Interviewee ID: 990077
Parent's name: Süh
Year of Birth: 1961
Notes on education:
Work: Provincial court
Born in: Bayangol sum, Övörhangai aimag
Lives in: Arvaiheer sum (or part of UB), Övörhangai aimag
Mother's profession: herder
Father's profession: herder
Themes for this interview, suggested by the interview team, are:
(Please click on a theme to see more interviews on that topic)
work; education / cultural production; privatization; collectivization; family;
Alternative keywords suggested by readers for this interview are: (Please click on a keyword to see more interviews, if any, on that topic)
education; cultural campaigns; collectivization; privatization;
Click here to submit your own keywords for this interview
To read a full interview with Tsoodol-Süren please click on the Interview ID below.
Summary of Interview 081206A with Tsoodol-Süren
The interviewee was born in 1960 in Ӧvӧrhangai aimag. He is married, with two children. His parents were herders. He is one of eleven children in his family. In 1977, after finishing the eighth grade in Ӧvӧrhangai, he went to the Soviet Union to study in a technical college. In 1980, he returned to Mongolia, worked as a plumber and served in the army. While in the army he was enrolled in a military school from which he graduated as a lawyer. During his career, he worked as a secondary school teacher, a lawyer, an accountant, and head of administration at the sum and bag levels. At the time of the interview he was working at an archive in Ӧvӧrhangai aimag .
He first heard of the ‘cultural campaigns’ in his childhood. He understands that it took place in 1961-1965. He recalls that during the ‘campaigns’, after each inspection the herders were given marks in the form of pictures. These marks- an airplane, a car, a horse and a pig- were attached to the names of the individuals on the public boards. The highest mark, an airplane, was given to those who passed the inspection successfully. The worst mark was a pig. The parents of the interviewee were against the collectivisation, though in the end they were forced to join a collective farm. The interviewee thinks that ordinary people did not understand the privatisation well, for it was carried out in a short period of time. Only a small minority, consisting of bureaucrats or those who had the adequate knowledge, has benefited. He, for example, gained nothing from the privatisation.
What is interesting about his story is that, like many other children who were born in the country-side, he first studied in a three-year- elementary-school in a brigade centre, then studied until the eighth grade in an eight-year-secondary-school in a sum centre. In order to complete his full secondary education (i.e. tenth grade) he was expected to study the remaining two years in a ten-year-secondary-school that were available only in the aimag centres. The interviewee instead chose to study in a technical college which gave ‘special education’.