, which was part of the state development plan (158). In the end, political fluctuations caused a decline in this area, but the interest of post-Soviet citizens in the affordable ways of healing and, in particular, water remained. This outcome confirms deep-rooted traditions and demonstrates the value of natural wellness practices for the population.
Conclusion
Adherence to traditional practices was a characteristic feature of the Soviet wellness system in which using water as a key resource was determined not only by physiological but also by psychological attachment to hygiene and purification. The cult of banyas promoted in the country proves how deeply the rituals of bathing were widespread.
The wellness trend promoted during the era of Stalin’s rule was supported, and the state system of vouchers offered free services in sanatoriums and rest homes, most of which were located in close proximity to water resources. Preserving traditions was an important aspect of national socialist politics, and the maintenance of a healthy lifestyle was a significant achievement of the communist government. The system of weekends and holidays was ambiguous at the initial stage of the country’s formation, but afterwards, people were given separate days as mandatory components of their labour weeks. The uniqueness of the Soviet wellness system lies in various aspects, including traditional medical practices, a system of access to recreational facilities and the unification of people’s leisure habits.
Works Cited
Assipova, Zhanna, and Lynn Minnaert. “Tourists of the World, Unite! The Interpretation and Facilitation of Tourism Towards the End of the Soviet Union (1962-1990).” Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, vol. 6, no. 3, 2014, pp. 215-230.
Conterio, Johanna. “Inventing the Subtropics: An Environmental History of Sochi, 1929-36.” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, vol. 16, no. 1, 2015, pp. 91-120.
Cowan, Katy. “A Glimpse Inside Abandoned Luxury Spa Resorts Built Under the Soviet Union.” Creative Boom. 2019. Web.
Frost, Natasha. “For 11 Years, the Soviet Union Had No Weekends.” History. 2018. Web.
Geisler, Johanna Conterio. The Soviet Sanatorium: Medicine, Nature and Mass Culture in Sochi, 1917-1991. Dissertation, Harvard University, 2014.
Ile, Florenţa Larisa, and Gabriela Ţigu. “Balneary Tourism Face to Face with Medical Tourism – A Comparative Exploratory Research.” Romanian Economic and Business Review, vol. 12, no. 4, 2017, pp. 72-81.
Jargin, Sergei V. “Pine Tree Tapping in Siberia with Special Reference to Alcohol Consumption.” Journal of Addiction & Prevention, vol. 5, no. 1, 2017, p. 1-3.
Klett, Tomas Casas I. “Banya Leadership: Where the Master Is a Servant.” The Life of Russian Business, 2019, pp. 263-265.
Koenker, Diane P. Club Red: Vacation Travel and the Soviet Dream. Cornell University Press, 2013.
Lissitzky, El. “Russia: An Architecture for World Revolution.” Lund Humphries, London, 1979.
Mcguire, Caroline. “Inside the Eerie USSR-Era Sanatoriums Where Russians Go for Soviet-Style Spa Breaks.” The Sun. 2017. Web.
Migacheva, Katya, and Bryan Frederick. Religion, Conflict, and Stability in the Former Soviet Union. RAND Corporation, 2018.
Omidi, Maryam. “Holidays in Soviet Sanatoriums: The Weird and Wonderful Wellness Palaces of the USSR.” The Calvert Journal. 2017. Web.
Pollock, Ethan. Without the Banya We Would Perish: A History of the Russian Bathhouse. Oxford University Press, 2019.
Rosenbaum, Adam T. “Leisure Travel and Real Existing Socialism: New Research on Tourism in the Soviet Union and Communist Eastern Europe.” Journal of Tourism History, vol. 7, no. 1-2, 2015, pp. 157-176.
Smith, Melanie. “Baltic Health Tourism: Uniqueness and Commonalities.” Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, vol. 15, no. 4, 2015, pp. 357-379.
Starks, Tricia A. “Propagandizing the Healthy, Bolshevik Life in the Early USSR.” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 107, no. 11, 2017, pp. 1718-1724.
Veselova, E. Sh. “Medical Tourism: Tourism with Health Benefits.” Problems of Economic Transition, vol. 59, no. 6, 2017, pp. 480-500.
Voon, Claire. “The Utopian Leisure of Soviet Sanatoriums.” Hyperallergic. 2017. Web.
Vujosevic, Tijana. “The Soviet Banya and the Mass Production of Hygiene.” Architectural Histories, vol. 1, no. 1, 2013, pp. 1-15.