1 Andreas Kappeler, Russland als Vielvölkerreich: Entstehung—Geschichte—Zerfall, 2nd ed. (Munich: Beck, 2008); the first edition in German was published in 1992. See also Ronald Suny, The Revenge of the Past: Nationalism, Revolution, and the Collapse of the Soviet Union (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1993); and Yuri Slezkine, Arctic Mirrors: Russia and the Small Peoples of the North (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994). On the debate over the relationship between nation and empire, see Geoffrey Hosking, Russia: People and Empire, 1552–1917, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997).
1 Andreas Kappeler，俄罗斯也Vielvölkerreich: Entstehung-Geschichte-Zerfall，第2版(慕尼黑:Beck, 2008);第一版德文于1992年出版。另见罗纳德·苏尼，《过去的复仇:民族主义、革命和苏联的崩溃》(斯坦福，加州:斯坦福大学出版社，1993年);Yuri Slezkine，北极镜子:俄罗斯和北方的小民族(伊萨卡，纽约州:康奈尔大学出版社，1994年)。关于民族与帝国关系的争论，见杰弗里·霍斯金，《俄罗斯:人民与帝国，1552-1917》，第2版(马萨诸塞州剑桥:哈佛大学出版社，1997年)。
{"title":"Diversity, Belonging, and Violence in the Russian and Soviet Empires","authors":"Franziska Davies","doi":"10.1353/kri.2022.0047","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2022.0047","url":null,"abstract":"1 Andreas Kappeler, Russland als Vielvölkerreich: Entstehung—Geschichte—Zerfall, 2nd ed. (Munich: Beck, 2008); the first edition in German was published in 1992. See also Ronald Suny, The Revenge of the Past: Nationalism, Revolution, and the Collapse of the Soviet Union (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1993); and Yuri Slezkine, Arctic Mirrors: Russia and the Small Peoples of the North (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994). On the debate over the relationship between nation and empire, see Geoffrey Hosking, Russia: People and Empire, 1552–1917, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997).","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43934059","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Angelina Lucento, Tatiana Vagramenko, Cristina Vatulescu, Molly Pucci, Erik R. Scott, Joshua A. Sanborn, C. Kelly, David Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, Franziska Davies, Mischa Gabowitsch, Christine Varga-Harris
{"title":"Archival Insights and the Secret Police","authors":"Angelina Lucento, Tatiana Vagramenko, Cristina Vatulescu, Molly Pucci, Erik R. Scott, Joshua A. Sanborn, C. Kelly, David Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, Franziska Davies, Mischa Gabowitsch, Christine Varga-Harris","doi":"10.1353/kri.2022.0038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2022.0038","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48657080","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As historians of imperial Russia and the USSR have long been aware, characteristic of the country’s development has been the arrival of influences from elsewhere in unexpected juxtaposition. So, the rise of Enlightenment scientism in the second half of the 18th century coincided with the spread of Freemasonry and other ideologies that in Enlightenment parlance would have been termed “enthusiastic,” while, in the late Soviet period, private citizens who modeled their attitudes to sexuality on the “progressive” West included not just the pioneers of free love in the hippie movement but the covert readers of foreign erotica such as Hugh Heffner’s Playboy.1 As far as the writing of history is concerned, a similarly contradictory moment was the end of the 1980s and early 1990s, when excitement about sudden access to formerly closed archival resources, the legitimating fetish of the positivistic historian, was challenged by what might retrospectively be described as “the textual turn.” Scholars of the Soviet past were not by intention looking for what Natalie Zemon Davis in a landmark book of 1987 termed “fiction from the archives.”2 But many were sensitive to the fact that the materials they retrieved might not only answer questions—and indeed, that the apparently most “objective” data might in some cases be the least reliable. The
{"title":"Police Talk: The Culture and Practices of the Secret Police in the Soviet Bloc","authors":"C. Kelly","doi":"10.1353/kri.2022.0045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2022.0045","url":null,"abstract":"As historians of imperial Russia and the USSR have long been aware, characteristic of the country’s development has been the arrival of influences from elsewhere in unexpected juxtaposition. So, the rise of Enlightenment scientism in the second half of the 18th century coincided with the spread of Freemasonry and other ideologies that in Enlightenment parlance would have been termed “enthusiastic,” while, in the late Soviet period, private citizens who modeled their attitudes to sexuality on the “progressive” West included not just the pioneers of free love in the hippie movement but the covert readers of foreign erotica such as Hugh Heffner’s Playboy.1 As far as the writing of history is concerned, a similarly contradictory moment was the end of the 1980s and early 1990s, when excitement about sudden access to formerly closed archival resources, the legitimating fetish of the positivistic historian, was challenged by what might retrospectively be described as “the textual turn.” Scholars of the Soviet past were not by intention looking for what Natalie Zemon Davis in a landmark book of 1987 termed “fiction from the archives.”2 But many were sensitive to the fact that the materials they retrieved might not only answer questions—and indeed, that the apparently most “objective” data might in some cases be the least reliable. The","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48478558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On 17 December 1936, a People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs (NKVD) committee led by the specialist Solomon Gol ́dman (fig. 1) interrogated the recently arrested painter Mykhailo Boichuk (fig. 2) in a Kyiv prison cell. It seems likely that Boichuk’s captors had beaten or otherwise tortured him just before Gol ́dman’s interrogation to force the artist into confessing to having been a Ukrainian nationalist. After all, until the moment of his arrest, Boichuk had been the leader of the most influential school of Ukrainian monumental artists known as the Boichukisty (fig. 3), and the NKVD was especially interested in the Ukrainian character of the group’s projects. They asked Boichuk, “As part of your practical work, what did you do?”1 The “detrimental old Ukrainian art, ancient painting, and the achievements of the bourgeois formal schools,” he replied. “I sent youth down that pathway of specialist training, tearing them consciously away from the pathway to Socialist Realism, and in so doing, tore them away from their participation in the building of socialism.”2
{"title":"The NKVD and the Political Origins of Socialist Realism: The Persecution of the Boichukisty in Ukraine","authors":"Angelina Lucento","doi":"10.1353/kri.2022.0039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2022.0039","url":null,"abstract":"On 17 December 1936, a People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs (NKVD) committee led by the specialist Solomon Gol ́dman (fig. 1) interrogated the recently arrested painter Mykhailo Boichuk (fig. 2) in a Kyiv prison cell. It seems likely that Boichuk’s captors had beaten or otherwise tortured him just before Gol ́dman’s interrogation to force the artist into confessing to having been a Ukrainian nationalist. After all, until the moment of his arrest, Boichuk had been the leader of the most influential school of Ukrainian monumental artists known as the Boichukisty (fig. 3), and the NKVD was especially interested in the Ukrainian character of the group’s projects. They asked Boichuk, “As part of your practical work, what did you do?”1 The “detrimental old Ukrainian art, ancient painting, and the achievements of the bourgeois formal schools,” he replied. “I sent youth down that pathway of specialist training, tearing them consciously away from the pathway to Socialist Realism, and in so doing, tore them away from their participation in the building of socialism.”2","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47327921","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the midst of the Cold War, if visitors to Kobuleti, a popular resort town on Soviet Georgia’s Black Sea coast, wandered south, they would follow a seaside road lined with palm trees or walk along the shores of its pebble beach, passing high-rise vacation complexes. On the outskirts of Batumi, they would be greeted by a lush botanical garden reaching up into the hills and showcasing the region’s subtropical abundance with citrus groves and areas devoted to the exotic plants of the Mediterranean, South America, East Asia, and even distant Australia. In Batumi itself, they would find a bustling international port, visited by container ships and tankers from across the world; they would pass sailors strolling the streets, conversing in foreign languages. The Black Sea coast was a showcase for Soviet achievements and, especially in the postStalinist era, an opening to the world beyond Soviet borders. If our travelers continued to head south from Batumi, however, they would soon enter a “forbidden border zone” (zapretnaia pogranichnaia zona) open only to carefully screened local residents and Soviet border troops, a restricted stretch of land whose topography was not detailed in public maps but instead considered classified information. The forbidden zone served as a buffer between the heavily trafficked port to the north and the nearby border with Turkey, a country described in a training manual for the Soviet border troops as a US-funded “base for the organization of subversive activity directed against the USSR.”1 If our imaginary travelers were not seized
{"title":"The Black Sea Coast as a Landscape of Cold War Intelligence","authors":"Erik R. Scott","doi":"10.1353/kri.2022.0043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2022.0043","url":null,"abstract":"In the midst of the Cold War, if visitors to Kobuleti, a popular resort town on Soviet Georgia’s Black Sea coast, wandered south, they would follow a seaside road lined with palm trees or walk along the shores of its pebble beach, passing high-rise vacation complexes. On the outskirts of Batumi, they would be greeted by a lush botanical garden reaching up into the hills and showcasing the region’s subtropical abundance with citrus groves and areas devoted to the exotic plants of the Mediterranean, South America, East Asia, and even distant Australia. In Batumi itself, they would find a bustling international port, visited by container ships and tankers from across the world; they would pass sailors strolling the streets, conversing in foreign languages. The Black Sea coast was a showcase for Soviet achievements and, especially in the postStalinist era, an opening to the world beyond Soviet borders. If our travelers continued to head south from Batumi, however, they would soon enter a “forbidden border zone” (zapretnaia pogranichnaia zona) open only to carefully screened local residents and Soviet border troops, a restricted stretch of land whose topography was not detailed in public maps but instead considered classified information. The forbidden zone served as a buffer between the heavily trafficked port to the north and the nearby border with Turkey, a country described in a training manual for the Soviet border troops as a US-funded “base for the organization of subversive activity directed against the USSR.”1 If our imaginary travelers were not seized","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42188370","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The comparative and theoretical literature on dictatorships shows that deeply ideological one-party states such as the Soviet Union—especially if forged in civil war—not only tend to survive longer but also show more resiliency than other types of authoritarian rule.1 Despite the recent publication of archivalbased biographies of I. V. Stalin, N. S. Khrushchev, L. I. Brezhnev, and M. S. Gorbachev that throw light on politics at the top, remarkably little research has been conducted on how local leaders governed under these rulers. Making substantial contributions to our understanding of how the USSR functioned at the regional level, the two complementary books under review draw on strategic archive-based research, memoirs, and the secondary literature (and, in Grybkauskas’s case, on oral interviews) to reveal how local leaders—first secretaries of oblasts (and of Soviet republics) and second secretaries in republic party committees—functioned after World War II and how their modus operandi changed as the USSR became less oppressive.
{"title":"Pillars of the Soviet Dictatorship at the Local Level","authors":"Donald J. Raleigh","doi":"10.1353/kri.2022.0030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2022.0030","url":null,"abstract":"The comparative and theoretical literature on dictatorships shows that deeply ideological one-party states such as the Soviet Union—especially if forged in civil war—not only tend to survive longer but also show more resiliency than other types of authoritarian rule.1 Despite the recent publication of archivalbased biographies of I. V. Stalin, N. S. Khrushchev, L. I. Brezhnev, and M. S. Gorbachev that throw light on politics at the top, remarkably little research has been conducted on how local leaders governed under these rulers. Making substantial contributions to our understanding of how the USSR functioned at the regional level, the two complementary books under review draw on strategic archive-based research, memoirs, and the secondary literature (and, in Grybkauskas’s case, on oral interviews) to reveal how local leaders—first secretaries of oblasts (and of Soviet republics) and second secretaries in republic party committees—functioned after World War II and how their modus operandi changed as the USSR became less oppressive.","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42093408","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Over the last decade or so, there has been renewed interest in biographical work in the fields of Russian and Soviet history, described recently in the pages of this journal as a potential “biographical turn.”1 One figure, however, has dominated this emerging trend and notably in books reaching a broader audience: Iosif Stalin.2 It is hardly a surprise that Stalin remains firmly at the center of scholarly attention and public imagination. Although a countless number of biographies exist about the dictator worldwide, Stalin is the significant presence looming over Russia’s past. Responsible for propelling the Soviet Union into modernity but also wreaking havoc with his destructive— and contradictory—behavior, if we are better to understand Soviet and broader 20th-century history, we still need to try and better understand Stalin on a personal level. Twenty years have passed, however, since Stalin’s carefully cultivated archive first partially opened, and much of what material was made accessible can now be found online. Stalin’s motivations, moreover, can be notoriously difficult to interpret, and limitations in accessible materials have led to almost irreconcilable disagreements over key parts of the Stalin era.3 With historians
{"title":"The Making of a Bolshevik","authors":"P. Whitewood","doi":"10.1353/kri.2022.0034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2022.0034","url":null,"abstract":"Over the last decade or so, there has been renewed interest in biographical work in the fields of Russian and Soviet history, described recently in the pages of this journal as a potential “biographical turn.”1 One figure, however, has dominated this emerging trend and notably in books reaching a broader audience: Iosif Stalin.2 It is hardly a surprise that Stalin remains firmly at the center of scholarly attention and public imagination. Although a countless number of biographies exist about the dictator worldwide, Stalin is the significant presence looming over Russia’s past. Responsible for propelling the Soviet Union into modernity but also wreaking havoc with his destructive— and contradictory—behavior, if we are better to understand Soviet and broader 20th-century history, we still need to try and better understand Stalin on a personal level. Twenty years have passed, however, since Stalin’s carefully cultivated archive first partially opened, and much of what material was made accessible can now be found online. Stalin’s motivations, moreover, can be notoriously difficult to interpret, and limitations in accessible materials have led to almost irreconcilable disagreements over key parts of the Stalin era.3 With historians","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42466950","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Aridity and the History of Water in Central Asia and Beyond","authors":"J. Lajus","doi":"10.1353/kri.2022.0027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2022.0027","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44567621","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Political power, elite support for the throne, and political ideologies were not solely represented by institutional rules or developed in polemical texts anywhere in early modern Europe. The two books reviewed below discuss, in different ways, how the vast and “undergoverned” early modern Russian Empire mustered its cultural resources to project political power and promote diffuse, if widely shared, political ideals outside of institutions and polemical texts. Instead, the ruling dynasties used art, architecture, and symbolic ritual to reinforce their divine authority and promote the related goals of unity, security, and social stability. The results contribute in important ways not only to understanding the ideals projected, but also to ongoing discussion about the dating of important transformations (“modernization”) in Russian society of the early modern period.
{"title":"Cultural Tropes and Political Power in Early Modern Russia","authors":"C. B. Stevens","doi":"10.1353/kri.2022.0032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2022.0032","url":null,"abstract":"Political power, elite support for the throne, and political ideologies were not solely represented by institutional rules or developed in polemical texts anywhere in early modern Europe. The two books reviewed below discuss, in different ways, how the vast and “undergoverned” early modern Russian Empire mustered its cultural resources to project political power and promote diffuse, if widely shared, political ideals outside of institutions and polemical texts. Instead, the ruling dynasties used art, architecture, and symbolic ritual to reinforce their divine authority and promote the related goals of unity, security, and social stability. The results contribute in important ways not only to understanding the ideals projected, but also to ongoing discussion about the dating of important transformations (“modernization”) in Russian society of the early modern period. ","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41908168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
There is common agreement that history museums are deeply engaged in transforming history into identity, because they create a public space where “personal, private or autobiographical narratives come into contact with larger-scale, collective or national narratives in mutually inter-animating ways.”1 It is thus very important to establish how museums affect the visitor’s memory and perception of the past on display. Visitor books in museums, where visitors can share their feedback and impressions of exhibitions, offer a space to present their views on the issues discussed in the exhibition.2 Moreover, they confirm that visitors are not mute observers but active participants in a public dialogue.3 As a specific source, visitor books do not offer
{"title":"The Museum Visitor Book as a Means of Public Dialogue about the Gulag Past: The Case of the Solovki Museum","authors":"Zuzanna Bogumił","doi":"10.1353/kri.2022.0023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/kri.2022.0023","url":null,"abstract":"There is common agreement that history museums are deeply engaged in transforming history into identity, because they create a public space where “personal, private or autobiographical narratives come into contact with larger-scale, collective or national narratives in mutually inter-animating ways.”1 It is thus very important to establish how museums affect the visitor’s memory and perception of the past on display. Visitor books in museums, where visitors can share their feedback and impressions of exhibitions, offer a space to present their views on the issues discussed in the exhibition.2 Moreover, they confirm that visitors are not mute observers but active participants in a public dialogue.3 As a specific source, visitor books do not offer","PeriodicalId":45639,"journal":{"name":"KRITIKA-EXPLORATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND EURASIAN HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48896266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：