Arts, Faculty of
Central, Eastern, and Northern European Studies, Department of
DSpace
UBCV
Bezeredi, Judith L
Master of Arts - MA
University of British Columbia
The purpose of this thesis is to explore the period of relative economic and artistic freedom that occurred during the time of the New Economic Policy (1921-1924). The general failure in agriculture and in industrial productivity forced the Soviet regime to allow diversions from the orthodox Marxist view of state ownership of the tools of production. Because of the need to start the wheels of production turning, the minor landowners, small manufacturers and petty profiteers took to the task in hope of financial gains. This economic environment, uncontrolled by the Communist Party, reflected itself in the relatively chaotic "artistic scene". Amongst the many literary groups that appeared during the early 1920's, I dwell mostly upon the Serapion Brothers and the members of that group, singling out for more intense study Mikhail Zoshchenko: his artistry and his struggle for artistic freedom.
MIKHAIL ZOSHCHENKO AND THE SERAPION BROTHERS by JUDITH L. BEZEREDI A.B., U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan, 1966 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of SLAVONIC STUDIES We ac c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1973 i i In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and study. I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s understood t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a llowed w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . J u d i t h L. B e z e r e d i Department of S l a v o n i c S t u d i e s The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date September, - 19 73 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ABSTRACT i v CHAPTER I. NEW ECONOMIC POLICY — A PARADOX IN MARXIST RUSSIA 1 I I . THE PERIOD OF RELATIVE ARTISTIC FREEDOM AND SEARCH FOR GOALS DURING THE N. E. P 12 I I I . THE SERAPION BROTHERS . . 24 IV. MIKHAIL ZOSHCHENKO — THE SERAPION BROTHER. CONCLUSION 53 BIBLIOGRAPHY 79 i i i ABSTRACT The purpose of t h i s t h e s i s i s to e x p l o r e the p e r i o d of r e l a t i v e economic and a r t i s t i c freedom t h a t o c c u r r e d d u r i n g the time o f the New Economic P o l i c y (1921-1924). The g e n e r a l f a i l u r e i n a g r i c u l t u r e and i n i n d u s t r i a l p r o d u c t i v i t y f o r c e d the S o v i e t regime to a l l o w d i v e r s i o n s from the orthodox M a r x i s t view of s t a t e ownership o f the t o o l s of p r o d u c t i o n . Because o f the need to s t a r t the wheels of p r o d u c t i o n t u r n i n g , the minor landowners, s m a l l manufacturers and p e t t y p r o f i t e e r s took t o the task i n hope o f f i n a n c i a l g a i n s . T h i s economic environment, u n c o n t r o l l e d by the Communist P a r t y , r e f l e c t e d i t s e l f i n the r e l a t i v e l y c h a o t i c " a r t i s t i c scene". Amongst the many l i t e r a r y groups t h a t appeared d u r i n g the e a r l y 19 20's, I d w e l l mostly upon the S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s and the members of t h a t group, s i n g l i n g out f o r more i n t e n s e study M i k h a i l Zoshchenko: h i s a r t i s t r y and h i s s t r u g g l e f o r a r t i s t i c freedom. i v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I s h o u l d l i k e t o express my s i n c e r e a p p r e c i a t i o n t o my a d v i s o r on t h i s t h e s i s , P r o f e s s o r V. Revutsky, and a l s o , f o r h i s g e n e r a l encouragement i n my s t u d i e s , t o P r o f e s s o r Z. F o l e j e w s k i . v CHAPTER I The c i v i l war ended i n 1921 0 War Communism, as an economic p o l i c y t o s t a r t p r o d u c t i o n i n the d e v a s t a t e d country to f e e d i t s p e o p l e , had f a i l e d . The essence o f [the] p e c u l i a r War Communism was t h a t we a c t u a l l y took from the peasant a l l the s u r p l u s g r a i n — and sometimes even not o n l y s u r p l u s g r a i n but p a r t o f the g r a i n the peasant r e q u i r e d f o r food — to meet the requirements of the army and to s u s t a i n the workers. Most o f i t we took on l o a n , f o r paper money. . . . We were f o r c e d to r e s o r t to War Communism by war and r u i n Q I t was not, nor c o u l d i t be, a p o l i c y t h a t corresponded t o the economic tasks of the p r o l e t a r i a t . . . . The c o r r e c t p o l i c y of the p r o l e t a r i a t which i s e x e r c i s i n g i t s d i c t a t o r s h i p i n a s m a l l - p e a s a n t country i s to o b t a i n g r a i n i n exchange f o r the^ manufactured goods the peasant r e q u i r e s . . . . 2 Thus L e n i n i n t r o d u c e d the New Economic P o l i c y to R u s s i a . L e n i n r e a l i z e d t h a t the war-torn country's popula-t i o n needed immediate s h o r t - t e r m i n c e n t i v e s r a t h e r than communism a t a d i s t a n t f u t u r e . T h e r e f o r e , he was w i l l i n g to bend h i s orthodox t h e o r i e s and allow ownership, the accumula-t i o n of c a p i t a l and p r i v a t e p r o f i t - t a k i n g on l a b o r . Our p o v e r t y and r u i n are so g r e a t t h a t we cannot a t one s t r o k e r e s t o r e l a r g e - s c a l e , f a c t o r y , s t a t e s o c i a l i s t production,, T h i s r e q u i r e s t h a t we accumulate l a r g e s t o c k s of g r a i n and f u e l i n the V. I . L e n i n , S e l e c t e d Works, i n Two Volumes (Moscow: 1950-1952), V o l . I I , p. 539. 2 From here on r e f e r r e d t o as N. E. P. 2 b i g i n d u s t r i a l c e n t e r s , r e p l a c e the worn-out machines w i t h new ones, and so on. Experience has _ convinced us t h a t t h i s cannot be done a t one s t r o k e 0 L e n i n was w i l l i n g t o a l l o w craftsmen and c e r t a i n s m a l l i n d u s t r i e s , which d i d not need b i g c a p i t a l investment, machinery or power ( i . e . , o i l , e l e c t r i c i t y ) f o r o p e r a t i o n , to produce and e x i s t as p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e s . Peasants were taxed i n g r a i n and, f o r the f i r s t time s i n c e the R e v o l u t i o n , they were allowed to s e l l t h e i r s u r p l u s g r a i n , meat, and produce on the open market. The hope of p r o f i t - t a k i n g f o r t h e i r h a r d work gave the peasants i n c e n t i v e t o work harder and thus they produced more food f o r the s t a r v e d p o p u l a t i o n . The theory behind the t o l e r a t i o n o f " s m a l l - s c a l e c a p i t a l i s m " was s i m p l e . The i d e a was t h a t i f the peasant accumulates cash not needed f o r h i s immediate s u r v i v a l he w i l l spend t h a t money on consumer goods, or i n v e s t i t i n machinery, o r b e t t e r h o u s i n g . Thus, he w i l l c r e a t e a consumer demand f o r i n d u s t r i a l p r o d u c t s ; i n r e t u r n , t h i s w i l l g i v e jobs and wages t o the urban p r o l e t a r i a t . With g r e a t e r demand f o r i n d u s t r i a l goods, on the r e t a i n e d p r o f i t the s t a t e can b u i l d up heavy i n d u s t r y , communication, e t c . The theory was s i m p l e , but i n r e a l l i f e i t d i d not work t h a t way. The peasants and the craftsmen took t h e i r p r o f i t , b ut they d i d not spend i t : the p o l i c i e s of War L e n i n , S e l e c t e d Works, P a r t I I , p. 5 4 4 . 3 Communism were s t i l l too v i v i d i n t h e i r memories, where a man c o u l d be condemned to death, or l a b e l l e d as a k u l a k , because he kept h i s household i n good r e p a i r or had a machine o r a spare h o r s e . As a r e s u l t , homes sta y e d i n d i s r e p a i r . No peasant went on a b i g spending s p r e e . I f he d i d purchase some s m a l l machinery, he would h i d e i t from h i s neighbors f o r f e a r o f i t s b e i n g taken away a t the next p o l i t i c a l change. Bukharin supported L e n i n ' s New Economic P o l i c y , and he made no attempt to deny t h a t the development envisaged by him might g i v e economic power to the group which was con-s i d e r e d the s t r o n g e s t remnant o f c a p i t a l i s m : the k u l a k s , s m a l l h o l d e r s , marketeers. "We have to t e l l the whole p e a s a n t r y , a l l i t s s t r a t a : g e t r i c h , accumulate, develop 4 your economy." In Bukharin*s view the growth of c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h the k u l a k s would r a i s e the economic l e v e l of the peasantry as a whole and thus sap the f o u n d a t i o n s o f the k u l a k ' s power. The gains secured by poor and medium peasants who had been p r e v i o u s l y , t o a v a r y i n g e x t e n t , dependent on the v i l l a g e r i c h , would be much g r e a t e r , p a r t i c u l a r l y s i n c e they would have on t h e i r s i d e the a l l - o u t support of the s t a t e . The s h a r p l y p r o g r e s s i v e t a x a t i o n would narrow the "0 n o v o i ekonomicheskoi p o l i t i k e i nashikh zadachakh" — P a r t I I , B o l s h e v i k , June 1, 1925. T h i s formula offended the orthodox M a r x i s t s and soon Bukharin had to r e t r a c t i t t h r e e t imes. However, he d i d not renounce the u n d e r l y i n g i d e a . 4 income d i f f e r e n t i a l s s t i l l f u r t h e r . P a r t o f the taxes drawn from the k u l a k s would be saved and used f o r the e s t a b l i s h m e n t of the s o c i a l i z e d s e c t o r o f the economy and f o r the expansion 5 o f a n a t i o n a l i z e d c r e d i t system. The r e s u l t o f t h i s g r a d u a l l e v e l l i n g and i n c r e a s i n g dependence on s t a t e - c o n t r o l l e d economy would be a e u t h a n a s i a of the kulaks a f t e r they had (very much a g a i n s t t h e i r w i l l ) rendered a yeoman s e r v i c e t o the s o c i a l i s t economy. Bukharin put h i s f i n g e r on the c r u c i a l s p o t when he spoke o f " s e t t i n g i n t o motion the f a c t o r s o f p r o d u c t i o n which are l y i n g i d l e l i k e a dead weight" and o f m o b i l i z i n g "the hidden r e s e r v e s o f energy",^ as w e l l as of "more 7 i n t e n s i v e u t i l i z a t i o n o f the u n i t o f c a p i t a l " . T h i s was, indeed, the b a s i c f a c t from which a l l the r e s t f o l l o w e d . S o v i e t l a r g e - s c a l e i n d u s t r y , i n the e a r l y y e a r s of the N.E.P., c o u l d have i n c r e a s e d i t s output w i t h o u t any expansion of i t s p l a n t , because l a r g e r e s e r v e s of unused c a p a c i t y were a v a i l a b l e . However, w i t h o u t s t e p p i n g up the volume o f p r o d u c t i o n as w e l l as improving the e f f i c i e n c y o f the l a b o r " I f we are w a l k i n g around naked, the kulak w i l l conquer us e c o n o m i c a l l y , and i f he i s a d e p o s i t o r i n our banks, he won't conquer us. We are h e l p i n g him, but he i s h e l p i n g us, too . . ." B o l s h e v i k , A p r i l 30, 1925. 6 B o l s h e v i k , November 5, 1924, p. 30. 7 B o l s h e v i k , January 15, 1925, p. 56 „ f o r c e employed o p e r a t i n g these p l a n t s and i n c r e a s i n g the food s u p p l i e s , the e x e c u t i o n o f t h i s p l a n was i m p o s s i b l e . ( A l s o , i mportant branches of the p r o c e s s i n g i n d u s t r i e s c o u l d not be put i n t o o p e r a t i o n w i t h o u t raw m a t e r i a l o f a g r i c u l -t u r a l o r i g i n . ) To i n c r e a s e the food s u p p l i e s , the s t a t e had to d e a l w i t h the peasants' demand f o r immediate i n c e n t i v e s . By o f f e r i n g the peasants b e t t e r terms of t r a d e than a c o n s i s t e n t l y " m o n o p o l i s t i c " p r i c e p o l i c y would have p e r m i t t e d , the urban i n d u s t r y would have b e n e f i t e d i n the long run — i t would have had a t i t s d i s p o s a l l a r g e r amounts o f a g r i c u l -t u r a l p r o d u c t s . T h i s , i n t u r n , would have made i t p o s s i b l e t o s t e p up the u t i l i z a t i o n of the i d l e i n d u s t r i a l c a p a c i t y s t i l l f u r t h e r and thereby s t a r t new c y c l e s of o v e r - a l l i n c r e a s e s . S i m i l a r l y , the i m p o s i t i o n of curbs on "easy m o n o p o l i s t i c p r o f i t s " would have put the managers o f s t a t e e n t e r p r i s e s under s t r o n g p r e s s u r e to minimize t h e i r c o s t s by i n t r o d u c i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n a l and t e c h n o l o g i c a l improvements. There c o u l d be no doubt t h a t the " f o r c e d n o r m a l i z a t i o n " i n the v i l l a g e s , and the c e s s a t i o n of u n c e r t a i n t y which had been weakening the peasants * i n c e n t i v e t o apply s u p e r i o r methods o f production,, would have operated i n the same d i r e c t i o n . B u k h a r i n , who, f o u r years e a r l i e r , had o f f e r e d the most p o l i s h e d and t h e o r e t i c a l l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d defence of War Communism, now h a i l e d the "normalcy" of the N. E. P. as the 6 s u r e s t r o u t e to economic re c o v e r y from the r u i n s of a r e v o l u t i o n and a c i v i l war. During the f i r s t months of the r e v o l u t i o n , L e n i n t r i e d t o c o n f i n e n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n t o the more v i t a l branches of i n d u s t r y , and t r i e d t o smooth the t r a n s i t i o n from the o l d o r d e r to the new by u t i l i z i n g the managerial s k i l l s o f former c a p i t a l i s t s and bourgeois s p e c i a l i s t s . These e f f o r t s q u i c k l y r e v e a l e d themselves as a b o r t i v e . C a p i t a l i s t s and managers abandoned t h e i r p l a n t s i n l a r g e numbers, and many o t h e r s were d r i v e n out by workers i n t e n t on avenging p a s t g r i e v a n c e s . The workers assumed t h a t the f a c t o r i e s now belonged t o them, and they sought to operate them i n t h e i r own i n t e r e s t . The r e s u l t s were d i s a s t r o u s . L a c k i n g mana-g e r i a l t r a i n i n g and t e c h n i c a l s k i l l , and unable to impose d i s c i p l i n e on t h e i r own members, the f a c t o r y committees f r e q u e n t l y brought t h e i r e n t e r p r i s e s to a s t a n d s t i l l . T h e i r problems were g r e a t l y aggravated by f a i l u r e s o f communications and t r a n s p o r t , as w e l l as shortages of raw m a t e r i a l s . D e s p i t e L e n i n ' s strenuous e f f o r t s t o improve the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e f f i c i e n c y of the n a t i o n a l i z e d e n t e r p r i s e s , i n d u s t r i a l d i s o r g a n i z a t i o n was endemic. The c i t i e s s u f f e r e d from c o l d and hunger; workers abandoned the f a c t o r i e s i n l a r g e numbers. S u p p l i e r s were cu t o f f ; i n d u s t r i a l produc-t i o n d e c l i n e d c a t a s t r o p h i c a l l y . The output of those f a c t o r i e s t h a t c o n t i n u e d to operate was r e s e r v e d almost e n t i r e l y f o r 7 the Red Army. Amongst the p o p u l a t i o n s t r i c t p r i c e c o n t r o l and r a t i o n i n g o f goods were i n t r o d u c e d . Shortages soon became so extreme as to render p r i c e and r a t i o n i n g c o n t r o l s meaningless. Money l o s t a l l v a l u e . Workers had to be p a i d i n k i n d , and a r a p i d l y expanding b l a c k market l a r g e l y d i s p l a c e d the o f f i c i a l channels o f t r a d e . The b l a c k marketeers f l o u r i s h e d on the proceeds of i l l i c i t t r a d e . D e s p i t e a l l these h a r d s h i p s , to those who b e l i e v e d i n the Communist cause, the r e v o l u t i o n and the f o l l o w i n g c i v i l war appeared as a l i b e r a t i n g a c t which brought the working masses t o the f o r e f r o n t o f w o r l d h i s t o r y . I t aroused hopes and dreams o f a w o r l d to be remade i n the image of b r o t h e r -hood, e q u a l i t y and j u s t i c e . The c i v i l war p e r i o d and the p e r i o d s h o r t l y f o l l o w i n g was an e r a o f c o n s i d e r a b l e s o c i a l e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n . During t h i s time the new regime was f e e l i n g i t s way i n t o the f u t u r e . The overthrow o f the o l d regime was accompanied by a r e b e l -l i o n a g a i n s t the f a m i l y and t r a d i t i o n a l moral v a l u e s , by the l o o s e n i n g of m a r i t a l t i e s and a new emphasis on the emanci-p a t i o n of women, by the i n c r e a s e d a u t h o r i t y of youth, by e d u c a t i o n a l i n n o v a t i o n s , and by a r e l a t i v e l y u n f e t t e r e d ferment o f l i t e r a r y and a r t i s t i c p r o d u c t i v i t y . Amidst the grimness of the r u i n s of War Communism, the r e b e l s a g a i n s t the o l d s o c i e t y l u x u r i a t e d i n t h e i r new freedom. The domination o f the P a r t y by i t s c e n t r a l organs was not y e t 8 complete. T h i s was indeed the romantic p e r i o d o f the r e v o l u t i o n . P a r t y d i s c u s s i o n s were l i v e l y and u n i n h i b i t e d . The c r i t i c i s m o f the l e a d e r s h i p was not equated w i t h t r e a s o n . U t o p i a n dreams o f the r u l e o f the masses s t i l l tempered the r e a l i t i e s o f d i c t a t o r s h i p . The peasants d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d were caught up i n c r o s s c u r r e n t s . They d i d not harbor l o v e f o r communism, but as l o n g as the B o l s h e v i k s s t o o d as the o n l y b a r r i e r which p r e v e n t e d the l a n d l o r d s from r e c l a i m i n g t h e i r e s t a t e s , many peasants were prepared t o g i v e the B o l s h e v i k s a t l e a s t p a s s i v e support.** L e f t - w i n g i n t e l l e c t u a l s who were a t odds wit h the B o l s h e v i k s found themselves drawn t o the S o v i e t cause because the p o l i c i e s espoused by the Whites were even more repugnant to them. To keep o r o b t a i n the l o y a l t y o f the workers and pea s a n t s , c o n c e s s i o n s had to be made immediately. These co n c e s s i o n s were made by the almost t o t a l abandonment of heavy i n d u s t r y i n f a v o r o f the consumer i n d u s t r y . (For example: the mining i n d u s t r y i n 1920 produced 33% of i t s 1912 o u t p u t j t h i s f e l l f u r t h e r t o 30% i n 19 21, and rose t o p "The l a n d s e t t l e m e n t adopted and r e l u c t a n t l y b l e s s e d by the B o l s h e v i k s was a c t u a l l y deeply repugnant to them, s i n c e i t i n t r o d u c e d the 'Trojan h o r s e 1 o f p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y i n t o the very m i d s t o f the communist c i t a d e l and r a i s e d u l t i m a t e dangers of c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n . " Merle F a i n s o d , How R u s s i a i s Ruled, p. 96 (see Bibliography)„ 9 o n l y 36% i n 1922. In the m e t a l l u r g i c a l i n d u s t r y , the output i n 1920 was no more than 6% o f t h a t of 1912, r i s i n g t o 9% i n 1921, and d e c l i n i n g t o 7% i n 1922.) 9 A c c o r d i n g t o a statement a t the t w e l f t h p a r t y congress i n A p r i l 19 23, i n d u s t r y as a whole, i n s p i t e o f severe measures taken, was s t i l l working a t 30% o f c a p a c i t y . 1 0 The peasants* o r i g i n a l r e l u c t a n c e to p a r t w i t h t h e i r p r o f i t s eased up, and an i n c r e a s i n g spending-spree swept through the c o u n t r y s i d e . The peasants l e a r n e d how to d r i v e a hard b a r g a i n f o r i n d u s t r i a l goods. The demand f o r food s u p p l i e s was so acute t h a t p r i c e s moved i n f a v o r of a g r i c u l -t u r a l p r o d u c t s . To a c t as go-between, a new c l a s s emerged: the Nepman,— some o f them once r e p u t a b l e , o t h e r s not so r e p u t a b l e . Some of them emerged from the underworld where they had l i v e d s i n c e the r e v o l u t i o n , o t h e r s were newcomers t o the scene who q u i c k l y adapted themselved to the new t r i c k s o f the t r a d e . T h e i r s t r e n g t h l a y i n t h e i r success i n making themselved i n d i s p e n s a b l e t o s t a t e t r a d i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s and to the i n d u s t r i a l t r u s t s . They r e c e i v e d p r i v i l e g e d t r e a t -ment everywhere. T h e i r p r o f i t s were d o u b t l e s s l a r g e enough t o enable them to r e s o r t to d i r e c t or i n d i r e c t forms of X I I S'ezd R o s s i i s k o i Kommunisticheskoi P a r t i i ( B o l ' s h e v i k o v ) , 1923, p. 339 — quoted by E. H. C a r r , A H i s t o r y o f S o v i e t R u s s i a . The B o l s h e v i k R e v o l u t i o n 1917-1923, Volume I , p. 311. • 1 0 I b i d . c o r r u p t i o n . Moscow, under N.E.P., became a c i t y o f l u x u r y f o r p r i v a t e agents o f the new s t a t e c a p i t a l i s m . The l a p s e o f time had brought f o r g e t f u l n e s s o f the f e a r f u l c r i s i s which n e c e s s i t a t e d the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f N.E.P., and some o f i t s l e s s a g r e e a b l e i m p l i c a t i o n s had become n o t o r i o u s . Complaints a g a i n s t i t began t o be w i d e l y heard. The R.S.F.S.R. 1 1 had e n t e r e d the N.E.P. p e r i o d w i t h o u t any o f f i c i a l machinery f o r the conduct o r r e g u l a t i o n o f i n t e r n a l t r a d e . The p h i l o s o p h y of N.E.P., w h i l e i t encouraged s t a t e i n s t i t u t i o n s t o engage i n t r a d e , i n s i s t e d t h a t t r a d e s h o u l d be conducted on market p r i n c i p l e s w i t h o u t s t a t e i n t e r f e r e n c e ; i t was, t h e r e f o r e , as i n i m i c a l as the p r a c t i c e o f war communism had been, though f o r a d i f f e r e n t reason, to the c r e a t i o n o f any s u p e r v i s o r y organ. Complete o f f i c i a l 1_ detachment c o u l d not, indeed, be maintained. The need f o r some c e n t r a l p l a n n i n g was obvio u s . S t a l i n s t a r t e d w i t h the assumption t h a t a program o f r a p i d i n d u s -t r i a l i z a t i o n was i m p e r a t i v e and t h a t n o t h i n g s h o r t o f a who l e s a l e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f S o v i e t a g r i c u l t u r e c o u l d guarantee the g r a i n r e s e r v e s t o c a r r y i t forward. The S t a l i n i s t p l a n , which was borrowed i n many of i t s aspects from the p r o p o s a l s o f the L e f t O p p o s i t i o n , i n v o l v e d the p r e l i m i n a r y a p p l i c a t i o n o f "emergency measures". These Ru s s i a n S o c i a l i s t F e d e r a l S o v i e t R e p u b l i c . E. H. C a r r , Op. c i t . , Volume I , p. 343. 11 measures were a g a i n s t the k u l a k s , i n o r d e r to e x p r o p r i a t e the s u r p l u s e s which they were a l l e g e d l y h o a r d i n g , and subse-q u e n t l y t o l i q u i d a t e the kulaks as c l a s s enemies. By h e r d i n g the a g r i c u l t u r a l p o p u l a t i o n i n t o s t a t e and c o l l e c t i v e farms, the regime would be a b l e to operate through a r e l a t i v e l y l i m i t e d number o f c o n t r o l l e d c o l l e c t i v e u n i t s i n s t e a d of d e a l i n g i n d i v i d u a l l y w i t h m i l l i o n s of peasant households. While the advocates of t h i s p l a n p r o f e s s e d to b e l i e v e t h a t r a p i d i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n c o u l d be combined w i t h an i n c r e a s e i n consumption as the r e s u l t of the a p p l i c a t i o n of modern t e c h n i c a l methods to a g r i c u l t u r e , i n p r a c t i c e , t h i s hope was soon shown to be i l l u s o r y . S t r i p p e d o f i t s propaganda v e r b i a g e , the S t a l i n i s t program foreshadowed a profound e x t e n s i o n o f the scope of t o t a l i t a r i a n power. The peasantry was to be brought to h e e l and t i e d t o s t a t e ends. The s u r p l u s e s e x t r a c t e d from the peasantry were to p r o v i d e the means o f c r e a t i n g a powerful i n d u s t r i a l s t r u c t u r e which would r e n d e r the S o v i e t s t a t e impregnable. Thus the e r a o f N.E.P., of p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e s , o f supply and demand market p r i n c i p l e s , gave way to the e r a o f the " Five-Year P l a n s " : the e r a of complete s t a t e - c o n t r o l l e d economy. CHAPTER I I D u r i n g the e r a o f N.E.P., l i t e r a r y p o l i c y was s u b j e c t t o the same compromise which was i n h e r e n t i n a l l the p o l i c i e s o f the r u l i n g p a r t y : l a c k of c e n t r a l c o n t r o l . T h i s compara-t i v e freedom can be e x p l a i n e d by the g r e a t p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g l e f o r complete power, between r i v a l groups behind the scenes. As l o n g as no one group had a b s o l u t e power over the p a r t y and thus over the country, the c o n t r o l of l i t e r a t u r e seemed t o be o f secondary importance, even though T r o t s k y , L e n i n , and Bukharin were con s c i o u s of the f a c t t h a t l i t e r a t u r e was the b a t t l e g r o u n d of s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l o p i n i o n . During t h i s p e r i o d an embarrassingly l a r g e number o f l i t e r a r y groups mushroomed a l l over the c o u n t r y , but most i n t e n s i v e l y i n L e n i n g r a d and Moscow. The c l a s h of opposing o p i n i o n s was mounting. On the L e f t , a number of l i t e r a r y groups and movements claimed to 12 be speaking i n the name of the p a r t y and the r e v o l u t x o n . They r e j e c t e d the h e r i t a g e of" the bourgeois p a s t . On the o p p o s i t e wing were the s o - c a l l e d " f e l l o w t r a v e l l e r s " The p a r t y view on t h i s , i n May 19 24, was as f o l l o w s : " C o n s i d e r i n g t h a t no one l i t e r a r y t r e n d , s c h o o l or group can, or s h o u l d be allowed to speak i n the name of the p a r t y , the congress emphasizes the importance of r e g u l a t i n g the q u e s t i o n of l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m and of throwing the f u l l e s t p o s s i b l e l i g h t on p a t t e r n s of b e l l e s - l e t t r e s i n the pages of the S o v i e t p a r t y p r e s s . " VKP(B) v R e z o l y u t s i y a k h (1941), i . 602. 13 13 ( P o p u t c h i k i ) who accepted the Russian l i t e r a r y and a r t i s t i c t r a d i t i o n as a v a l i d f o u n d a t i o n on which a new S o v i e t l i t e r a t u r e c o u l d be b u i l t . In e f f e c t , L e n i n and T r o t s k y were both on the s i d e o f the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s . T h e i r works were f r e e l y p u b l i s h e d i n l i t e r a r y j o u r n a l s , r e c e i v i n g p r a i s e from Bukharin as w e l l as T r o t s k y . Heated debates and statements on the p o s i t i o n the p a r t y s h o u l d take i n r e g a r d t o l i t e r a t u r e were f r e q u e n t , but not b i n d i n g . Bukharin d e s c r i b e d h i s p o s i t i o n as "very r a d i c a l " . He f e l t the p a r t y should impose i t s i d e o l o g y on a l l f i e l d s , "even on mathematics", but i t would be wrong t o "crush peasant l i t e r a t u r e " or to e l i m i n a t e "the w r i t e r from the S o v i e t i n t e l l i g e n t s i a " . T r o t s k y gave the l o n g e s t and b e s t - r e a s o n e d speech i n defence o f the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s , b u t by t h i s time h i s p o s i t i o n i n the p a r t y , s i n c e the " T h i r -t e e n t h P a r t y Conference" (January, 1924), was s e r i o u s l y compromised. The main o p p o s i t i o n to the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s was the N o n - p r o l e t a r i a n and non-communist w r i t e r s who, i n t h e i r own way, had accepted the r e v o l u t i o n , mainly f o c u s i n g t h e i r a r t i s t i c a t t e n t i o n on i t s p r o c e s s e s . Even the m a j o r i t y of the S e r a p i o n Brothers,- d e s p i t e t h e i r i n s i s t e n c e on b e i n g f r e e t o choose t h e i r s u b j e c t s , i n f a c t wrote almost e x c l u s i v e l y about the r e v o l u t i o n . A l l these w r i t e r s who, w i t h o u t b e i n g communists, vaguely sympathized w i t h the r e v o l u t i o n and were c e r t a i n l y h o s t i l e to i t s ' e n e m i e s , were dubbed " f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s " . The name was f i r s t used by T r o t s k y i n one o f the essays i n h i s book, L i t e r a t u r a i R e v o l u t s i y a , — as s t a t e d by Gleb S t r u v e . 14 "On-Guardist" (Na postu) group. O r i g i n a l l y t h i s group broke away from the "Smithy" (Kuznitsa) group, by f i r s t p u b l i s h i n g t h e i r r i v a l j o u r n a l October (Oktyabr) and then c a l l i n g t h e i r group by the same name. They had a hundred per cent communist membership. T h e i r aims were to develop i d e o l o g i -c a l l y pure p r o l e t a r i a n l i t e r a t u r e and to c r u s h any oth e r l i t e r a t u r e , such as t h a t o f the peasantry and the i n t e l l i -g e n t s i a , as n o n - r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the r e v o l u t i o n a r y masses. In June 1923 they began i s s u i n g t h e i r new j o u r n a l , On Guard. The e d i t o r i a l m anifesto appeared i n the f i r s t i s s u e , and demanded a break w i t h the p a s t : We s h a l l stand f i r m l y on guard over a s t r o n g and c l e a r communist i d e o l o g y i n p r o l e t a r i a n l i t e r a t u r e . In view of the r e v i v a l ever s i n c e the b e g i n n i n g o f N.E.P. of the a c t i v i t y o f bourgeois l i t e r a r y groups, a l l i d e o l o g i c a l doubts are a b s o l u t e l y i n a d m i s s i b l e , and we s h a l l make a p o i n t o f b r i n g i n g them to l i g h t . 14 We s h a l l f i g h t those Manilovs who d i s t o r t and s l a n d e r our r e v o l u t i o n by the a t t e n t i o n they pay to the r o t t e n f a b r i c o f the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s * l i t e r a r y c r e a t i o n i n t h e i r attempt to b u i l d an a e s t h e t i c b r i d g e between the p a s t and the present.15 Among the l i s t of c o n t r i b u t o r s i n the second i s s u e of the j o u r n a l were Kamenev, Radek and Y a r o s l a v s k y . T h i s M anilov: the complacent land-owner i n Gogol's Dead S o u l s . 15 . . . G. R. Reavey and M. Slonim, S o v i e t L i t e r a t u r e : An Anthology (1933), p. 405. 16 T h i s might not be as s i g n i f i c a n t as i t seems, as i t was a common p r a c t i c e o f p a r t y l e a d e r s to l e n d t h e i r names 15 meant t h a t the j o u r n a l and the group had support i n p a r t y c i r c l e s . T h i s support gave them c o n f i d e n c e t o wage an a l l - o u t b a t t l e a g a i n s t the very popular group o f f e l l o w -t r a v e l l e r s . P r o l e t a r i a n l i t e r a t u r e i n the S o v i e t Union has bu t one aim b e f o r e i t : t o se r v e the cause of worl d p r o l e t a r i a n v i c t o r y , to f i g h t r u t h l e s s l y a l l the enemies of the R e v o l u t i o n . P r o l e t a r i a n l i t e r a t u r e w i l l conquer bourgeois l i t e r a t u r e , - ^ f Q r the pro-l e t a r i a n r e v o l u t i o n w i l l i n e v i t a b l y d e s t r o y c a p i t a l i s m . 1 8 T r o t s k y answered t h e i r a t t a c k i n h i s book, L i t e r a t u r e and R e v o l u t i o n (1923): I f we should e l i m i n a t e P i l n i a k , the Serap i o n Brotherhood, Mayakovsky, E s e n i n , what w i l l remain o f a f u t u r e p r o l e t a r i a n l i t e r a t u r e except a few d e f a u l t e d promissory notes? The p r o l e t a r i a n w r i t e r s w i l l have t o win t h i s war "by h i g h -grade p r o d u c t i v e n e s s r a t h e r than by m a n i f e s t o s " ; "the i s s u e between bourgeois and p r o l e t a r i a n l i t e r a t u r e depends on q u a l i t y . " As a matter o f f a c t , a l l the l e a d i n g poets of the p e r i o d emerged from o t h e r than p r o l e t a r i a n backgrounds: Mayakovsky and Blok from the n o b i l i t y , Pasternak from the to a new j o u r n a l w i t h o u t any s e r i o u s i n t e n t i o n of w r i t i n g f o r them. 17 Gorky was tagged by them as "the d a r l i n g of Western b o u r g e o i s i e " ; A l e x i s T o l s t o y and Ehrenburg as "pseudo-r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s " . Mayakovsky, E s e n i n , P i l n i a k , the Se r a p i o n B r o t h e r s , Polonsky were accused o f b e i n g " l i b e r a l s who pamper o l d t i m e r s and NEPmen". Zvezda ( S t a r ) , No. I (1925), e d i t o r i a l . 16 i n t e l l i g e n t s i a , E s e n i n from the pe a s a n t r y . Another s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e on the l i t e r a r y scene was the F u t u r i s t movement. Russian F u t u r i s m developed p a r a l l e l t o the I t a l i a n F u t u r i s t movement of M a r i n e t t i , b ut i d e o l o g i c a l l y independent o f i t . From the very b e g i n n i n g the movement was not homogeneous: i t s p l i t i n t o many f a c t i o n s , such as the E g o - F u t u r i s t s , C u b o - F u t u r i s t s and o t h e r s . T h e i r common aim was t o e l i m i n a t e the c o n v e n t i o n a l form, b a l a n c e , and rhythm i n a l l types o f a r t . In "western" a r t and l i t e r a t u r e , t h i s was j u s t another movement to welcome the new age o f the machines. In R u s s i a the Symbolist movement s t i l l dominated the l i t e r a r y scene, and the F u t u r i s t movement was a r e v o l t a g a i n s t the Sy m b o l i s t t r e n d toward i n v e s t i n g p o e t r y w i t h r e l i g i o u s or p h i l o s o p h i c a l meaning. In S o v i e t R u s s i a the movement gained some s t r e n g t h mainly due t o the e f f o r t s o f V. Mayakovsky, but i t s beginnings 19 went back to 1910. T h e i r j o u r n a l was L e f p u b l i s h e d by Gos-20 i z d a t . The j o u r n a l ' s name was s i g n i f i c a n t , as the F u t u r i s t s s t i l l i d e n t i f i e d l i t e r a r y i n n o v a t i o n s w i t h " L e f t i s m " . They hoped t o e s t a b l i s h p r o l e t a r i a n c r e d e n t i a l s , and to a t t a c k the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s . T r o t s k y , i n an essay on "Futurism", gave Seven i s s u e s , i n a l l , appeared between March 1923 and March 1925. 20 Gosudarstvennoye I z d a t e l ' s t v o (State P u b l i s h i n g House). 17 very q u a l i f i e d a p p r o v a l to the e f f o r t s o f t h i s group. In h i s essay on "Party P o l i c y i n A r t " , he argued t h a t , j u s t as the S o v i e t s t a t e under N.E.P. t o l e r a t e d the p a r a l l e l e x i s t e n c e o f d i f f e r e n t forms of economic p r o d u c t i o n , by no means a l l o f them s o c i a l i s t , so i t must t o l e r a t e d i f f e r e n t 22 forms o f l i t e r a r y and a r t i s t i c p r o d u c t i o n . Mayakovsky and h i s F u t u r i s t f r i e n d s o r g a n i z e d the L e f t F r o n t o f A r t i n 1923, and began p u b l i s h i n g the magazine L e f . T h e i r purpose was s t a t e d i n the f o l l o w i n g p o i n t s : 1. To a i d i n the d i s c o v e r y o f a Communist path f o r a l l v a r i e t i e s o f a r t . 2. To re-examine the theory and p r a c t i c e o f s o - c a l l e d " l e f t " a r t , f r e e i n g i t from i n d i v i d u a l -i s t i c d i s t o r t i o n s and d e v e l o p i n g i t s v a l u a b l e Communist a s p e c t s . 3. To s t r u g g l e w i t h decadence and a e s t h e t i c m y s t i c i s m , as w e l l as w i t h s e l f - c o n t a i n e d formalism, i n d i f f e r e n t n a t u r a l i s m , and f o r the a f f i r m a t i o n o f tendentious r e a l i s m , based on the use o f the t e c h n i c a l d e v i c e s developed i n a l l the r e v o l u t i o n a r y s c h o o l s o f a r t . 2 ^ • A f t e r a f o u r - y e a r i n t e r v a l , Mayakovsky launched a hew j o u r n a l the "New L e f " . I t s t h e o r e t i c i a n s were Chuzhak, B r i k , and Tretyakov. V i c t o r Shklovsky a l s o c o n t r i b u t e d r e g u l a r l y ; he L. T r o t s k y , L i t e r a t u r a i R e v o l y u t s i a (19 23), pp. 159-168. 2 2 I b i d . , pp. 91-116. 23 E. J . Brown, Russian L i t e r a t u r e S i n c e the R e v o l u t i o n , p. 58. 18 advocated " l i t e r a t u r e o f f a c t " . In 1929 a c o l l e c t i o n of a r t i c l e s w r i t t e n d u r i n g the p a s t two years was e d i t e d and p u b l i s h e d by Chuzhak. The t i t l e o f the volume was L i t e r a t u r e 24 of F a c t . Most of the a r t i c l e s spoke of the death o f f i c t i o n and o f p l o t l i t e r a t u r e . L e n i n r e f e r r e d t o r e l i g i o n , Chuzhak t o f i c t i o n , as "opium f o r the people", and they saw f a c t u a l l i t e r a t u r e as an a n t i d o t e f o r i t . The aim of the New L e f was t o s h i f t . t h e importance i n the a r t s from human emotions t o the o r g a n i z a t i o n o f s o c i e t y . In Chuzhak's o p i n i o n , n o t h i n g c o u l d be le a r n e d from r e a d i n g the c l a s s i c s as they were thoroughly i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c and i d e a l i s t i c . A r t was a matter of s k i l l and d i d not r e q u i r e a r t i s t i c i n s p i r a -t i o n . "Factography", a c c o r d i n g t o Chuzhak and h i s f o l l o w e r s (amongst them M. Gorky), was the h i g h e s t form of l i t e r a r y a c t i v i t y : i t was f a c t u a l r e p o r t i n g of the w r i t i n g of d i a r i e s , t r a v e l notes, b i o g r a p h i e s . The w r i t e r ' s concern should be wi t h w r i t i n g f a c t s . H is t o p i c should be what h i s " c l i e n t " demands. F o l l o w i n g t h i s p r i n c i p l e , V. Shklovsky p u b l i s h e d a number of s t i m u l a t i n g and o r i g i n a l s t u d i e s i n the New L e f , among them, " T o l s t o y ' s War and Peace, a Formal S o c i o l o g i c a l 25 Study"; Furmanov wrote "Chapayev"; Mayakovsky, "How to L i t e r a t u r a f a k t a . Pervy s b o r n i k m a t e r i a l o v r a b o t -n i k o v LEF-a ( e d i t e d by N. Chuzhak). 25 B. B. IUKJIOBCKHK , „MaTepHaji H CTHJIB B poMaHe JlbBa TojicToro Boa Ha H Mnp" (MocKBa, „Oeflepai;HH", 1928). 19 W r i t e P o e t r y " . 2 6 The New L e f never enjoyed the p o p u l a r i t y o r the support t h a t L e f had. They l i m i t e d the j o u r n a l ' s e d i t i o n to f i f t e e n hundred c o p i e s , as Osip B r i k f e l t t h a t t h e i r l i t e r a r y adventures were i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l phase and should not be read i n t h i s "green" s t a t e by m i l l i o n s : " I t i s a mistake," he s a i d , " t o demand t h a t every c u l t u r a l work be m u l t i p l i e d and d i s t r i b u t e d i n the hundreds of thousands." Under p o l i -t i c a l p r e s s u r e , Mayakovsky r e s i g n e d from the e d i t o r s h i p o f New L e f i n the summer o f 1928, g i v i n g as h i s reason l a t e r t h a t t i n y l i t e r a r y " f a c t i o n l e t s " had o u t l i v e d themselves, and i n s t e a d o f o r g a n i z i n g groups l i t e r a r y men should t r a n s f e r t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s t o mass o r g a n i z a t i o n s c a r r y i n g on a g i t a -t i o n a l work: newspapers, " a g i t p r o p s " , commissions, e t c . In 19 29 Mayakovsky and some of h i s f e l l o w - w r i t e r s abandoned L e f and formed a new group which they c a l l e d the R e v o l u t i o n a r y F r o n t o f A r t (REF). They claim e d t h a t t h e i r aim was t o c a r r y on a s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t " a - p o l i t i c a l tenden-c i e s " . From t h e i r abandonment of L e f , i t must f o l l o w t h a t they a l s o r e j e c t e d the theory o f " f a c t u a l l i t e r a t u r e " . The independent e x i s t e n c e of t h i s group was s h o r t ; i t ended by merging w i t h a l a r g e r group of p r o l e t a r i a n w r i t e r s , the B. MaHKOBCKHfi, „KaK nenaTB CTHXH" (1927) , ItoJiHoe coSpaHHe co^HHeHHft B 13-MH TOMax (MocKBa, 1959), T. X I I , pp. 81-117. Russian A s s o c i a t i o n o f P r o l e t a r i a n W r i t e r s (RAPP). L e f and the New L e f , as w e l l as RAPP, were ardent opponents o f the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s . At the f i r s t A l l - U n i o n Conference o f P r o l e t a r i a n W r i t e r s i n January 19 25, they p r e s s e d f o r the " l i c e n c e " t o become the organ of the p a r t y d i c t a t o r s h i p i n l i t e r a t u r e . In h i s r e p o r t , V a r d i n d e c l a r e d t h a t . . . . the supremacy of the p r o l e t a r i a t i s incom-. p a t i b l e w i t h the supremacy o f a n o n - p r o l e t a r i a n i d e o l o g y and, consequently, of a n o n - p r o l e t a r i a n l i t e r a t u r e . What was r e q u i r e d was "the s e i z u r e of power by the p r o l e -27 t a r i a t i n the f i e l d o f a r t " . B u k h a n n , who c o u l d not be accused o f T r o t s k y i s m , through h i s p o l i t i c a l maneuvers became the most a c t i v e champion o f the peasants i n the c o u n c i l s o f the p a r t y , and t h i s l o g i c a l l y a l i g n e d him with the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s i n l i t e r a t u r e . He accused RAPP of wanting t o e s t a b l i s h a monopoly, and e x p l a i n e d t h a t "our r e l a t i o n t o the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s i s determined by our g e n e r a l r e l a t i o n t o s o c i a l - p o l i t i c a l forms sympathetic to us." In c o n c l u s i o n , i n h i s appeal f o r t o l e r a t i o n f o r many l i t e r a r y movements, he showed how l i t t l e the p a r t y l e a d e r s wanted to be compelled t o take s i d e s i n t h i s thorny i s s u e : V. Polonsky, O c h e r k i L i t e r a t u r n o g o D v i z h e n i y a R e v o l y u t s i o n n o i Epokhi (2nd ed., 1929), pp. 173-174. A l s o p u b l i s h e d i n Pravda, February 1, 19 25. 21 L e t t h e r e be 1000 o r g a n i z a t i o n s , l e t t h e r e be 2000 o r g a n i z a t i o n s . L e t t h e r e be s i d e by s i d e w i t h MAPP and VAPP as many groups and o r g a n i z a -t i o n s as you please.28 Other p r i n c i p a l speakers a t the c o n f e r e n c e , such as L e n i n and Frunze, argued "the n e c e s s i t y of a l l o w i n g , w i t h i n c e r t a i n l i m i t s , c a p i t a l i s t accumulation i n the c o u n t r y s i d e " . They p o i n t e d t o the t o l e r a t i o n o f s i m i l a r non-party elements i n l i t e r a t u r e . "Face t o the c o u n t r y s i d e " c a r r i e d w i t h i t an o b l i g a t i o n f o r the On-Guardist group t o a c c e p t , or a t l e a s t 29 t o l e r a t e the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s . The r e s o l u t i o n of the c e n t r a l committee of June 18, 1925, p r o c l a i m e d t h a t i n a c l a s s s o c i e t y t h e r e c o u l d be no n e u t r a l a r t , and t h a t l e a d e r s h i p i n the f i e l d o f l i t e r a t u r e belongs t o the working c l a s s as a whole. However, at t h i s time t h e r e was no hegemonic group of p r o l e t a r i a n w r i t e r s and the p a r t y recommended t h a t t o l e r a n c e and a t a c t f u l a t t i t u d e s hould be adopted toward the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s , as they were 30 " q u a l i f i e d s p e c i a l i s t s i n l i t e r a r y t e c h n i q u e " . The con-t r o v e r s y d i d not end w i t h t h i s q u a l i f y i n g statement from the p a r t y , but c o n t i n u e d i n the pages of the p a r t y j o u r n a l The conference of January 19 25 had r e s u l t e d i n the c r e a t i o n of a new Russian A s s o c i a t i o n of P r o l e t a r i a n W r i t e r s (RAPP), which took the p l a c e of the former VAPP. MAPP was i t s Moscow branch. 29 M. Frunze, Sobranie S o c h i n e n i i , i i i (1927), 150-155. 3 0 P r a v d a , J u l y 1, 1925. B o l s h e v i k . A f t e r shedding T r o t s k y as t h e i r main s u p p o r t e r , the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s found a new champion of t h e i r cause i n Bukh a r i n . The e n t h u s i a s t s f o r p r o l e t a r i a n l i t e r a t u r e — n o t a b l y V a r d i n , L e l e v i c h and Rodov — l o g i c a l l y j o i n e d Z i n o v i e v ' s L e n i n g r a d o p p o s i t i o n , and a t t a c k e d Bukharin's peasant o r i e n t a t i o n . These new alignments a l s o produced a s p l i t i n RAPP. 3 1 Auerbakh, u s i n g h i s o p p o s i t i o n t o the f e l l o w - t r a v e l -l e r s as an excuse, s e t h i m s e l f a g a i n s t L e l e v i c h 1 s group as w e l l . He managed t o keep the j o u r n a l On Guard, which he renamed On L i t e r a r y Guard (Na l i t e r a t u r n o m p o s t u ) . Through h i s a t t a c k s h i s former c o l l e a g u e s appeared, l i k e Z i n o v i e v i n the p a r t y s t r u g g l e , as the f a c t i o u s d i s s i d e n t s who had broken p a r t y u n i t y . V a r d i n and h i s f o l l o w e r s d i d not see the t r a p , and by t h e i r own m i s c a l c u l a t i o n they s e a l e d t h e i r own d e f e a t . Auerbakh emerged as the r i s i n g s t a r i n the l i t e r a r y c o n s t e l l a t i o n . Through h i s " i n t u i t i o n " he d i s s o -c i a t e d h i m s e l f i n time from both the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s o f the R i g h t and the p r o l e t a r i a n e x t r e m i s t s o f the L e f t . Thus Auerbakh u t i l i z e d the same t a c t i c s which S t a l i n so b r i l l i a n t l y L i t e r a t u r n a y a E n t s i k l o p e d i y a , i x (1935), p. 521, a t t r i b u t e s the s p l i t d i r e c t l y t o the r e s o l u t i o n o f June 18, 1925. A f t e r the s p l i t L e l e v i c h claimed t h a t he, V a r d i n and Rodov had the ap p r o v a l of the m a j o r i t y i n the Len i n g r a d s e c t i o n o f RAPP. (B o l s h e v i k Nos. 9-10, May 30, 1926, p. 91). 23 a p p l i e d i n the p a r t y s t r u g g l e . Auerbakh's v i c t o r y was not complete over the A l l - R u s s i a n Union of W r i t e r s ; he had to a c c e p t a compromise: both p r o l e t a r i a n w r i t e r s and f e l l o w -t r a v e l l e r s he e q u a l l y admitted to membership. However much the p r o l e t a r i a n w r i t e r s p r e s s e d the p a r t y to take an o f f i c i a l s tand, the p a r t y l e a d e r s h i p remained r e l u c t a n t t o take s i d e s i n these d i s p u t e s . T h e i r p o l i c y and d e s i r e was t o t o l e r a t e a l l c o n f l i c t i n g groups o r s c h o o l s , s u b j e c t o n l y t o the c o n d i t i o n of l o y a l t y to the regime. Auerbakh and a group of young p r o l e t a r i a n w r i t e r s were t r y i n g to convince the p a r t y l e a d e r s h i p t h a t t h i s l i t e r a r y i s s u e was e s s e n t i a l l y a p o l i t i c a l and i d e o l o g i c a l i s s u e as w e l l . They branded t h e i r l i t e r a r y opponents as a s s o c i a t e s of the p o l i t i c a l o p p o s i t i o n . They sought to persuade the p a r t y to extend i t s e x c l u s i v e patronage t o them and to e n t r u s t to them the f u n c t i o n s of l i t e r a r y d i c t a t o r s h i p . A f t e r c o n s i d e r a b l e s t r u g g l e the p a r t y had been o b l i g e d to renounce an a t t i t u d e o f n e u t r a l i t y i n l i t e r a r y a f f a i r s and t o take d e c i s i o n s about them. T h i s was a s t e p i n the d i r e c t i o n d e s i r e d by Auerbakh, and a v i c t o r y f o r the view t h a t a r t and l i t e r a t u r e were i n s e p a r a b l e from p o l i t i c s . CHAPTER I I I F a i t h f u l t o the vogue of the e r a , the h a n d f u l o f young l i t e r a r y e n t h u s i a s t s who met f o r the f i r s t time on 32 February 1, 1921, e s t a b l i s h e d a l i t e r a r y c i r c l e . They 33 c a l l e d themselves the Serapion B r o t h e r s . The d e c i s i v e d i f f e r e n c e between t h i s group o f w r i t e r s and most of the ot h e r s was t h e i r c a s u a l , f r e e , not c o n f i n i n g a s s o c i a t i o n . Whereas the o t h e r groups f o r g e d a l l i a n c e t o r e s t r i c t p a r t i -c i p a t i o n t o , f o r example, a common p r o l e t a r i a n background among the members, or to advocate a common s t y l e , , t o p i c , o r i d e o l o g y , Lev Lunc's "manifesto", "Why We Are the Se r a p i o n 34 B r o t h e r s " , s t a t e s t h a t the s t r e n g t h o f t h e i r a l l i a n c e l a y i n t h e i r mutual l o v e o f l i t e r a t u r e and i n t h e i r freedom o f s e l f - e x p r e s s i o n : The S e r a p i o n Brothers i s a novel by Hoffmann. W e l l then, we w r i t e i n i m i t a t i o n of Hoffmann, so M. Slonimsky, "Serapionovy B r a t ' y a o sebe", L i t e r a -turnye z a p i s k i , 3 (August 1, 1922) . 33 . T h e i r members were: Lunc, F e d i n , V s e v o l o d Ivanov, K a v e r i n , Gruzdyov, N i k i t i n , Tikhonov, Slonimsky, Shklovsky, Pozner, E l i z a v e t a Polonskaya and M. Zoshchenko. P r o f e s s o r Struve quotes V. Pozner as w r i t i n g about twelve S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s ; F e d i n i n h i s book on Gorky speaks o f t e n , e x c l u d i n g Shklovsky and Pozner, although g i v i n g Shklovsky c r e d i t f o r h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n to t h e i r l i t e r a r y debates. 34 Lev Lunc, "Pochemu my Serapionovy B r a t ' y a " , L i t e r a -turnye z a p i s k i , 3 (August 1, 1922), pp. 30-31. T r a n s l a t i o n i s taken from H. O u l a n o f f , The Serap i o n B r o t h e r s , Theory and P r a c t i c e , pp. 26-28. 25 we are a s c h o o l of Hoffmann. T h i s c o n c l u s i o n i s drawn by any person who has heard of us. And he too, having read through our c o l l e c t i o n or separate s t o r i e s by the b r o t h e r s , i s a t a l o s s : What do they have from Hoffmann? S u r e l y , g e n e r a l l y speaking, they do not have a s i n g l e s c h o o l , a s i n g l e t r e n d . Everyone w r i t e s i n h i s own way! Yes, i t i s so. We are not a s c h o o l , not a t r e n d , not a s t u d i o i n i m i t a t i o n o f Hoffmann. And t h a t i s why we named o u r s e l v e s S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s . We have named o u r s e l v e s S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s , because we do not want compulsion or boredom, we do not want everyone to w r i t e i d e n t i c a l l y , even i f i t were i n i m i t a t i o n of Hoffmann. Each of us has h i s own p e r s o n a l i t y and h i s own l i t e r a r y t a s t e s . In each of us i t i s p o s s i b l e to f i n d the most d i v e r s e l i t e r a r y i n f l u e n c e s . "Everyone has h i s own drum," s a i d N i k i t i n a t our f i r s t meeting. 35 The s i x S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s are not a s c h o o l Reference to the s i x b r o t h e r s i n Hoffmann's n o v e l . "At the f i r s t meeting f o u r f r i e n d s were p r e s e n t — L o t h a r , Theodor, C y p r i a n , and Ottomar — w h i l e S y l v e s t e r and Vincenz were d i s c u s s e d as p r o s p e c t i v e members at the t h i r d meeting and appeared a t the f o u r t h . L o t h a r , Theodor and C y p r i a n r e p r e s e n t , g e n e r a l l y speaking, d e l i c a t e l y graded aspects of Hoffmann's own p e r s o n a l i t y : L o t h a r i s more r e a l i s t i c i n h i s views and i s somewhat i n c l i n e d to s k e p t i c i s m ; Theodor i s Hoffmann the m u s i c i a n , and C y p r i a n i s an out-and-out romantic and m y s t i c . Ottomar i s Hoffmann's o l d f r i e n d H i t z i g , more of a r e a l i s t , more s k e p t i c a l than L o t h a r ; he i s ever c a l l i n g h i s companions back to e a r t h . Vincenz i s a l i v e l y and spark-l i n g p a r t i c i p a n t i n d i s c u s s i o n s . S y l v e s t e r i s showing s p e c i a l c a r e i n s e l e c t i n g s t o r i e s of h i s own i m a g i n i n g which might be a p p r o p r i a t e to the l i t e r a r y t e n dencies and p r e j u d i c e s o f h i s f r i e n d s , perhaps w i t h a b i t of m a l i c i o u s humour." Harvey W. Hewett-Thayer, Hoffmann: Author of T a l e s ( P r i n c e t o n , N.J.: 26 or a t r e n d e i t h e r . They a t t a c k one another, e t e r n a l l y d i s a g r e e w i t h one another, and t h e r e f o r e we have named o u r s e l v e s S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s . In February o f the year 1921, i n the p e r i o d of the most s t r i c t r e g u l a t i o n s , r e g i s t r a t i o n s and b a r r a c k - l i k e o r d e r i n g , when everyone was g i v e n one i r o n - c l a d and b o r i n g s e t of r u l e s , — we d e c i d e d t o gathe r without any r u l e s or chairmen, w i t h o u t e l e c t i o n s or v o t i n g . Together w i t h Theodor, Ottomar and C y p r i a n we b e l i e v e d t h a t the c h a r a c t e r o f the f u t u r e meetings would take shape by i t s e l f , and we undertook the vow of be i n g f a i t h f u l t o the end to the r u l e s of hermit S e r a p i o n . We b e l i e v e i n the r e a l i t y o f our f i c t i o n a l heroes and f i c t i o n a l events. There l i v e d Hoffmann, a man, th e r e a l s o l i v e d N u t c r a c k e r , a d o l l , i t l i v e d i t s s p e c i a l , but a l s o r e a l l i f e . 3 6 Lunc expresses h i s d i s l i k e f o r the "monotony" and " s t i f f n e s s " o f Russian l i t e r a t u r e . W r i t e r s ' f a n t a s i e s , i m a g i n a t i o n s i n today's S o v i e t l i t e r a t u r e are banished. We are pe r m i t t e d to w r i t e s t o r i e s , n o v e l s and te d i o u s dramas, e i t h e r i n the o l d orthography or i n the new o n e , — but without f a i l on everyday l i f e and without f a i l on contemporary themes. We gathered i n the days o f r e v o l u t i o n , i n the P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1948), pp. 101-102 [abridged by J . L . B . ] . The "hermit S e r a p i o n " i s an acquaintance o f C y p r i a n . He was Graf P. — nobleman, di p l o m a t , poet — who disappeared i n t o the T y r o l e s e mountains. When f o r c i b l y r e t u r n e d t o h i s home he became a madman. He i n s i s t e d t h a t he was the monk Se r a p i o n , who s u f f e r e d martyrdom under the Emperor Decius. The mad herm i t had amazing i n t e l l e c t u a l v i g o r . He outmatched C y p r i a n i n l o g i c a l d i a l e c t i c . Ottomar d i s c o v e r e d t h a t the day o f t h e i r f i r s t meeting happened t o be S t . Serapion's Day, and they took the s a i n t f o r t h e i r p a t r o n . 36 Abridged p o r t i o n o f Lunc's "Pochemu my Serapionovy B r a t ' y a ? " , p a r t s 1 and 2. 27 days of powerful p o l i t i c a l s t r a i n . "Who i s not wi t h u s . i s a g a i n s t us," they s a i d to us on the r i g h t and on the l e f t . "So w i t h whom are you, Ser a p i o n B r o t h e r s ? With the Communists o r a g a i n s t the Communists? F o r the r e v o l u t i o n or a g a i n s t the r e v o l u t i o n ? " So w i t h whom are we, S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s ? We are w i t h h e r m i t S e r a p i o n . So, w i t h no-one? Slough? An i n t e l l i g e n t s i a i d l y i n d u l g i n g i n beauteousness? Without i d e o l o g y , w i t h o u t c o n v i c t i o n , the d e v i l may care? No. Each o f us has an i d e o l o g y , p o l i t i c a l c o n v i c -t i o n s ; everyone p a i n t s h i s hut i n h i s own c o l o r . So i t i s i n l i f e . And so i t i s i n s t o r i e s , t a l e s , dramas. But we t o g e t h e r , we — a brotherhood — demand one t h i n g : t h a t the v o i c e s h o u l d not be f a l s e ; That we should b e l i e v e i n the r e a l i t y o f l i t e r a r y work whatever i t s c o l o r may be. So w i t h whom are we, S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s ? We are w i t h hermit S e r a p i o n . We b e l i e v e t h a t l i t e r a r y chimeras are a s p e c i a l r e a l i t y , and we do not want any u t i l i t a r i a n i s m . We are w r i t i n g not f o r propaganda. A r t i s r e a l as l i f e i t s e l f . And, as l i f e i t s e l f , i t i s wi t h o u t aim and wit h o u t meaning: i t e x i s t s because i t cannot h e l p e x i s t i n g . B r o t h e r s ! To you my l a s t word. There i s s t i l l something t h a t u n i t e s us, t h a t cannot be proved o r e x p l a i n e d , — our b r o t h e r l y l o v e . We are not f e l l o w members o f a c l u b , not c o l -leagues, not comrades, but B r o t h e r s 137 Abridged p o r t i o n o f Lunc's "Pochemu my Serapionovy B r a t ' y a ? " , p a r t 3. 28 C o n s i d e r i n g the c h a r a c t e r o f r e l a t i v e r e l a x a t i o n i n the N.E.P. e r a , Lunc's a r t i c l e was a courageous p l e a f o r freedom o f e x p r e s s i o n i n the a r t s , and a p r o t e s t a g a i n s t the made-to-order l i t e r a t u r e of the time. He renounced the i d e a t h a t l i t e r a t u r e ' s o n l y purpose i s t o d e l i v e r p a r t y propaganda to the p l e b s . In h i s a r t i c l e s t h a t f o l l o w e d 38 the p r e v i o u s l y quoted "manifesto" he had to defend h i s p o s i t i o n . The o l d M a r x i s t c r i t i c , P. S. Kogan, i n h i s a r t i c l e "0 m a n i f e s t e 1Serapionovykh b r a t ' y e v ' " , charged them 40 w i t h d e v o t i o n to " a r t f o r a r t ' s sake". Jury Sobolev compared the S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s ' t r e n d to c h i l d h o o d measles: they w i l l get over i t , and i t i s not too dangerous. The m a j o r i t y of the M a r x i s t c r i t i c s took i t much more s e r i o u s l y and made a p o l i t i c a l and i d e o l o g i c a l i s s u e o f i t . V a l e r i a n Polyansky c a l l e d i t a "cheap, outmoded theory, taken from the a r c h i v e s of h i s t o r y . " Behind t h i s facade the Serapions were t r y i n g t o h i d e t h e i r " p e t t y - b o u r g e o i s p r e j u d i c e s " . I r e f e r t o h i s a r t i c l e , "Pochemu my Serapionovy B r a t ' y a ? " , as h i s m a n i f e s t o , a d m i t t i n g t h a t he h i m s e l f denied t h a t i t was a m a n i f e s t o . A c c o r d i n g to Lunc t h i s was h i s p e r s o n a l view o f why he was a member of the group. Having a m a n i f e s t o to f o l l o w and l i v e by would have been a g a i n s t the brotherhood's p h i l o s o p h y . 39 P. S. Kogan, "O manifeste Serapionovykh b r a t ' y e v " , Krasnaya Gazeta, No. 215 (1368), Sept. 23, 1922. ^ J u r y Sobolev, review of N i k i t i n " s "Amerikanskoe s c h a s t i e " and "Rvotnyy f o r t " , Krasnaya Nov', No. 1 (1923), pp. 326-329. 29 U s i n g G. V. P l e k h a n o v ' s ^ a n a l y s i s of a r t f o r a r t ' s sake essay, which he gave i n P a r i s i n 1912, Kogan wrote h i s r e p l y t o Lunc: Plekhanov b e a u t i f u l l y demonstrated t h a t w r i t e r s who p r o c l a i m a r t to be n o n - i d e o l o g i c a l and non-s o c i a l are a l s o e x p r e s s i n g a s p e c i f i c s o c i a l i d e a . "Pure" a r t a t t e s t s to the f a c t t h a t t h e r e are s o c i a l groups which, because o f t h e i r s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n , f i n d i t necessary to a v o i d the i n t e r e s t s o f s o c i e t y , and "pure" a r t i s n o t h i n g e l s e than t h e i r i d e o l o g i c a l expression.42 Both Kogan and Polyansky a t t a c k e d the S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s f o r t h e i r r e f u s a l to take p o l i t i c a l s i d e s i n t h e i r l i t e r a t u r e . Lunc maintained t h a t as f a r as i t i s a d i c t a t e d i d e o l o g y they w i l l c o n t i n u e t o r e j e c t i t . Polyansky condemned the Serapions f o r h a ving t h e i r work p u b l i s h e d i n G. V. Plekhanov, " I s k u s s t v o i obshchestvennaya z h i z n ' " , l e c t u r e g i v e n i n P a r i s , November 10, 1912. The main i d e a o f the a r t i c l e i s expressed i n t h i s paragraph: The tendency of a r t i s t s and those concerned w i t h a r t t o adopt an a t t i t u d e of a r t f o r a r t ' s sake a r i s e s when a hopeless c o n t r a d i c t i o n e x i s t s between them and t h e i r s o c i a l environment. . . The s o - c a l l e d u t i l i t a r i a n concept of a r t , t h a t i s , the tendency t o r e g a r d the f u n c t i o n of a r t as a judgment on the phenomena o f l i f e and r e a d i n e s s to p a r t i c i p a t e i n s o c i a l s t r u g g l e s , develops and becomes e s t a b l i s h e d when a mutual bond o f sympathy e x i s t s between a c o n s i d e r a b l e s e c t i o n of s o c i e t y and those more o r l e s s a c t i v e l y i n t e r e s t e d i n a r t i s t i c c r e a t i o n . T r a n s l a t e d f o r " C r i t i c s Group S e r i e s " , No. 3 (New York, 1937) t i t l e : " A r t and S o c i e t y " . ^ P . S. Kogan, "Ob i s k u s s t v e i p u b l i c i s t i k e " , Krasnaya Gazeta, No. 274 (1425), December 2, 1922. 30 n o n - p r o l e t a r i a n j o u r n a l s and t h e i r l a c k o f p r i n c i p l e t h a t undermines the working c l a s s ' c o n f i d e n c e i n t h e i r a r t . He s a i d t h a t the p r o l e t a r i a t i s l o o k i n g f o r a l e a d e r i n t h e i r w r i t e r s "with whom they are u n i t e d i n thought and a c t i o n " , and not f o r some s e l f i s h "playboys". Lunc's o r i g i n a l theory became a very h o t l y debated i s s u e f o r the f o l l o w i n g s i x months. Every c r i t i c who was of any importance had a statement, a r t i c l e , speech on the t o p i c . The most remarkable point i n the dissension v;as t h a t i t appeared i n l i t e r a r y as w e l l as p a r t y newspapers w i t h o u t c e n s o r s h i p . T h i s e x p r e s s i o n o f i d e a l i s m c o u l d o n l y be e x p l a i n e d by the u n s e t t l e d p o l i t i c a l c l i m a t e o f the country or by the i d e a l -ism o f these young, t a l e n t e d people; or by the m i x t u r e of b o th. Kogan i n v i t e d them to see the r e v o l u t i o n through the eyes o f the workers whether they were w i t h i n the p a r t y or on the o u t s i d e . He p r e s s e d t h e i r s o c i a l o b l i g a t i o n s , a t t a c k i n g t h e i r " a r t f o r a r t ' s sake" t h e o r y . . . . A t r u l y a r t i s t i c work always serves s o c i a l purposes, i t always o r g a n i z e s the thoughts and f e e l i n g s of one c o l l e c t i v e or another and guides i t s w i l l i n a s p e c i f i c d i r e c t i o n . L e t the enthu-s i a s t i c " B r o t h e r s " not become angry. In these words t h e r e i s no attempt upon t h e i r independence, upon t h e i r freedom o f i n s p i r a t i o n . P r e c i s e l y because they a r e t a l e n t e d , they a l r e a d y e x e r t s o c i a l i n f l u e n c e . And i t does not matter whether they want t h i s or not. I t i s s t r a n g e t h a t w r i t e r s should c o n s i d e r i t a d i s g r a c e f o r t h e i r works to i n f l u e n c e s o c i e t y . I t was long ago demonstrated t h a t the f r e e r a w r i t e r ' s i n s p i r a t i o n i s , the more powerful i s h i s 31 i n f l u e n c e ; t h a t crude tendentiousness a c h i e v e s e x a c t l y the o p p o s i t e e f f e c t ; t h a t a work o f a r t stamped by such tendentiousness i n s p i r e s d i s g u s t f o r those v e r y i d e a s which i t aims a t spreading.^3 Looking back a t these developments f i f t y y e a r s a f t e r t hese events took p l a c e , one must come t o the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e i r b o l d c l a i m to s t a y a p o l i t i c a l , not i n v o l v e d i n a d i c t a t e d i d e o l o g y , and i n t e r p r e t events of the times through i t s beauty as the a r t i s t sees i t — does g i v e the i m p r e s s i o n o f s u p e r f l u i t y . Those were v e r y d i f f i c u l t times and w r i t e r s o f the e r a had a duty e i t h e r t o support the new regime or take a c t i v e p a r t a g a i n s t i t . The S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s chose n e i t h e r . Why? P r e c i s e l y f o r the same reason as the o t h e r group o f s o c i e t y , the peasants, the i n t e l l i g e n t s i a d i d not a c t i v e l y f i g h t a g a i n s t the r e v o l u t i o n : i t was t h e i r r e v o l u -t i o n , b ut t h i s r e v o l u t i o n d i d not f u l f i l l t h e i r needs or hopes. The t s a r i s t regime was r e p u l s i v e and the new regime shortchanged them. Where does one t u r n when t h e r e are no more cards l e f t t o p l a y ? The f a c t t h a t they s t a t e d t h a t t h e i r a r t i s t i c independence was of the g r e a t e s t v a l u e to them,— they d i d take up t h e i r share of s o c i a l p r o t e s t . The S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s ' i n s i s t e n c e on a r t i s t i c i n d e -pendence met w i t h the utmost c r i t i c i s m and had f a r - r e a c h i n g consequences. In August, 19 34, the new Union of S o v i e t Kogan, "0 m a n i f e s t e 'Serapionovykh b r a t ' e v ' " . W r i t e r s had i t s f i r s t Pan-Soviet Congress i n Moscow. The p a r t y ' s p o l i c y on l i t e r a t u r e had been s t a t e d by A. Zhdanov: t h e r e w i l l be no room f o r o t h e r forms o f a r t than the one t h a t r e f l e c t s "upon the l i f e and e x p e r i e n c e o f the men o f Dneprostroy and M a g n i t o s t r o y . . ." The p r o l e t a r i a t i s the o n l y h e i r t o the b e s t t r e a s u r e s o f the w o r l d and o f Russian l i t e r a t u r e . Zhdanov c a l l e d upon S o v i e t w r i t e r s to " c o l l e c t , study, and c r i t i c a l l y d i g e s t " the l i t e r a r y h e r i t a g e "squan-dered" by the b o u r g e o i s i e . Under the d i c t a t o r s h i p o f the 44 p r o l e t a r i a t , l i t e r a t u r e must become "Party-minded". And I t h i n k t h a t every S o v i e t man o f l e t t e r s can say t o any thickheaded b o u r g e o i s , to any p h i l i s t i n e , t o any bourgeois w r i t e r who w i l l t a l k of the t e n d e n t i o u s n e s s of our l i t e r a t u r e : "Yes, S o v i e t l i t e r a t u r e i s t e n d e n t i o u s , and we are proud of i t s t e n d e n t i o u s n e s s , because our tendency c o n s i s t s i n l i b e r a t i n g the workers, the whole of mankind from the yoke of c a p i t a l i s t s l a v e r y . " 4 5 V s e v o l d d Ivanov, a S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r , who had e a r l i e r p r o t e s t e d a g a i n s t " t e n d e n t i o u s n e s s " i n S o v i e t l i t e r a t u r e , r epented a t the Congress, s t a t i n g t h a t he now r e a l i z e d t h a t " B o l s h e v i k t e n d e n t i o u s n e s s " was an i n d i s p e n s a b l e weapon i n the hands of S o v i e t w r i t e r s . The f a r - r e a c h i n g consequence of Zhdanov's purge among 44 L e n i n had p r e t t y w e l l s t a t e d the same aim i n a r t i c l e s as e a r l y as 1905. " S o v i e t L i t e r a t u r e — The R i c h e s t i n Ideas, the Most P r o g r e s s i v e L i t e r a t u r e i n the World", A. Zhdanov's address t o the Congress. 33 S o v i e t w r i t e r s reached M. Zoshchenko i n 1946. He was accused o f . . . s p e c i a l i z i n g i n w r i t i n g empty, fatuous and v u l g a r s t u f f , and i n p r e a c h i n g r o t t e n l a c k o f i d e a s [ b e z i d e y n o s t 1 ] , v u l g a r i t y , and a p o l i t i c a l n e s s , designed to l e a d our youth a s t r a y and to p o i s o n i t s consciousness.46 Zoshchenko was d e s c r i b e d as "scum of l i t e r a t u r e " . His s h o r t s t o r y , "The Adventures o f a Monkey" (p u b l i s h e d i n Zvezda, No. 5-6, 1946) was s i n g l e d out f o r a t t a c k . (Zhdanov's p e r s e c u t i o n o f Zoshchenko w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n more d e t a i l i n Chapter IV.) The i d e a l i s t i c , s o u l - s e a r c h i n g , b a l a n c e - s e e k i n g p e r i o d i n l i t e r a t u r e had ended. Now, even t h e i r former s u p p o r t e r , L. T r o t s k y , turned a g a i n s t them: The most dangerous t r a i t of the Serapions i s t h a t they g l o r y i n t h e i r l a c k of p r i n c i p l e s . T h i s i s s t u p i d i t y and thickheadedness. As i f an a r t i s t c o u l d ever be "without a tendency", w i t h o u t a d e f i n i t e r e l a t i o n t o s o c i a l l i f e , even though unformulated or unexpressed i n p o l i t i c a l terms. I t i s t r u e t h a t the m a j o r i t y o f a r t i s t s form t h e i r r e l a t i o n t o l i f e and i t s s o c i a l forms d u r i n g o r g a n i c p e r i o d s , i n an u n n o t i c e a b l e and m o l e c u l a r way and almost w i t h o u t the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of c r i t i c a l r e a son. The a r t i s t takes l i f e as he f i n d s i t , c o l o r i n g h i s r e l a t i o n to i t w i t h a k i n d o f l y r i c tone. He c o n s i d e r s i t s f o u n d a t i o n s to be immovable and approaches i t as u n c r i t i c a l l y as he does the s o l a r system, and t h i s p a s s i v e c o n s e r v a t i s m o f h i s forms the unseen p i v o t o f h i s work. R e s o l u t i o n o f the C e n t r a l Committee o f the Communist P a r t y , August 14, 1946. 34 C r i t i c a l p e r i o d s do not a l l o w an a r t i s t the l u x u r y o f an automatic and i r r e s p o n s i b l e e l a b o -r a t i o n of s o c i a l p o i n t s of view. Whoever boasts o f t h i s , whether i n s i n c e r e l y o r even w i t h o u t p r e t e n s e , i s masking a r e a c t i o n a r y tendency or has f a l l e n i n t o s o c i a l s t u p i d i t i e s or i s making a f o o l o f h i m s e l f . . . The n o v e l i s t s and poets who were born of the R e v o l u t i o n and who are s t i l l v e ry young, b e i n g almost i n t h e i r swaddling c l o t h e s , t r y , i n t h e i r s e a r c h f o r t h e i r a r t i s t i c i n d i v i d u a l i t i e s , t o g e t away from the R e v o l u t i o n which has been t h e i r environment and i n which m i l i e u they have y e t to f i n d themselves. From t h i s come the t i r a d e s o f " a r t f o r a r t ' s sake" which seem very s i g n i f i c a n t and b o l d to the S e r a p i o n s , but which are, i n f a c t , a s i g n of growth a t b e s t and of immaturity i n any c a s e . I f the Serapions should get away from the R e v o l u t i o n e n t i r e l y , they would r e v e a l themselves at once as a second-rate or t h i r d - r a t e remnant o f the d i s c a r d e d p r e - r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a r y s c h o o l s . I t i s i m p o s s i b l e to p l a y w i t h h i s t o r y . Here the punishment f o l l o w s immediately upon the crime.47 The a r t i s t i c freedom t h a t Lunc sought a f t e r became a b i t t e r i d e o l o g i c a l f i g h t . V i c t o r Shklovsky presented an i n d i r e c t defense of h i s f e l l o w Serapions i n a w i t t y chapter 48 of The Knight's Move. In t h i s he t o l d the s t o r y of the m i l l i p e d e , which f o r some time managed to walk q u i t e w e l l u n t i l one day a t u r t l e admired h i s l e g s f o r t h e i r wonderful c o o r d i n a t i o n . T h i s compliment made him conscious of h i s movements and he h i m s e l f began to marvel: j u s t how d i d he manage so w e l l ? 47 L. T r o t s k y , L i t e r a t u r e and R e v o l u t i o n (New York, 1925), pp. 70.71. (Quoted from the E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n . ) 48 V i c t o r Shklovsky, Khod Konya (Moscow-Berlin, 1923). 35 He e s t a b l i s h e d c e n t r a l i z a t i o n , r e d tape, and bureaucracy, and by t h a t time he c o u l d not move a s i n g l e l e g . . . . " C i t i z e n s and comrades!" s a i d the m i l l i -pede, "look a t me and you w i l l see what super-o r g a n i z a t i o n leads t o . P o s t r e v o l u t i o n a r y comrades, postwar comrades, l e a v e a r t f r e e , not on i t s own account, b ut because we must not r e g u l a t e what i s unknown."49 M a r x i s t s , i n c l u d i n g L e n i n and T r o t s k y , had some awareness of the n e c e s s i t y o f freedom to c r e a t e good a r t , but t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s freedom d i f f e r e d from t h a t of the Serapions.. "The important p o i n t f o r the M a r x i s t s was t h a t the w r i t e r s h o u l d accept h i s unfreedom so w i l l i n g l y 50 t h a t he a c t u a l l y f e l t f r e e w i t h i n i t s l i m i t a t i o n s . " The M a r x i s t s were i n the advantageous p o s i t i o n o f having a d o c t r i n e which they c o n f i d e n t l y a p p l i e d t o a r t as w e l l as t o a l l o t h e r human a c t i v i t i e s . With the h e l p of Plekhanov's essay on " a r t f o r a r t ' s sake', they were ab l e t o c l a s s i f y the Brotherhood. To c o u n t e r a t t a c k t h e i r seasoned c r i t i c s , the Serapions l a c k e d e x p e r i e n c e , they were too young and " s u f f e r e d the disadvantage o f p o s s e s s i n g no ready-51 made p h i l o s o p h y " . Lunc t r i e d to q u a l i f y h i s former 49 ^ I b i d . , p. 17. 50 W. Edgerton, "The Serap i o n B r o t h e r s : An E a r l y S o v i e t C o n t r o v e r s y " , The American S l a v i c and E a s t European Review, V I I I , p. 60. 5 1 I b i d . statement, by which the Serapions were branded as a group a d v o c a t i n g " a r t f o r a r t ' s sake", by ar g u i n g t h a t he d i d not mean " a r t f o r a r t ' s sake" i n the crude sense o f t h a t phrase. But h i s argument f o r l o v e o f l i t e r a t u r e and f o r g r e a t d e v o t i o n t o a r t c o n t a i n e d many h o l e s , even f o r a non-Marxist. F o r example, to s t a t e the case i n terms t h a t a r e meaningful today, l e t any Western democratic s u r v i v o r o f the second World War t r y to imagine h i m s e l f r e a d i n g a s k i l l f u l l y w r i t t e n n o v e l o f N a z i i d e o l o g y p u r e l y f o r the a e s t h e t i c p l e a s u r e i t might o f f e r . 5 2 The moderate M a r x i s t c r i t i c and e d i t o r o f Krasnaya Nov', Voronsky, came t o the defense o f the Serapions and made a much b e t t e r job of i t than they themselves had managed, 53 The main p o i n t o f h i s a r t i c l e l a y i n the va l u e o f both a r t and s c i e n c e t o s o c i e t y and how i t s v a l u e depends on i t s f a i t h f u l n e s s i n r e v e a l i n g o b j e c t i v e t r u t h . A s o c i a l o r d e r t h a t attempts t o f r u s t r a t e o r r e s t r i c t the development o f the a r t s o r s c i e n c e s "does i t a t i t s own p e r i l " . The fundamental task i s to keep s u b j e c t i v i s m , i d e o l o g y , and propaganda from d i s t o r t i n g the w r i t e r ' s works of a r t ; h i s s u b j e c t i v e a t t i t u d e s must correspond t o the nature o f the o b j e c t . . . Voronsky d e f i n e d the v a l u e o f a r t as "the way i t renders 5 2 I b i d . , pp. 60-61. 53 A. K. Voronsky, " I s k u s s t v o , kak poznanie z h i z n i " , Krasnaya Nov', No. 2 (August-September, 1923), pp. 347-384. 5 4 I b i d . , p> 352. 37 o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y " . And " o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y " can be found i n the c l a s s i c s as w e l l as i n l i t e r a t u r e w r i t t e n by p r o l e t a r i a n s o r by f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s . T h i s p r i n c i p l e enabled Voronsky, 55 not o n l y t o r e f u t e F r i c h e ' s nonsensical a r t i c l e i n which he r e j e c t e d the contemporary v a l u e o f the c l a s s i c s (such as Shakespeare), b ut a l s o t o h o l d up one common s t a n d a r d by which a l l the new S o v i e t l i t e r a t u r e c o u l d be judged, "whether w r i t t e n by p r o l e t a r i a n s , peasants, or p e t t y - b o u r g e o i s i n t e l -l e c t u a l s " . F o l l o w i n g through w i t h h i s p r i n c i p l e s as the e d i t o r o f Krasnaya Nov', he i n v i t e d a l l the w r i t e r s o f the S o v i e t Union, of whatever background or p o l i t i c a l a f f i l i a t i o n , 5 6 t o compete f o r a p l a c e w i t h i n the journal's pages. It i s not a matter o f s l y i n t r i g u e r s t a k i n g i n the "good-natured" B o l s h e v i k s , but o f the f a c t t h a t 95 p e r c e n t o f Russians are s t i l l f e l l o w t r a v e l l e r s o f the Communists, and t h a t cannot h e l p b e i n g r e f l e c t e d i n the f o r t u n e s of the new l i t e r a t u r e . Our j o u r n a l s are not opening t h e i r doors t o the f e l l o w t r a v e l l e r s because as a r e s u l t o f NEP they have a p e c u l i a r and c r i m i n a l enthusiasm f o r them, b u t because contemporary Russian l i t e r a t u r e cannot c o n f i n e i t s e l f to Demyan Bednyj and L i b e d i n s k y ' s t a l e "The Week". I t i s a f a c t t h a t we f i n d the 1 most b r i l l i a n t t a l e n t s i n the persons o f Ivanov, T i k h o n o v , 5 ? and the o t h e r f e l l o w t r a v e l l e r s , t h a t i t was they who f i r s t spoke l i v i n g words about the l i v i n g people o f our R e v o l u t i o n , i f you exclude V. F r i c h e , "Nuzhno l i ? " , Krasnaya Gazeta, No. 215 (1368), September 23, 1922. 5 6 K r a s n a y a Nov' was c o n s i d e r e d t o be the l i t e r a r y j o u r n a l o f the f e l l o w - t r a v e l l e r s . 57 Both S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s . 38 ("The Twelve") Blok ( a l s o a f e l l o w t r a v e l l e r ) , Demyan Bednyj, t h e r e w i l l be very few o t h e r t a l e n t s l e f t . L e t us g i v e honor and a p l a c e t o the communist w r i t e r s and the p r o l e t a r i a n w r i t e r s , but i n p r o p o r t i o n to t h e i r t a l e n t s and i n p r o p o r t i o n to t h e i r c r e a t i v e c a p a c i t y . A P a r t y c a r d i s a g r e a t t h i n g , but i t i s not proper t o wave i t about a t the wrong t i m e s . ^ 8 Who were these h e r e t i c s who managed t o s t i r up such an i d e o l o g i c a l b a t t l e on the l i t e r a r y scene? Lev Natanovich Lunc was a teenager (nineteen years old) i n 1920, a Romance philology major from the U n i v e r s i t y o f P e t r o -grad, s p e c i a l i z i n g i n Spanish l i t e r a t u r e . He had a happy but somewhat s h e l t e r e d c h i l d h o o d i n a h i g h l y c u l t u r e d Jewish i n t e l l i g e n t s i a f a m i l y . A f t e r the outbreak of the r e v o l u t i o n h i s p a r ents emigrated to Germany. He h i m s e l f was supposed to go to Spain on a s c h o l a r s h i p t o continue graduate s t u d i e s i n l i t e r a t u r e . Lunc had a deep "romantic" involvement w i t h Western l i t e r a t u r e . One of h i s f a v o r i t e w r i t e r s was Conan Doyle. As a f e l l o w S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r i n h i s c r i t i c a l works he o f t e n a t t a c k e d the " s t a t i c " , d u l l t r a d i t i o n s of Russian l i t e r a t u r e i n f i c t i o n as w e l l as i n drama. In h i s a r t i c l e 59 "To the West" (which twenty years l a t e r s erved as a 5 8 Voronsky, " I s k u s s t v o , kak poznanie z h i z n i " , p. 352. Quoted from Edgerton, The S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s , p. 63. 59 "Na zapad!" F i r s t read by Lunc a t a meeting of the S e r a p i o n s . P u b l i s h e d i n Gorky's Beseda, No. 3 (1923), pp. 259-274. 39 f o u n d a t i o n f o r a t t a c k by A. Zhdanov a g a i n s t former S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s ) , he suggested t h a t the Russians might l e a r n " p l o t c o n s t r u c t i o n " and "dynamic n a r r a t i v e " , o r how to a c h i e v e and h o l d suspense from the West. (This "Western tendency" was a l s o f o l l o w e d by K. Fedin.) Lunc looked upon h i s audience as a group o f people who had c e r t a i n l i k e s f o r entertainment and a good w r i t e r ' s duty was more t o p l e a s e h i s readers than to educate them. In t h i s r e s p e c t he and h i s f e l l o w Serapions found themselves out of f a v o r w i t h most of the communist c r i t i c s . L u n c 1 s importance to Russian l i t e r a t u r e was not c o n f i n e d t o h i s championing of the "freedom of a r t " on b e h a l f o f the Brotherhood, he a l s o c o n t r i b u t e d t o i t : "The Outlaw" (Vne zakona, 19 21), "The Apes Are Coming" (Obezyany i d u t , 1921), "Bertrand de Born" (1922). His p l a y , "The C i t y o f T r u t h " , was p u b l i s h e d posthumously by M. Gorky i n Beseda. He j o i n e d h i s parents i n Germany i n 19 23 t o seek a cure f o r a c h r o n i c i l l n e s s . He never r e c o v e r e d and d i e d t h e r e s h o r t l y a f t e r h i s t w e n t y - t h i r d b i r t h d a y . K o i i s t a n t i n A l e x a n d r o v i c h F e d i n was the o l d e s t member o f the group (twenty-nine i n 1921). He was c l o s e l y a s s o c i -a t e d w i t h the r e v i v a l of the Russian n o v e l and of n i n e t e e n t h century R u s s i a n l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n s . F e d i n was born i n the V o l g a r e g i o n ; h i s f a t h e r was o f peasant s t o c k and h i s mother of noble background. He was 40 educated a t the Commercial I n s t i t u t e of Moscow. During the f i r s t World War he was i n Germany. A f t e r h i s r e t u r n i n 1918 to the S o v i e t Union, he served i n the Red Army. Fe d i n ' s l i t e r a r y debut was i n the S e r a p i o n s ' Almanac. On Gorky's recommendation he was accepted f o r "membership" i n the S e r a p i o n Brotherhood. His f i r s t s h o r t s t o r i e s were w r i t t e n under obvious s t y l i s t i c i n f l u e n c e from Chekhov and Bunin. " S t i l l n e s s " ( T i s h i n a , 1924) conveys the tragedy of an o l d d i s p o s s e s s e d s q u i r e ; "The Peasants" (Muzhiki, 1924) i s a s t o r y which r e l a t e s many episodes of v i l l a g e l i f e w i t h i t s c r u e l t y and harshness, very much l i k e Bunin's s t o r i e s . H i s f i r s t n o v e l , C i t i e s and Years (Goroda i gody) was pub-l i s h e d i n 1924, a long n a r r a t i v e t h a t combined " p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e a l i s m of c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n w i t h a p l o t o f adventure and s u s p e n s e " . ^ The theme of the n o v e l i s the p e r s o n a l tragedy o f a member o f the i n t e l l i g e n t s i a i n the t i d e o f the r e v o l u -t i o n . The hero i s a modern v a r i a n t of the n i n e t e e n t h century s u p e r f l u o u s man. In "The Orchard" (Sad), F e d i n r e t u r n s to h i s f a v o r i t e theme, the c l a s h o f the o l d and the new i n the R e v o l u t i o n . The o l d gardener who served the former master so f a i t h f u l l y cannot a c c e p t the new "masters" and burns down the manor house. M. Slonim, Modern Russian L i t e r a t u r e (New York, 1953), p. 307. In the S e r a p i o n Brotherhood, F e d i n took a u n i q u e l y p e r s o n a l p o s i t i o n . He d i d not s u b s c r i b e to Lunc's p h i l o s o p h y 61 "To the West!", nor d i d he w h o l l y belong to the " E a s t e r n " or S c y t h i a n wing o f the movement. His main i n t e r e s t was c o n c e n t r a t e d on the r e l a t i o n s h i p o f R u s s i a and Europe, and the problems o f the i n d i v i d u a l i n h i s t o r y , the f a t e o f the " s u p e r f l u o u s man" i n modern R u s s i a . F e d i n drew c r i t i c i s m from time t o time f o r h i s c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the S e r a p i o n s , but managed to s u r v i v e a l l the purges. Now he i s an honored doyen of S o v i e t l i t e r a t u r e , a l e a d i n g f i g u r e i n the Union o f W r i t e r s and former e d i t o r o f the most important l i t e r a r y magazine i n the S o v i e t Union, the New World (Novyj M i r ) . Vsevolod V y a c h e s l a v o v i c h Ivanov was the son o f a S i b e r i a n v i l l a g e s c h o o l - t e a c h e r and drunkard. His f a t h e r was a c c i d e n t a l l y k i l l e d by one o f h i s sons when Ivanov was o n l y f i f t e e n y e a r s o l d , a f t e r which he promptly l e f t h i s home. Although he was the p r o d u c t o f a p r o v i n c i a l i n t e l l e c -t u a l m i l i e u , h i s biography i s very s i m i l a r t o t h a t of Gorky. L i k e Gorky, he l i v e d as a k i n d of tramp on the lower l e v e l o f l i f e . He had numerous o c c u p a t i o n s : s a i l o r , clown, p o e t r y r e a d e r , sword swallower, d e r v i s h , m u s i c i a n . He had some The e x p r e s s i o n of "Western" and " E a s t e r n " wing was used by E. Zamyatin, "Serapiony B r a t ' y a " , L i t e r a t u r n y e z a p i s k i , No. 1 (May, 1922). 42 doubt as t o h i s sympathies d u r i n g the C i v i l War: he fought under A d m i r a l Kolchak w i t h the Whites and l a t e r j o i n e d the Red Army. Ivanov*s f i r s t s h o r t s t o r y was p r i n t e d i n 1916 i n a l o c a l S i b e r i a n paper. Encouraged by h i s s u c c e s s , he sent some s t o r i e s t o Gorky f o r p u b l i c a t i o n i n L e t o p i s ' . Gorky encouraged him and urged him t o study, t o read . A c c o r d i n g to Ivanov's autobiography, i n two years he read more books than i n the r e s t of h i s l i f e . H i s r e a d i n g d i d not i n c l u d e p o l i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e , and when the R e v o l u t i o n broke out, i n h i s n a i v e t e he j o i n e d both the S o c i a l - D e m o c r a t i c and the S o c i a l - R e v o l u t i o n a r y p a r t i e s . His f i r s t book of s h o r t s t o r i e s was p r i n t e d and p u b l i s h e d by h i m s e l f i n 1919 i n S i b e r i a . With Gorky's h e l p he came to P e t r o g r a d . "The P a r t i s a n s " ( P a r t i z a n y ) was p u b l i s h e d i n 1921, a l o n g s t o r y based on h i s experiences d u r i n g the C i v i l War. In the n o v e l , Skyblue Sands (Golubye p e s k i ) , we f i n d most o f the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Ivanov's e a r l y works: ornamental language f u l l o f d i a l e c t i c i s m s , l y r i c a l r e f r a i n s , human joys and sorrows, obvious Russian f o l k l o r e i n f l u e n c e , c r u e l S i b e r i a n nature and g r e a t s t r e s s on the c r u e l a spects o f the R e v o l u t i o n . His t o p i c s i n c l u d e the people o f mid-Asia, the A l t a y and S i b e r i a . P s y c h o l o g i -c a l l y h i s s t o r i e s plough deeply i n t o the b a r b a r i c , sense-l e s s l y c r u e l n ature o f human beings (e.g., "The C h i l d " ) . In 43 h i s s h o r t n o v e l , The Return o f Buddha (Vozvrashchenie Buddy, 1 9 2 3 ) , h i s language was much l e s s ornamental, had l e s s l o c a l i z e d i n t e r e s t s , and had a p l o t o f adventure. H i s book of s t o r i e s o f v i l l a g e l i f e , Mystery o f M y s t e r i e s (Taynoye taynykh, 1 9 2 7 ) , r e c e i v e d a mixed r e c e p t i o n from S o v i e t c r i t i c s . In h i s l a t e r w r i t i n g s Ivanov took a s t e p toward p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e a l i s m . His s t y l e became l e s s ornamental and he developed the psychology o f h i s c h a r a c t e r s w i t h g r e a t c a r e . In the 1 9 3 0 ' s Ivanov made the 1 8 0 ° s w i t c h , he became an e n t h u s i a s t i c s u p p o r t e r o f the i n d u s t r i a l achievements under S t a l i n . H is s t y l e i n Parkhomenko ( 1 9 3 8 ) and i n The F a l l o f B e r l i n ( 1 9 4 5 ) was n e a t l y t a i l o r e d t o p a r t y l i n e requirements, b ut l a c k e d the s t y l i s t i c beauty o f h i s e a r l i e r works. Veniamin A l e x a n d r o v i c h K a v e r i n (pseudonym o f Veniamin A l e x a n d r o v i c h Z i l b e r g ) came from an i n t e l l e c t u a l , m u s i c a l l y -g i f t e d f a m i l y . To f o l l o w f o u r g e n e r a t i o n s o f m u s i c a l t r a d i t i o n i n the f a m i l y , he h i m s e l f f i r s t s t u d i e d music. At the U n i v e r s i t y o f P e t r o g r a d he s t u d i e d O r i e n t a l languages, h i s t o r y and l i t e r a t u r e . A t the age of f i f t e e n he sent h i s f i r s t s h o r t s t o r y , "The E l e v e n t h Axiom", to Gorky. S t i l l a teenager when he j o i n e d the S e r a p i o n s , K a v e r i n — and h i s b e s t f r i e n d , Lunc — r e p r e s e n t e d the " W e s t e r n i z i n g " tendency i n the Brotherhood. In h i s autobiography, he i s c y n i c a l o f 44 the R u s s i a n t r a d i t i o n among w r i t e r s : . . . so f a r I have not had time to make f o r : myself a biography f i t f o r a Russian w r i t e r . I have t r i e d n e i t h e r t o shoot myself nor t o hang myself, nor have I once gone mad.62 Kav e r i n ' s f i r s t major work, The End o f a Gang (Konets khazy, 1926), i s an e x c i t i n g s t o r y o f a gang of a n a r c h i s t s and underworld c h a r a c t e r s i n L e n i n g r a d . H i s s t y l e i n t h i s s t o r y shows the i d e n t i f i a b l e i n f l u e n c e o f R. L. Stevenson. G o g o l i a n grotesque r e a l i s m i s mingled i n the s t o r y "Diamond S u i t " (Bubnovaya mast, 1927). " R e v i z o r " i s a parody of Gogol's "The Nose", w i t h an obscene t w i s t . "Nine-Tenths of F a t e " (Devyat' desyatykh sud'by, 1926) f o l l o w e d the t r e n d o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e a l i s m . The main theme i s the p l a c e o f the i n t e l l i g e n t s i a i n the, R e v o l u t i o n . I t i s r e m i n i s c e n t o f F e d i n ' s C i t i e s and Years, but much l e s s developed and s u p e r f i c i a l . K a v e r i n ' s " A r t i s t Unknown" — i n theme v e r y much l i k e Olesha's Envy — i s a contemporary myth. I t s hero, the a r t i s t Arkhimedov, i s a modern Don Quixote, an o l d - f a s h i o n e d romantic i d e a l i s t who f i g h t s a l o n e l y , l o s i n g b a t t l e a g a i n s t the new s o c i e t y i n the name of f o r g o t t e n moral v a l u e s , o f a r t i s t i c freedom and independence. His l a t e r works (The F u l f i l l m e n t of D e s i r e s , 1935; Two C a p t a i n s , " P i s a t e l i o sebe", Na l i t e r a t u r n o m p o s t u , XVII-XVIII (1927), p. 109. "0 vremeni i o sebe", S o v e t s k i e " ~ p i s a t e l i . A v t o b i o g r a f i i v dvukh tomakh. V o l . I , Moscow, 19 59. 45 1939) show a marked improvement: they are w e l l - w r i t t e n and n i c e l y - c o n s t r u c t e d s t o r i e s , w i t h j u s t enough of the r e q u i r e d i d e o l o g i c a l element t o make them p u b l i s h a b l e i n the S o v i e t Union. N i k o l a y N i k o l a e v i c h N i k i t i n was born i n the n o r t h o f R u s s i a i n a merchants* f a m i l y . He spent most of h i s c h i l d -hood and s c h o o l y e a r s i n P e t e r s b u r g . He fought i n the C i v i l War, but on which s i d e i s not known. N i k i t i n ' s f i r s t s t o r y was p u b l i s h e d i n 19 22, a f t e r he had met Gorky, Shklovsky and Zamyatin. C o l l e c t i o n s o f h i s works were p u b l i s h e d i n 19 28 under the t i t l e s , F o r t Vomit (Rvotny F o r t ) and F l i g h t ( P o l y o t ) . L i k e most young authors he a l s o experimented wi t h many d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s o f w r i t i n g . I t i s not d i f f i c u l t t o see the i n f l u e n c e of Remizov, Zamyatin, and P i l n y a k on N i k i t i n . To t h i s l i s t can a l s o be added e i t h e r as d i r e c t or as i n d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e s the names of Leskov and Gogol, and, as o c c a s i o n a l i n f l u e n c e s , those o f Dostoyevsky and Andrey Bely.^3 In h i s s t o r i e s he used the "author's p e r s o n a l i n t e r v e n t i o n s " ; t o s u b s t a n t i a t e h i s hero's c l a i m s he used documentations, q u o t a t i o n s . H i s t o r i c a l l a n d s c a p e s , i n t e n s e e r o t i c i s m , a v a r i e t y o f spoken d i a l e c t s , i n t o n a t i o n s , anecdotes, f o l k l o r e elements made h i s "skaz" come a l i v e . Many o f h i s s t o r i e s d e a l w i t h the C i v i l War — i n the North, i n the South and Gleb S t r u v e , S o v i e t R u s s i a n L i t e r a t u r e 1917-1950, p. 62. E a s t . I t was not so much the romanticism of the r e v o l u t i o n t h a t i n t e r e s t e d him, but the e f f e c t on the l i f e o f the remote Ru s s i a n v i l l a g e s , where the o l d and the new c l a s h e d . S o v i e t c r i t i c s d i d not f a i l t o p o i n t out t h a t N i k i t i n was concerned not so much w i t h the new as w i t h the o l d : the r e s i s t a n c e o f the o l d a g a i n s t the new. Of a l l the S e r a p i o n s , perhaps, no one aimed so p e r s i s t e n t l y a t s t r a n g e , p a r a d o x i c a l e f f e c t s as d i d N i k i t i n . In i t s most c o n s i s t e n t form, the method of " o s t r a n e n i e " (making strange) i s a p p l i e d by him i n "Daisy", the s t o r y o f a young t i g r e s s i n c a p t i v i t y and o f her u l t i m a t e escape. G r a d u a l l y , maybe under i n c r e a s i n g o f f i c i a l p r e s s u r e , N i k i t i n e v o l v e d toward a more r e a l i s t i c treatment o f h i s themes. V l a d i m i r Pozner was born i n P a r i s , r e c e i v e d h i s h i g h s c h o o l e d u c a t i o n i n P e t r o g r a d and i n Moscow, and h i s u n i v e r -s i t y e d u c a t i o n a t the Sorbonne. His f i r s t poems were p r i n t e d i n Epopeia (1923). H i s f i r s t book was p u b l i s h e d i n France i n 1929: The Panorama o f Contemporary Russian L i t e r a t u r e (Panorama de l a l i t t e r a t u r e r u s s e contemporaine). He took up the h e r o i c themes o f the C i v i l War and t r e a t e d them i n the form of b a l l a d s . In t h i s the i n f l u e n c e of E n g l i s h p o e t r y , and more p a r t i c u l a r l y of K i p l i n g , can be seen. A f t e r the mid-twenties he r e t u r n e d t o France, where he became an a c t i v e c r i t i c o f c a p i t a l i s t i c (mainly American) v a l u e s . H i s 47 views d i d not prevent him from s e e k i n g r e f u g e i n the U.S.A. d u r i n g World War I I . H i s l a t e s t n o v e l , S p a i n , My F i r s t Love (Espagne, premier amour, 1965, t r a n s l a t e d i n t o R u ssian i n 1967) , emphasized the romanticism of the Spanish C i v i l War. E l i z a v e t a G r i g o r ' e v n a Polonskaya was the o n l y " s i s t e r " i n the group. She was born i n Warsaw, Poland. To escape p o l i c e s u r v e i l l a n c e she went t o France, where she attended m e d i c a l s c h o o l a t the Sorbonne from 1907 to 1914. A f t e r her r e t u r n from France, she t r i e d her hand at w r i t i n g p o e t r y . Her f i r s t c o l l e c t i o n o f poems, F l a g s , was p u b l i s h e d i n 19 21, mostly her p e r s o n a l f e e l i n g s , joys and sorrows i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h the R e v o l u t i o n and the C i v i l War. Polonskaya was one o f the seven young w r i t e r s who formed the nucleus of the S e r a p i o n Brotherhood. L a t e r i n the t w e n t i e s , she wrote e x c l u s i v e l y poems f o r c h i l d r e n : Baby Rabbits (1923) , Guests (1924), Hours (1925). In her c a p a c i t y as a correspondent f o r the L e n i n g r a d Pravda i n the t h i r t i e s , she t r a v e l l e d w i d e l y i n the S o v i e t Union. On her experiences she wrote a book of s h o r t s t o r i e s , People of S o v i e t Weekdays (1934). In the f i f t i e s she found g r e a t success w i t h her t r a n s l a t i o n s of Hugo, M o l i e r e , Shakespeare, K i p l i n g , G a r c i a L o r c a . M i k h a i l L e o n i d o v i c h Slonimsky came from a very h i g h l y c u l t u r e d Jewish f a m i l y : h i s f a t h e r was e d i t o r o f the magazine H e r a l d of Europe ( V e s t n i k E v r o p y ) , and h i s mother was the 48 s i s t e r of a famous p r o f e s s o r . "My c h i l d h o o d , " he wrote, "passed i n an atmosphere permeated by l i t e r a t u r e and music." A f t e r the war he began t o a t t e n d l e c t u r e s r e g u l a r l y a t the House o f A r t s . His f i r s t l e c t u r e r s were Shklovsky and Zamyatin. The c o l l e c t e d volume o f h i s f i r s t s t o r i e s , The S i x t h L a ncers (Shestoy s t r e l k o v y ) was p u b l i s h e d i n 1922 and showed a very s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e o f Zamyatin's manner and s t y l e : e c c e n t r i c , odd c h a r a c t e r s i n v o l v e d i n strange s i t u a t i o n s where r e a l i t y and f a n t a s y i n t e r m i n g l e d i n dramatic i n c i d e n t s . In 1923 Slonimsky e d i t e d the miners' paper i n the Donets c o a l b a s i n . One of the s t o r i e s he wrote t h e r e , "The Emery Machine" (Mashina Emery), marked a new d e p a r t u r e from h i s former themes. His hero i s an i d e a l i s t Communist, O l e y n i k o v , f o r whom p e r s o n a l l i f e i s completely overshadowed by h i s sense of duty toward the c o l l e c t i v e . Slonimsky f a i l e d to make h i s p o r t r a i t of a Communist v i s i o n a r y ; i n s t e a d , O l e y n i k o v i s not r e a l and human, but remains an a b s t r a c t i o n . H i s f i r s t n o v e l , The Lavrovs (Lavrovy), d e p i c t s the d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f an i n t e l l i g e n t s i a f a m i l y . The n o v e l i s o b v i o u s l y a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l and documentary. I t c e n t r e s around the f i g u r e of B o r i s Lavrov, who through h i s e x p l o i t s i s t r y i n g to become a u s e f u l member of S o v i e t s o c i e t y . At one p o i n t he t h i n k s t h a t i n s i d i n g w i t h the R e v o l u t i o n he has a t t a i n e d f u l l freedom, but l a t e r he r e a l i z e s t h a t t h e r e 49 i s no freedom anywhere on t h i s e a r t h , not i n a s i n g l e c o rner o f i t , and t h a t of a l l the a v a i l a b l e unfreedoms he had chosen the one i n which h i s wishes and a c t i o n s c o i n c i d e d . Foma Kleshnyov was p u b l i s h e d i n 1931, f i v e y e ars a f t e r The Lavrovs; the hero i s a model communist a t work. As a n o v e l t h i s book i s a f a i l u r e . N i k o l a y Semyoriovich Tikhonov was born i n t o a lower-m i d d l e - c l a s s f a m i l y . A f t e r s t u d y i n g a t a t r a d e s c h o o l , he e n l i s t e d i n the army. He fought w i t h a Hussar regiment d u r i n g World War I, and l a t e r w i t h the Red Army i n the C i v i l War. L i k e Vsevolod Ivanov, he a l s o t r i e d h i s hand a t v a r i o u s p r o f e s s i o n s . He j o i n e d the S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s i n 19 21, and a year l a t e r h i s f i r s t c o l l e c t i o n o f poems was p u b l i s h e d : The Horde (Orda). I t s p r i n c i p a l theme was the war. The i n f l u e n c e of the Acmeists i s q u i t e obvious i n i t . His v e r s e has a noble s i m p l i c i t y , t h e r e are no i n n o v a t i o n s f o r n o v e l t y ' s sake, and h i s c h o i c e of words i s p r e c i s e . Tikhonov*s second book of v e r s e was Mead (Braga), i n which themes o f the C i v i l War predominated. Most o f h i s poems i n t h i s c o l l e c t i o n were w r i t t e n i n the form o f b a l l a d s i n the E n g l i s h t r a d i t i o n . L i k e K i p l i n g , he used O r i e n t a l s e t t i n g s f o r h i s unrhymed b a l l a d , "Sami". Tikhonov experimented w i t h language and metre. In t h i s p e r i o d (1924) the i n f l u e n c e o f Gumilyov and the Acmeists gave p l a c e t o t h a t of the F u t u r i s t s : of Mayakovsky and of 50 Pasternak. L a t e r he experimented w i t h prose w r i t i n g : The Venturesome Man (1927) and An Oath i n the Fog (1933). While i n h i s p o e t r y he tended to become l e s s o f a romantic and more o f a r e a l i s t , i n h i s prose he moved i n the o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n : C aucasian s e t t i n g w i t h unusual c h a r a c t e r s , the "drowsy E a s t " . I I ' y a A l e x a n d r o v i c h Gruzdyov was born i n P e t e r b u r g . He a l s o r e c e i v e d h i s e d u c a t i o n t h e r e . In 1918 he graduated from the U n i v e r s i t y of P e t r o g r a d w i t h a degree i n p h i l o l o g y . Gruzdyov was one of the o r i g i n a l seven founding members of the S e r a p i o n Brotherhood. From 1914 he wrote l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m and t r i e d t o w r i t e f e u i l l e t o n s . He became b e s t known f o r h i s b i o g r a p h i c a l book on M. Gorky, Gorky and H i s Time (1938), which i n c l u d e d p e r s o n a l c o r r e s -pondence between h i m s e l f and Gorky. V i c t o r B o r i s o v i c h Shklovsky, one of the most important f i g u r e s i n the h i s t o r y of S o v i e t l i t e r a t u r e , was o f mixed Jewish-German-Russian descent. His l i t e r a r y c a r e e r began i n 1914, w h i l e s t u d y i n g a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f P e t r o g r a d . He became one o f the l e a d e r s of the F o r m a l i s t movement, which had c l o s e l i n k s w i t h the F u t u r i s t movement i n l i t e r a t u r e . In 1920 he was appointed p r o f e s s o r a t the I n s t i t u t e of the H i s t o r y of A r t , where among h i s students were s e v e r a l S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s . His i n f l u e n c e and a u t h o r i t y upon them was such t h a t he immediately became a l e a d e r among them. 51 The S e r a p i o n s ' d i s l i k e o f bureaucracy and o f o r g a n i z a -t i o n a l f o r m a l i t i e s was so g r e a t t h a t o n l y the date of t h e i r f i r s t meeting i s d e f i n i t e . The exact number o f t h e i r member-s h i p i s a l s o i n doubt. Some l i t e r a r y h i s t o r i a n s and one of the B r o t h e r s (Gruzdyov) accept ten members, ot h e r s i n c l u d e Shklovsky and Pozner. Whether the l a t t e r two were " o f f i c i a l l y " members or not i s r e a l l y unimportant. Shklovsky's ideas were c e r t a i n l y s t i m u l a t i n g , even when they were demonstrably wrong o r f a n t a s t i c . In the 1920's Shklovsky became a c l o s e f r i e n d of Mayakovsky. When the Moscow P r o l e t a r i a n W r i t e r s ' A s s o c i a t i o n (MAPP) and members of L e f demanded the e x p u l s i o n of Shklovsky and Pasternak, Mayakovsky defended him: ". . . even V i c t o r ' s dubious n o t i o n s w i l l l a t e r e nter i n t o the h i s t o r y of Russian 64 l i t e r a t u r e . " Shklovsky's f i r s t important book was p u b l i s h e d i n B e r l i n i n 1923, a f t e r he had l e f t R u s s i a . I t s t i t l e was S e n t i m e n t a l Journey (Sentimentalnoye p u t e s h e s t v i e ) . In i t , h i s approach to the R e v o l u t i o n and the C i v i l War and t h e i r h o r r o r s i s as c o o l , as detached, and as m a t t e r - o f - f a c t as t h a t of h i s p u p i l s , the S e r a p i o n s , who undoubtedly l e a r n e d t h e i r detachment from him. His second t r y a t another book, Yury L i b e d i n s k y , Sovremenniki, Moscow, 1958, p. 165. Quoted i n E. J . Brown, Russian L i t e r a t u r e S i n c e the R e v o l u t i o n , p. 97. 52 Zoo, o r L e t t e r s Not 'About Love (Zoo, i i i pis'ma ne o l y u b v i ) , showed a p e r s o n a l d i g r e s s i o n . Shklovsky's Knight's Move (Khod konya) was a s m a l l volume o f s h o r t essays about a r t and l i t e r a t u r e , — uneven, but mostly i n t e r e s t i n g and w i t t y . A f t e r h i s r e t u r n to R u s s i a he p u b l i s h e d another volume o f " a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l fragments", The T h i r d F a c t o r y ( T r e t y a f a b r i k a , 1926). When, i n 1929, Formalism was pr o c l a i m e d a dangerous d o c t r i n e , Shklovsky devoted h i m s e l f to l i t e r a r y h i s t o r y and d r a m atic f i l m c r i t i c i s m . He l o s t the f i r e and r e c a n t e d the h e r e s i e s of h i s youth and managed t o carve out a long c a r e e r i n S o v i e t l i t e r a t u r e . CHAPTER IV M i k h a i l M i k h a i i o v i c h Zoshchenko was the c h r o n i c a l l y depressed and most humorous S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r . His s t o r i e s enjoyed immense p o p u l a r i t y i n R u s s i a . He was p o p u l a r not o n l y among those readers who p r e f e r r e d to read l i g h t , u n s o p h i s t i c a t e d l i t e r a t u r e , but a l s o among those who as a r u l e read mostly c l a s s i c s and d i d not f o l l o w contemporary l i t e r a t u r e . His f i r s t s t o r i e s t o appear i n the West were p u b l i s h e d as e a r l y as 1929. 6^ He was born i n P o l t a v a , August 10, 1895, i n t o a f a m i l y of- a r t i s t s : h i s f a t h e r was a p a i n t e r of modest fame, h i s mother was an a c t r e s s . He was the youngest i n a f a m i l y of t h r e e , w i t h two o l d e r s i s t e r s . A f t e r g r a d u a t i n g from gymnasium (high school) i n 1913, he c o n t i n u e d h i s s t u d i e s i n the f a c u l t y o f law a t the U n i v e r s i t y of P e t r o g r a d . Without g r a d u a t i n g from law s c h o o l he v o l u n t e e r e d f o r m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e i n 1915, and was sent to the f r o n t as an e n s i g n . He fought f o r two y e a r s , was wounded many times. A German g a s - a t t a c k l e f t him i n poor h e a l t h f o r the r e s t o f h i l i f e , b u t i t d i d not stop him from v o l u n t e e r i n g f o r the Red M i k h a i l Zoshchenko, Four Sketches, t r a n s l a t e d and e d i t e d by C a r g i l l Sprietsma and Georges N a z a r o f f , "Reprinted from the B u l l e t i n of the American Women's Club,- 19 29" ( P a r i s 1929?). Army i n 1917. On account of h i s f a i l i n g h e a l t h he l e f t the Red Army, t r i e d a number o f o c c u p a t i o n s . In 1920, when he was working as a c l e r k f o r the m i l i t a r y P o r t A u t h o r i t y o f P e t r o g r a d , he began to w r i t e . In 1921 h i s f i r s t c o l l e c t i o n o f s t o r i e s was p r i n t e d by " E r a t o " p u b l i s h e r s , P e t r o g r a d . His l i t e r a r y c a r e e r took an upward t u r n from 19 21, a f t e r he j o i n e d the S e r a p i o n s ' l i t e r a r y group. K. F e d i n d e s c r i b e s him i n the f o l l o w i n g manner: Zoshchenko i s b l a c k - h a i r e d and q u i e t . He i s handsome i n person. In war he had been poisoned by gases; he has a h e a r t d i s e a s e . That's what makes him q u i e t . He i s a man who i s not s e l f -c o n f i d e n t ; he never knows how he w i l l w r i t e next? He began to w r i t e w e l l a l r e a d y a f t e r the s t u d i o a t the "Serapions". His " S t o r i e s by Nazar I l ' i c h , Mr. Sinebryukhov" are very good. "6 I t was customary a t the time to ask p o p u l a r w r i t e r s and a r t i s t s to p u b l i s h a u t o b i o g r a p h i e s i n which they were to s t a t e t h e i r p e r s o n a l f e e l i n g s on popular i s s u e s . Zoshchenko 6 7 p u b l i s h e d a w i t t y parody on h i s f e l l o w S e r a p i o n s , i n which he made fun of the " p r e c i s e i d e o l o g y " demanded of w r i t e r s by M a r x i s t c r i t i c s : . . . b e i n g a w r i t e r i s s o r t of hard. . . Take i d e o l o g y — these days a w r i t e r has got to have i d e o l o g y . K. F e d i n , "Gorky s r e d i nas: dvadcatye gody" ( K a r t i n y l i t e r a t u r n o y z h i z n i ) . T r a n s l a t e d q u o t a t i o n from H. O u l a n o f f , The S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s , p. 10. M. Zoshchenko, "Druzheskie p a r o d i i " , L i t e r a turny e z a p i s k i , No. 2 (June 23, 1922), pp. 8-9. 55 Here's Voronsky now (a good man) who w r i t e s : " . . . I t i s necessary t h a t w r i t e r s s h o u l d have a more p r e c i s e i d e o l o g y . " Now t h a t ' s plumb d i s a g r e e a b l e ! T e l l me, how can I have a " p r e c i s e i d e o l o g y " when not a s i n g l e p a r t y among them a l l appeals to me? I don't hate anybody — t h e r e ' s my p r e c i s e i d e o l o g y . . . In t h e i r g e n e r a l swing the B o l s h e v i k s are c l o s e r to me than anybody e l s e . And so I'm w i l l i n g to b o l s h e v i k around w i t h them. . . But I'm not a Communist (or r a t h e r not a M a r x i s t ) , and I t h i n k I never s h a l l be.68 T h i s a r r o g a n t show of p o l i t i c a l and a r t i s t i c indepen-dence went unpunished i n 1922, but was never f o r g o t t e n , and i n 194 6 he probably wished many times t h a t he had not made t h a t statement. With g r e a t care Zoshchenko g r a d u a l l y developed h i s own manner o f w r i t i n g . His s t y l e became l i k e a s i g n a t u r e : i n s t a n t l y r e c o g n i z a b l e . I t was based on "skaz", which was a p o p u l a r form i n the e a r l y 1920's, but by the mid-twenties had gone out of f a s h i o n . Zoshchenko not o n l y remained f a i t h -f u l to the "skaz" form, but p e r f e c t e d i t and put i t t o new use. The "skaz", as an a r t i s t i c t e chnique, demands d i r e c t speech. In h i s speech the n a r r a t o r r e v e a l s h i s s o c i a l back-ground, h i s e d u c a t i o n , h i s temperament, h i s p r e j u d i c e s . The W. Edgerton, The S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s , p. 63. skaz form f r e q u e n t l y accentuates c o m i c a l e f f e c t s . Zoshchenko, the grand master o f c o m i c a l skaz, e x c i t e s l a u g h t e r by the manner i n which the n a r r a t o r , 'Nazar I l ' i c h , gospodin S i n e -bryukhov," t e l l s h i s s t o r i e s . His n a r r a t o r ' s f i g u r e i s a compound o f many c h a r a c t e r s . H is view o f h i s surroundings i s simple, the events t h a t take p l a c e are grotesque, the s i t u a t i o n s are f a n t a s t i c . Zoshchenko's c h a r a c t e r s never develop t o s u f f i c i e n t depth to become ug l y and h a t e f u l . He achi e v e s grotesque e f f e c t not n e c e s s a r i l y through the world he d e s c r i b e s i n h i s s t o r i e s , b u t mostly w i t h the unusual t w i s t t h a t he give s to the language i n h i s s t o r i e s . Not o n l y do h i s c h a r a c t e r s not develop depth and dimension, but h i s "skaz" u n f o l d s on a s i n g l e p l a n e : t h a t o f the n a r r a t i v e "skaz" o f anecdotes. The grotesque i n "Nazar I l ' i c h gospodin Sinebryukhov" i s not h i s world, but the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of h i s spontaneous, muddled o r a l n a r r a t i o n : H TaKofi ^eJiOBeK, I T O Bee Mory. . . XoMeuib — Mory 3eMjiHiiiKy o6pa6oTaTb no cnoBy nocJieflHeii TeXHHKH, XO^eUIB KaKHM HH Ha eCTb pyKOMechoM 3a£iMyc&,— Bee y MeHH B pyKax KHFIHT H BSPTHTCH . A *ITO no OTB.ne'yeHHbix npeflMeTOB,— TaM, MOJKeT 6biTb, paccKa3 paccKa3aTb,. HJIH KaKoe-H«6yflb TOHeHbKoe flejibue BbiHCHHTb, — nosajiyfiCTa: 3TO RJIH. MeHH o^eHb flaace npocTO H BexiHKOJienHo.^ MnxaHJi 3omeHKo: H3 6paHHbie npOH3BeneHHH B flByx TOMax, CTp. 51. His language i s f u l l o f d i s t o r t i o n s and d e v i a t i o n s . Even h i s name i s c o m i c a l : i n s t e a d of "Gospodin N.I.S." the "gospodin" i s i n s e r t e d between h i s patronymic and h i s f a m i l y namej t h i s o f f e r s a c a n o n i c a l t w i s t to h i s name. T h i s , i n i t s e l f , might not be p a r t i c u l a r l y funny, but w i t h the f a r c i c a l f a m i l y name f o l l o w i n g , i t has a h i l a r i o u s e f f e c t on the r e a d e r . The primary c h a r a c t e r i s the n a r r a t o r , who breaks up i n t o two opposing c h a r a c t e r s : Nazar I l ' i c h and Gospodin Sinebryukhov. Nazar I l ' i c h i s a very s e r i o u s p e r s o n a l i t y : "I am such a man, t h a t I can do e v e r y t h i n g , " he can do e v e r y t h i n g a c c o r d i n g to the l a t e s t t e c h n i q u e s . T h i s s e r i o u s c h a r a c t e r ' s double i s the f a r c i c a l Gospodin Sinebryukhov, i n whose hands " e v e r y t h i n g b o i l s and turns around." His peasant l o v e o f the land shows i n h i s c h o i c e o f the word "zemlishka". Such words as "tonen'koe d e l ' c e " are used on l y i n c o l l o q u i a l spoken language. They support the o r a l n a r r a t i v e dominant i n t h i s q u o t a t i o n . From the above e x c e r p t we can f i n d out many t h i n g s about the n a r r a t o r : he i s a happy-go-lucky f e l l o w , he has s u p e r f i c i a l knowledge and very l i t t l e e d u c a t i o n . He i s a l s o impressed by the t e c h n o l o g i c a l c r a z e t h a t swept over R u s s i a i n the 19 20's — "po s l o v u posledney t e k h n i k i " , m i s u s i n g the s l o g a n , "po poslednemu s l o v u t e k h n i k i " . The n a r r a t o r r e v e a l s h i s emotional a t t i t u d e and h i s p e r s o n a l f e e l i n g s toward the o b j e c t o f h i s communication. With t h i s 58 s t y l i s t i c d e v i c e - t h e author makes h i s hero i n t o a l i v i n g p e rson. But the w r i t e r has t o be c a r e f u l not t o exceed the q u a n t i t y of v e r b a l means necessary to c h a r a c t e r i z e h i s n a r r a t o r . He would contravene the p r i n c i p l e u n d e r l y i n g the "skaz" t e c h n i q u e : one type of phraseology — one p o i n t of view. The speech t h a t the c h a r a c t e r s o f the "skaz" use i s never t h e i r own, but t h a t o f . t h e n a r r a t o r . The speech of the c h a r a c t e r s goes through the n a r r a t o r ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . To g i v e an example, the raven, f o r the l a c k of human language, d i s p l a y s the same a t t i t u d e , t h i n k i n g and speech as Nazar I l ' i c h gospodin Sinebryukhov: . . . TOJibKo, cMOTpw — cBepxy Ha MeHH BOPOH cnycKaeTCH. 9L Jiejicy JKHBOH, a OH ayMaeT, MTO na.na.nB, H cnycKaeTCH. H Ha Hero THXOHBKO UIHKaio: — d a , — roBopK) — noineJi, npoBaji Te6n BQ3BMH! Mamy pyKofl, a OH, MoaceT 6biTb, He BepuT H npHMO Ha MeHH HaceflaeT.TD" In Nazar I l ' i c h ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n the raven i s u s i n g the same p h i l i s t i n e d i c t i o n as he does. The c h a r a c t e r s do not possess any depth or i n d i v i d u a l i t y of e x p r e s s i o n other than t h a t o f the n a r r a t o r . M. 3oineHKO: H36paHHbie npon3BeaeHHfl B flByx TOMax. TOM I. nBHKTOpHH Ka3HMHpOBHa", d p . 69. 59 Zoshchenko's presence i s very seldom f e l t i n h i s s t o r i e s ; he p r e f e r s to l e a v e a l l the communication t o h i s n a r r a t o r s . Leskov, whose s t y l i s t i c i n f l u e n c e on Zoshchenko was very s t r o n g , sometimes sweeps away t h i s i l l u s i o n o f an autonomous n a r r a t o r and he, the author, takes over as the s t o r y - t e l l e r : the n a r r a t o r ' s speech becomes a humorous q u o t a t i o n i n the author's speech. When the w r i t e r takes over as n a r r a t o r the l i m i t a t i o n s of the "skaz" technique b e t r a y themselves. With o n l y one p o i n t of view, one d i c t i o n , the c h a r a c t e r of the n a r r a t o r can be q u i t e l i f e - l i k e . As soon as the author i n t r o d u c e s h i s own p o i n t of view, the v a l i d i t y o f h i s c a r e f u l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d c h a r a c t e r s u f f e r s , o r sometimes i s d e s t r o y e d . The reader w i l l no l o n g e r b e l i e v e t h a t the o r a l n a r r a t i v e flows from the mouth o f a l i v i n g n a r r a t o r . Thus the n a r r a t o r i s not the s t o r y - t e l l e r any more, but o n l y h e l p s the author to t e l l the s t o r y h i m s e l f . Zoshchenko c o n s i s t e n t l y uses the "skaz" technique: one phraseology — one p o i n t of view. The n a r r a t i o n i s communicated o n l y through h i s u n s o p h i s t i c a t e d hero. The c o m p l e x i t i e s o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s he cannot comprehend, every-t h i n g f i l t e r s i n t o h i s mind s i m p l i f i e d . T r i v i a l n o t i o n s t h a t t r i g g e r h i s e m o t i o n a l i t y become abs u r d l y exaggerated. In both cases the mechanism remains the same: h i s n a i v e n a r r a t o r ' s mind d i s t o r t s the proper s c a l e of t h i n g s . F o r example, i n "The A r i s t o c r a t " the n a r r a t o r , G r e g o r i i Ivanovich, 60 i s p r e o c c u p i e d f i r s t w i t h the plumbing and the t o i l e t , l a t e r w i t h the p a s t r i e s . There i s no o t h e r s i d e t o h i s c h a r a c t e r . Not o n l y does the n a r r a t o r have no depth o f v e r b a l communication, but the o t h e r c h a r a c t e r s are a l s o shallow ( l i k e the n a r r a t o r ) . Here the humour i s e s t a b l i s h e d through the "mask" of the n a r r a t o r : he i s masquerading as a gentleman u n t i l the s i t u a t i o n i s too demanding and h i s mask f a l l s o f f . In "The Bathhouse" the a b s u r d i t y o f the s i t u a t i o n i s a naked man w i t h a paper c l a i m s - t i c k e t ; the manageress i n a men's bathhouse. T h i s c r e a t e s the humour. The naked bather s i t u a t i o n i s repeated f o u r times. The e x p r e s s i o n "you're not i n the t h e a t r e " i s used out of c o n t e x t t h r e e times and i t ! a c h i e v e s f a r c i c a l humour: He iiapcKHft, roBopjo, pe»HM-uiafiKaMH nnnaTB. 3roH3M, roBopio, KanoK. Hano »e, roBopjo, H npyr-HM noMUTBCH . He B T e a T p e , roBopio. 71 In the above q u o t a t i o n Zoshchenko uses the pure form of "skaz" w i t h the n a r r a t o r r e p e a t e d l y r e a s s u r i n g the reader t h a t i t i s not a d i a l o g u e , but a monologue h e - i s r e a d i n g : "roBopio". The c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h the bath at t e n d a n t i s the same d e v i c e : the n a r r a t o r t a l k s f o r both o f them: rpaacfiaHe, roBopio. Ha MOHX, r o B o p i o , TyT nbipna SbiJia. A Ha 3THX SBOH rp,e? A 6aHiiiHK r o B o p H T : 3omeHKo: noB ecTH H paccKaabi. New York, 1952. MH, roBopHT, 3 a fltapKaMH H e n p H C T a B J i e H b i . He B TeaTpe, roBopHT.7 2 The-comedy here i s i n the d u a l nature of the " h o l e " ' (ntipKa) : f i r s t , i t i s the means of i d e n t i f y i n g the o b j e c t ; second, i t becomes an o b j e c t of n e c e s s i t y ( t h a t i s , w i t h o u t the h o l e the pants l o s e t h e i r former w o r t h ) . N a r r a t i v e techniques conform i n v a r y i n g degrees t o e i t h e r of the two f u n c t i o n a l l y d i f f e r e n t types of n a r r a t i o n : 1, s c e n i c n a r r a t i o n , 2, n a r r a t i o n proper.73 In " s c e n i c n a r r a t i o n " the n a r r a t i o n serves more or l e s s as a b i n d i n g m a t e r i a l to keep the elements of the d i a l o g u e t o g e t h e r . I t prevents a g i v e n l i t e r a r y work from t u r n i n g i n t o a pure drama. In " n a r r a t i o n proper" the o r a l n a r r a t i o n forms the dominant component o f the l i t e r a r y work. The reader l e a r n s the s t o r y from the mouth of the n a r r a t o r . The "skaz" technique u t i l i z e s t h i s d e v i c e w e l l . The author uses "skaz" t e c h n i q u e w i t h a view to s e t t i n g the " o r a l n a r r a t i o n " of the p erson who communicates the s t o r y . F o r t h i s purpose the author s e l e c t s the p r o per l e x i c a l means, he construes the a p p r o p r i a t e s y n t a c t i c a l combinations and he s e t s the i n t o n a -t i o n i n harmony w i t h t h a t of the supposed n a r r a t o r . T h i s supposed n a r r a t o r i s the s u b j e c t whose consciousness — 7 2 I b i d . , p. 144. 73 V. Eikhenbaum, "Leskov i sovremennaya proza " , L i t e -r a t u r a , T e o r i y a , K r i t i k a , Polemika (Leningrad, 1927), p. 210. whatever the degree o f i t s e x p l i c i t n e s s may be — both r e c o r d s l i t e r a r y r e a l i t y and i n t e r p r e t s i t s meaning, estimates i t and imparts to i t the t o n a l i t y agreeable t o the under-s t a n d i n g o f t h i s c o n s c i o u s n e s s . The s e l e c t i o n of a n a i v e and s o c i a l l y humble n a r r a t o r was not unique t o Zoshchenko; i n f a c t i t had a l o n g - e s t a b -l i s h e d l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n : Pushkin's Ivan P e t r o v i c h B e l k i n , the p r o v i n c i a l s q u i r e ; Gogol's Rudyj Pan'ko, the beekeeper; Leskov's nameless n a r r a t o r of w o r k i n g - c l a s s background, i n "Levsha"; Babel's Kurdyukov, the simple s o l d i e r who w r i t e s home to h i s mother. The pure "skaz" form i s even more s u c c e s s f u l i n s m a l l e r genres, such as i n anecdotes. Zoshchenko succeeds b e s t i n h i s s h o r t anecdotes, where the n a r r a t o r ' s c o n n e c t i o n t o each anecdote i s o n l y f o r m a l . Besides Zoshchenko, Vsevolod Ivanov and N i k o l a y N i k i t i n , both S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s , a l s o wrote s h o r t s t o r i e s w i t h the use o f "skaz" t e c h n i q u e . What d i d Zoshchenko t h i n k about h i s own s t y l e ? H nHiuy oieHb cacaTO. $pa3a y MeHH K o p o T K a n . flocTynHaa 6eflHUM. 74 MoweT 6hiTB nosTOMy y MeHH MHOTO ^CHTaTenea. In h i s s t o r i e s he always r e l i e s on the "one phraseology — one p o i n t o f view" t e c h n i q u e . T h e r e f o r e he has no need M. 3omeHKO, „0 ce6e, o KpHTHKax H O CBoefi pa6oTe", OraTBH H MaTepjiajiHi, CTP. 11. 63 t o develop i n t r i c a t e l y complex p l o t s . The s i m p l e r the motive, the g r e a t e r can the c o n t r a s t be i n the manner the h e r o - n a r r a t o r s o l v e s i t . Zoshchenko h i m s e l f i s o n l y a detached o b s e r v e r o f the c o n f l i c t ; he does not take s i d e s . H i s themes a r e r e p e t i t i o u s . He does not w r i t e about the c o r r u p t i o n o f morals, but o f the b r u t e energy and awkward d e s i r e t o conform, to understand and to s t a y a l i v e i n the changing t i m e s . H i s s t o r i e s are supposed to have a moral a t the o u t s e t , but through the n a r r a t i o n of h i s n a i v e hero, the p o i n t gets l o s t . The hero l o s e s s i g h t o f the moral o r the main i s s u e and o f t e n a r r i v e s a t a completely unexpected c o n c l u s i o n . The s i t u a t i o n s t h a t p r o v i d e "raw m a t e r i a l " f o r Zoshchenko*s t a l e s are the everyday l i f e o f the average S o v i e t c i t i z e n : the i n e f f i c i e n c y o f consumers' s e r v i c e s (The K i t t e n and P e o p l e ) , the housing shortage (Pushkin), the s c a r c i t y of consumer goods (Economy Campaign), bureaucracy and r e d tape (The R e c e i p t ) , bad roads, the j u x t a p o s i t i o n of backwardness and the new i d e o l o g y . These are not merely a s e t t i n g f o r h i s s t o r i e s : Zoshchenko i n t e n d s t o expose the f r u s t r a t i o n s o f h i s fellow-men. P e r s o n a l problems and g r i e f s are reduced i n s c a l e or e n l a r g e d t o . t h e absurd. " I t i s n ' t f i d e l i t y o r i n f i d e l i t y i n marriage t h a t counts, but the 64 75 a v a i l a b i l i t y o f an apartment." The c h a r a c t e r s t r y t o g i v e the i m p r e s s i o n o f t h e i r g r e a t e r importance, but t h e i r a c t i o n s and language c o n s i s t e n t l y b e t r a y them. Zoshchenko has a whole g a l l e r y of " s m a l l " men f o r h i s heroes. Nazar I l ' i c h gospodin Sinebryukhov i s a f a i l u r e , so are h i s a s s o c i a t e s : the m i l l e r who d i e s from an a c c i d e n t a l s t r a y b u l l e t ; the P o l i s h beauty, V i k t o r i a Kazimirovna, who gets h e r e n s i g n , the o l d p r i n c e and h a p p i l y s e t t l e s f o r a peasant. Nazar I l ' i c h has no s t r o n g i d e n t i t y : he i s a peasant, h i s w i f e and h i s home are i n the v i l l a g e , but he i s a l s o a s o l d i e r i n the t s a r ' s army, he "knows e v e r y t h i n g by the l a t e s t t e chnology". For the p r e d e c e s s o r s of Zabyeshkin, the u n f o r t u n a t e p e t t y c l e r k , we do not have to look f a r i n the novels of Gogol o r Dostoevsky. He i s the same f a i l u r e i n l i f e as Nazar I l ' i c h . In f a c t , they are both s t r i v i n g f o r the same u n o b t a i n a b l e g o a l : " f i n a n c i a l s e c u r i t y " , a p l a c e to c a l l home and a woman to look a f t e r them. Nazar I l ' i c h ' s p l a n t o get the m i l l e r ' s money i s f r u s t r a t e d by a f r e a k a c c i d e n t : „. .. . a KaK na non c i y n u T , TaK non rpeMHT — 3eMJia K ce6e 7 6 noKOftHHKa Tpe6yeT." 75 Scenes from the Bathhouse and Other S t o r i e s of Communist R u s s i a by M. Zoshchenko" I n t r o d u c t i o n by Sidney Monas , p~. v i i i . n c. 3omeHKO, H3'6'pa'HHbie ripOH3BeneriHH B flByx TOMax,CTP.65. 65 The s e l e c t i o n o f a goat as a symbol o f s e c u r i t y i s a s a t i r e . The goat i s o f t e n c a l l e d the poor man's cow; i t i s the most i n s i g n i f i c a n t domesticated mammal one c o u l d own. Zabyeshkin's modest dreams are a l s o f r u s t r a t e d : he i s not to have the goat ( t h a t i s , the f u l f i l l m e n t o f h i s wishes f o r s e c u r i t y and h a p p i n e s s ) . The " A c t o r " i s a v i c t i m of the u n s t a b l e economic c l i m a t e i n R u s s i a i n the 19 20's. The drama comes to a h i g h l i g h t i n r e a l i s m when the " a c t o r " understands t h a t he i s a c t u a l l y b e i n g robbed i n p u b l i c , on the t h e a t r e stage, and t h e r e i s n o t h i n g he can do to stop i t . T h i s " v i c t i m " i s i n k i n s h i p w i t h the n a r r a t o r o f "The C r i s i s " and a l s o with the hero (Ivan Fedorovich) of "Pushkin". In the two l a t t e r t a l e s the housing shortage i s so acute t h a t they f a l l " v i c t i m s " : one s e t t l e s i n a communal bathroom w i t h w i f e , c h i l d and mother-in-law; Ivan F e d o r o v i c h i s put out on the s t r e e t , because n i n e t y years ago Pushkin might have l i v e d i n h i s new-found room. The i r o n y i n t h i s s t o r y i s t h a t the o r g a n i z e r s o f the Pushkin a n n i v e r s a r y are more concerned w i t h s e t t i n g up a s h r i n e f o r the deceased poet than w i t h l o o k i n g a f t e r the needs o f l i v i n g human b e i n g s . The s t o r y " K i t t e n and People" conveys the same g e n e r a l i d e a . The n a r r a t o r ' s stove emits carbon monoxide fumes. The b u r e a u c r a t s from the housing c o o p e r a t i v e f a i n t from the poisonous gas, but d e c l a r e the stove s a f e : ". . . n o r e p a i r s . 66 One can l i v e . " The n a r r a t o r submits to h i s f a t e and when he comprehends t h a t he i s l e s s s i g n i f i c a n t than a f l e a — "A 77 man i s n ' t a f l e a — he can g e t used to a n y t h i n g " — he i s c o n t e n t . The s o c i a l l y conscious c h a r a c t e r of the "new man" i s another of Zoshchenko's f a v o r i t e heroes. T h i s man i s back-ward, h i s v o c a b u l a r y f u l l of p o s t e r slogans t h a t he uses f r e e l y and almost always a t the wrong time, f o r the wrong r e a s o n s . H i s g l o s s a r y i s o f the p r o l e t a r i a t , but h i s i n t o n -a t i o n and emotions b e t r a y h i s peasant background. During the 19 20's, to cover up f o r desperate s h o r t a g e s , the p a r t y master-minded v a r i o u s economy campaigns. The popu-l a t i o n was r e g u l a r l y o r g a n i z e d i n t o " b r i g a d e s " and sent scavenging around the c o u n t r y s i d e f o r s c r a p metal, paper, r a g s . Zoshchenko's "Economy Campaign" takes us i n t o a f a c -t o r y , where the workers d e c i d e they w i l l stop h e a t i n g the t o i l e t because " i t i s n ' t a l i v i n g room." The campaign works out w e l l d u r i n g the w i n t e r : f i f t y f e e t of p i n e firewood i s saved. The n a r r a t o r i s a shopkeeper a t h e a r t : "In a hundred y e a r s you c o u l d e a s i l y save t h r e e c o r d s . In a thousand years 7 8 you c o u l d j u s t open up shop w i t h firewood." To a Zosh-chenko hero, success does not come e a s i l y : nature s t r i k e s a t Zoshchenko, Scenes from the Bathhouse . . ., p. 45. I b i d . , p. 35. the " t s a r i s t p i p e s " and they b u r s t open d u r i n g the s p r i n g thaw. "In g e n e r a l i t i s necessary to p u l l such p i p e s out by 79 the r o o t s " — the n a r r a t o r i s not c r i t i c a l o f the economy campaign, he i s good-natured, he t r i e s t o go a l o n g , he wants to see t h i n g s as he i s t o l d they a r e . But he f e e l s i t might be a good i d e a to t h i n k i t over c a r e f u l l y : "Otherwise, i t t u r n s i t s e l f away." The " l i t t l e men" of Zoshchenko's s t o r i e s never win. The h e r o i n e o f "No Need to S p e c u l a t e " d e v i s e s a f o o l p r o o f method of o b t a i n i n g money from l a d i e s who are i n search of a husband: she i n t r o d u c e s her own husband as an e l i g i b l e b a c h e l o r , c o l l e c t s the fee and a few days l a t e r the husband w i l l r e t u r n , the d e a l i s o f f and she w i l l end up having both husband and money. A scheme l i k e t h i s would deserve t o succeed 1 But a g a i n the h e r o i n e l o s e s her husband to a lady d e n t i s t . She a l s o l o s e s p a r t o f her l i v e l i h o o d : she i s not allowed to d e l i v e r m i l k to the apartment house where her husband now l i v e s . Zoshchenko here p o r t r a y s the greedy p h i l i s t i n e (meshchanstvo), who d u r i n g the N.E.P. years made uncon s c i o n a b l e gains and s o l d anything — or i n t h i s case, anyone — ' f o r p r o f i t . In "The A r i s t o c r a t " , G r e g o r i i I v a n o vich, the good-natured c a r e t a k e r , has h i s t r o u b l e s . His f i r s t encounters I b i d . , p. 36. 68 w i t h the " A r i s t o k r a t k a " (whose n o b i l i t y d e r i v e d from having a g o l d t o o t h and s t o c k i n g s ) are l i m i t e d to c o n v e r s a t i o n on such t o p i c s as the c o n d i t i o n o f the plumbing. G r e g o r i i I v a n o v i c h overcomes h i s shyness and i n v i t e s the " l a d y " t o the t h e a t r e . The c a r e t a k e r l o v e s h i s new s e l f — the gentleman. Zoshchenko does not allow him t o remain a "gentleman": the mask i s r i p p e d o f f when he p u b l i c l y o f f e n d s the " l a d y " f o r e a t i n g too many sweets. G r e g o r i i I v a n o v i c h cannot f o r g i v e the " A r i s t o k r a t k a " f o r the p u b l i c embarrass-ment. "I don't l i k e a r i s t o c r a t s " — h i s view happens to c o i n c i d e w i t h the p a r t y ' s view, but h i s reason f o r d i s l i k i n g " a r i s t o c r a t s " i s p e r s o n a l and not h i s t o r i c a l . The t h i n veneer of fake manners i s o f f . The dear incompetent man of "Rachis" has managed to sta y i n h i s job f o r t h i r t y y e a rs a t the pos t o f f i c e ' s " F o r e i g n Correspondences" bureau, even though he does not read L a t i n l e t t e r s . His incompetence was covered up f o r yea r s as h i s fellow-workers read the telegrams f o r him. In t h i s s t o r y the n a r r a t o r i s as uneducated as the hero, f o r he does not see the n e c e s s i t y f o r K r y l y s h k i n t o know f o r e i g n languages: And I f e e l very s o r r y f o r him! W e l l , where are you going to get an o l d - t i m e s p e c i a l i s t i n f o r e i g n languages nowadays? Should have l e t him sta y on!80 8 0 Zoshchenko, Scenes from the Bathhouse . . ., p. 41. 69 In h i s sketches Zoshchenko mostly c r i t i c i z e s the c r a s s n e s s (poshlost*) of the "meshchanstvo", i t s condescend-i n g way o f l i f e , i t s p u r p o s e l e s s greed. Seldom, i f e v e r , does he c r i t i c i z e the regime. His f a u l t f i n d i n g i s u s u a l l y aimed a t a m i n o r i t y segment o f S o v i e t s o c i e t y , — v e r y o f t e n the b u r e a u c r a t , the h e a r t l e s s , inhuman machine. T h i s q u a l i t y o f h i s s t o r i e s was one of the s e c r e t s of h i s g r e a t success w i t h the p u b l i c and w i t h the P a r t y . His c r i t i c i s m was a c c e p t a b l e as long as i t was not aimed a g a i n s t the s h o r t -comings of P a r t y p o l i c i e s . In 19 32, Zhdanov . . . i n v i t e d i n t o a s i n g l e Union of S o v i e t W r i t e r s a l l w r i t e r s who support the p l a t f o r m of S o v i e t power and [who] wish to p a r t i c i p a t e i n b u i l d i n g s o c i a l i s m . 8 1 At the f i r s t meeting o f the A l l - U n i o n Congress of S o v i e t W r i t e r s i n 1934, Zhdanov l e f t no i l l u s i o n i n the w r i t e r s ' minds t h a t the P a r t y would a b s t a i n from forming l i t e r a r y p o l i c i e s as i t had h i t h e r t o . Zhdanov a s s e r t e d c a t e g o r i c a l l y t h a t s o c i a l i s t r e a l i s m would h e n c e f o r t h c o n s t i t u t e the e x c l u s i v e a r t i s t i c method of e x p r e s s i o n f o r S o v i e t l i t e r a t u r e . With t h i s , the p e r i o d o f p a t h f i n d i n g and r e l a t i v e freedom o f e x p r e s s i o n f o r the a r t s had ended. Some w r i t e r s t u r n e d a new page i n t h e i r c r e a t i v e l i v e s and, i f f o r no o t h e r reason "0 p e r e s t r o y k e l i t e r a t u r n o - k h u d o z h e s t v e n n y k h o r g a n i -z a t s i i , P o s t a n o v l e n i e CKVKP(b) o t 23 a p r e l y a 1932 g." Sovremennaya L i t e r a t u r a (Moskva, 1946), pp. 14-18. than s e l f - p r e s e r v a t i o n , they accepted the new r u l e . Maya-kovsky chose s u i c i d e a f t e r a t r i a l p e r i o d ; o t h e r s were never heard o f a g a i n . Zoshchenko's s t o r i e s were as p o p u l a r as ever; even S t a l i n , a l l e g e d l y , was amused by them. He seemed an u n l i k e l y c a n d i d a t e f o r Zhdanov's purges. As i t happened, Zhdanov was j u s t w a i t i n g f o r the o p p o r t u n i t y to punish Zoshchenko f o r an e a r l i e r statement he had made: "I am not a Communist (or 8 2 r a t h e r not a M a r x i s t ) , and I t h i n k I never s h a l l be" — i t had not been allowed to go unpunished, o n l y the time had to be r i p e . Zoshchenko must have overestimated h i s i n v u l n e r a b i l i t y o r underestimated Zhdanov's e v e r - i n c r e a s i n g powers when he 8 3 submitted "The Adventures of an Ape" and h i s autobiograph-i c a l s t o r y "Before the S u n r i s e " f o r p u b l i c a t i o n . They both proved f a t a l f o r h i s l i t e r a r y c a r e e r u n t i l a f t e r the death of S t a l i n i n 1953. "The Adventures of an Ape" begins i n the L e n i n g r a d Zoo. During a bomb a t t a c k on the c i t y , the zoo i s h i t and a monkey escapes. On t h i s sad o c c a s i o n t h e r e i s something t o r e j o i c e about: the t h r e e snakes are k i l l e d , s i n c e b i b l i c a l M. Zoshchenko, "Druzheskie p a r o d i i " , L i t e r a t u r n y e z a p i s k i , No. 2 (June 23, 1922), pp. 8-9. 83 Zvezda, May-June, 1946. 71 times they are the most u n i v e r s a l symbol f o r a l l e v i l : "not i n i t s e l f a very sad f a c t perhaps", says Zoshchenko. Unfor-t u n a t e l y the o s t r i c h i s k i l l e d t o o , — meaning t h a t even those who do not commit themselves t o one i d e o l o g y o r another, the s o - c a l l e d " n e u t r a l s " , are not s a f e from d e s t r u c t i o n . Among a l l the animals the monkey i s the most f r i g h t -ened. Maybe he i s the most i n t e l l i g e n t and he can t e l l when h i s l i f e and s e c u r i t y are i n danger? At f i r s t he i s r e l u c t a n t to l e a v e : he has more freedom and s e c u r i t y behind bars than the f r e e people on the s t r e e t s . He i s captured t h r e e times soon a f t e r he leaves the zoo: f i r s t by a k i n d m i l i t a r y man, then by a p r o f i t e e r i n g o l d man, l a s t l y by a warm-hearted l i t t l e boy. U n t i l he i s permanently s e t t l e d i n the l i t t l e boy's apartment, he i s b e i n g chased by d i f f e r e n t groups of people. The order i n which they run a f t e r him i s always the same: "The boys a t the head. Behind them, the grown-ups. Behind the grown-ups, 84 the policeman." D u r i n g the monkey's escapade, Zoshchenko does not f o r g e t t o make a few jabs a t h i s f a v o r i t e u n s o p h i s t i c a t e s , the o r d i n a r y c i t y f o l k . When the monkey takes grandma's candy: "Well, an ape. I t ' s not a man. A man, i f he takes M. Zoshchenko, Scenes from the Bathhouse and Other S t o r i e s of Communist R u s s i a (Ann Arbor Paperbacks, 1962), pp. 178-179, 182. 85 something, wouldn't do i t r i g h t under grandma's nose." In Q C the bathhouse: "no one knew i t was an ape." The edge of i r o n y i s sharp h e r e : i t wasn't r e c o g n i z e d as an ape, because i t i s so much l i k e the o t h e r s who use the bathhouse. When the monkey jumps on the la d y s e l l i n g the t i c k e t s , she shouts: 87 "A bomb f e l l i n my o f f i c e . Quick, some i o d i n e I " She i s "knowledgeable" i n pharmacology, she demands i o d i n e , the good o l d remedy t h a t cures a l l ! The dog, which chased the monkey once and had i t s nose almost t w i s t e d o f f i n the p r o c e s s , when urged the second time, . . . d i d n ' t go a f t e r him. The dog o n l y looked a t the f l e e i n g ape, f e l t a sharp p a i n i n i t s nose, and stopped running; even turned around. Probably thought: "They don't supply you w i t h noses — running a f t e r apes."88 T h i s i s a r e f e r e n c e t o the P a v l o v i a n dog's c o n d i t i o n i n g ; b ut i n s t e a d o f l e a r n i n g through reward, i t l e a r n e d i t s l e s s o n through p a i n . A l s o another u n i v e r s a l human t r a i t : never v o l u n t e e r ! Zoshchenko makes a few r e f e r e n c e s t o the shortage o f food: He ate a f l y t o recoup h i s s t r e n g t h . And then a couple of worms. Where c o u l d he eat? There wasn't a n y t h i n g e d i b l e i n the s t r e e t s . . . A l l the more he had no money. . . R a t i o n coupons he does not have.9 u 8 5 I b i d . , p. 179. 8 6 I b i d . , p. 181. 8 7 I b i d . , p. 182. 8 8 I b i d . 8 9 I b i d . , p. 177. 9 0 I b i d . , p. 178. 73 At l a s t the ape r e t u r n s t o the l i t t l e boy, who takes very good c a r e of him and t r a i n s him. The monkey l e a r n s very good manners, and eat s a t the t a b l e . C h i l d r e n , and many a d u l t s , can l e a r n manners from the monkey. T h i s s t o r y has been i n t e r p r e t e d i n many ways. The C e n t r a l Committee of the Communist Party had the f o l l o w i n g o p i n i o n : "Adventures of a Monkey" . . . i s a v u l g a r lampoon on S o v i e t l i f e and on S o v i e t p e o p l e . Zoshchenko d i s f i g u r e s and c a r i c a t u r e s S o v i e t customs and S o v i e t people, s l a n d e r o u s l y p o r t r a y -i n g S o v i e t people as p r i m i t i v e , u n c u l t u r e d , s t u p i d , w i t h p h i l i s t i n e t a s t e s and customs. Zoshchenko's m a l i c i o u s , h o o l i g a n - l i k e d e p i c t i o n of our way o f l i f e i s accompanied by a n t i - S o v i e t a t t a c k s . Zhdanov's r e p o r t was j u s t as s t r o n g l y worded: Of n e c e s s i t y , Zoshchenko had to g i v e monstrous, c a r i c a t u r e d , and v u l g a r p o r t r a y a l o f the l i f e o f the S o v i e t people i n order t o make the monkey u t t e r the f o u l , poisonous, a n t i - S o v i e t quip t h a t i t i s b e t t e r to l i v e i n the zoo than o u t s i d e i t , t h a t one can breathe more f r e e l y i n a cage than among S o v i e t people. Is i t p o s s i b l e to s i n k any lower m o r a l l y and p o l i t i c a l l y ? And how can the people of L e n i n g r a d t o l e r a t e such f i l t h and o b s c e n i t y on the pages of t h e i r j o u r n a l s ? In f a c t , Zoshchenko d i d not w r i t e s p e c i f i c a l l y about S o v i e t people i n t h i s s k e t c h , but about mankind i n g e n e r a l . L i f e i n the " c i v i l i z e d " w o r l d i s so c o n f u s i n g t h a t the monkey would much r a t h e r choose the s h e l t e r e d s e c u r i t y of a cage. There are zoos i n almost any l a r g e c i t y ; t h e r e was a shortage of food i n a l l European c i t i e s d u r i n g the war. A l c o h o l i s m , s t u p i d i t y and greed are not p e c u l i a r l y S o v i e t q u a l i t i e s . The manners of c h i l d r e n , and o f some a d u l t s , c o u l d stand improvement i n any c o u n t r y . There i s n o t h i n g outrageous i n t h i s s t o r y , except t h a t t h e r e i s no i d e n t i f i a b l e p r o g r e s s i v e p o s i t i v e hero, which i s a must i n s o c i a l i s t r e a l i s m . On August 14, 1946, the C e n t r a l Committee of the S o v i e t Communist P a r t y , i n a p u b l i c statement, reprimanded the l i t e r a r y j o u r n a l Zvezda f o r p u b l i s h i n g c e r t a i n works of Zoshchenko and Akhmatova. A f t e r t h i s , i t was o n l y a metter of time: i n f a c t , on September 4, 1946, the P r e s i d i u m of the Board o f the Union of S o v i e t W r i t e r s e x p e l l e d Zoshchenko and Akhmatova from the Union, on the ground t h a t o n l y w r i t e r s who "stand on the p l a t f o r m of S o v i e t power and p a r t i c i p a t e 91 i n s o c i a l i s t c o n s t r u c t i o n " were e n t i t l e d t o membership. The charge a g a i n s t Zoshchenko was the p u b l i c a t i o n of h i s s t o r y "The Adventures o f an Ape", p r i n t e d i n the i s s u e o f Zvezda o f May-June 1946. P a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n was a l s o drawn to h i s a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l n o v e l Before S u n r i s e , w r i t t e n d u r i n g the war. One of h i s major a l l e g e d crimes was t h a t he had done no t h i n g d u r i n g the war to h e l p the war e f f o r t and the f i g h t i n g people of the S o v i e t Union. R e z o l u t s i j a P rezidiuma p r a v l e n i j a Sojuza SoVetskikh p i s a t e l e j o t 4 s e p t . 1946 g., O k t i a b r , No. 9 (1946), pp. 182-187. His f a l l was a l l the more s u r p r i s i n g because he was so very p o p u l a r among S o v i e t r e a d e r s . H i s f e l l o w - w r i t e r s had e l e c t e d him t o the p r e s i d e n c y o f the Union of S o v i e t W r i t e r s . In 1939 he had r e c e i v e d the medal o f the Red Labour Banner " f o r o u t s t a n d i n g p r o g r e s s and achievements i n the 92 development o f S o v i e t b e l l e s - l e t t r e s . " I t i s very d i f f i c u l t t o comprehend how "Zoshchenko the v i l l a i n " c o u l d have "m i s l e d " so many S o v i e t r e a d e r s , h i s f e l l o w - w r i t e r s , and members o f the Pa r t y f o r t w e n t y - f i v e y e a r s . His e x p u l s i o n from the Union o f S o v i e t W r i t e r s put an end t o h i s b r i l l i a n t s t o r i e s . When the world next heard o f him, i t was an u n i n s p i r e d , humourless Zoshchenko. On r e a d i n g 9 3 such a sk e t c h as "Rogul'ka"/ one can o n l y be dismayed: what had Zoshchenko gone through t o abandon h i s p r i n c i p l e s and produce a s t o r y l i k e t h a t ? Zoshchenko's e x p u l s i o n was revoked soon a f t e r S t a l i n ' s death i n 19 53. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , he never r e t u r n e d t o h i s former s t y l e , w i t h i t s former e x c e l l e n c e . He d i e d i n 19 58, at the age o f s i x t y - t h r e e , from a h e a r t a i l m e n t he had con-t r a c t e d as a r e s u l t o f gas p o i s o n i n g d u r i n g the F i r s t World War. 9 2 L i t e r a t u r n a j a Gazeta, February 5, 1939. 9 3 V i r e n , F r o n t o v o j jumor, Voennoe i z d a t e l ' s t v o (Moskva, 1970), p. 33. 76 The o f f i c i a l S o v i e t c r i t i c s d i d not w r i t e about him u n t i l two ye a r s a f t e r h i s death. Zoshchenko i s s t i l l frowned upon by the S o v i e t l i t e r a r y c r i t i c s . They are s t i l l unable to " f o r g i v e " him f o r coming out s t r o n g l y a g a i n s t the " p o l i -t i c h e s k a y a tendentsiya". ..BCHKVIO TeHfleHunosHOCTB MU OTpnnaeM 94 B KOpHe." iiHeT y MeHH HH K KOMy HeHaBHCTH BOT MOH 95 iTOiHan uneonorHH*". D e s p i t e the s m a l l volume o f r e p r i n t s o f h i s works (50,000) , he i s s t i l l very p o p u l a r among S o v i e t r e a d e r s , and he i s g a i n i n g p o p u l a r i t y among western readers o f Russian l i t e r a t u r e . More of h i s works have been t r a n s -l a t e d i n t o E n g l i s h s i n c e the l a t e 1950's than d u r i n g h i s most p r o d u c t i v e years i n the twenties and t h i r t i e s . As f o r the Se r a p i o n B r o t h e r s — they came q u i e t l y and they l e f t q u i e t l y . They ceased t o meet r e g u l a r l y i n the mid-tw e n t i e s . They were no lo n g e r an i n f l u e n t i a l l i t e r a r y group 96 by 19 29. T h e i r main accomplishment as a group was i n f i l l i n g the vacuum: Bourgeois a r t was q u i t t i n g the stage o f h i s t o r y , whereas the new a r t , the a r t o f the R e v o l u t i o n , had not y e t emerged. Some p r o v i s i o n a l forms o f a r t had t o patch the gap s e p a r a t i n g the p r o s p e c t i v e s o c i a l i s t a r t from the f a d i n g bourgeois a r t . 94 P e t e r b u r g s k i j S b o r n i k . 95 . . M. Zoshchenko, "O sebe, ob i d e o l o g i i l ish c h o koe o chom", L i t e r a t u r n y e z a p i s k i , 1922, No. 3, p. 28. 96 A. Lezhnev and D. Gorbov, L 1 1 e r a t u ra r e vo l y u t s I onnogo d e s y a t i l e t i y a 1917-19 27 ( " P r o l e t a r i y " , 1 9 2 9 ) , p. 69. 77 P i l ' n y a k , the S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s . E s e n i n and o t h e r s produced t h i s t r a n s i t i o n a l a r t . 9 ? From a f i f t y - y e a r h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , one must come to the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t the Serapions* l i t e r a r y a c h i e v e -ments were modest. They d i d not manage to e s t a b l i s h a l i t e r a r y t r e n d l i k e the Symbolists or the F o r m a l i s t s . Ac-c o r d i n g to Lunc, they never wanted to e s t a b l i s h a l i t e r a r y s c h o o l — i n t h a t they d i d succeed. Some of the B r o t h e r s were s h o r t - l i v e d ; f o r i n s t a n c e , Lunc d i e d i n Germany i n 1923. Others became b e t t e r known abroad; f o r example, Pozner was b e s t known f o r h i s c r i t i c a l works i n P a r i s . A f t e r Zhdanov's p e r s e c u t i o n of Russian w r i t e r s , many of them changed t h e i r l i t e r a r y s t y l e s ; they developed new c h a r a c t e r s to complement the new p l o t s . The q u a l i t y of Zoshchenko's s t o r i e s w r i t t e n a f t e r 1946 can be d e s c r i b e d , a t b e s t , as mediocre. Shklovsky l o s t h i s s p i r i t , h i s " t i g e r -t o o t h " had been p u l l e d by Zhdanov. Tikhonov had to t u r n 180 degrees to s u r v i v e . (He not o n l y s u r v i v e d , but managed to l i v e w e l l . ) Polonskaya, Gruzdyov — they faded away i n S o v i e t l i t e r a t u r e . Ivanov, N i k i t i n and F e d i n are s t i l l read i n the S o v i e t Union. Only Zoshchenko has the same p o p u l a r i t y as he H. O u l a n o f f , The S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s . Theory and P r a c t i c e , p. 34. 78 enjoyed d u r i n g the twenties and t h i r t i e s . H is most pop u l a r works are s t i l l those t h a t he wrote d u r i n g the u n s e t t l e d e r a o f the New Economic P o l i c y . BIBLIOGRAPHY PRIMARY SOURCES: W r i t i n g s o f M. Zoshchenko, and o f the othe r S e r a p i o n Brothers.. . . 3omeHKO, M. M. „flpyxecKHe napoflHH (napoflHH o CepannoHOBbix EpaTBHx)", JlHTepaTypHbie 3anHCKH, No. 2 ( 1 9 2 2 ) , pp. 8-9. . „0 c e 6 e , 0 6 HfleonorHH H eme Koe o ^eM", JlHTepaTyp-Hbie sanHCKH, No. 3 ( 1 9 2 2 ) , pp. 28-29. . ,|ABT06HOrpa$HH" B cSopHHKe nHcaTejiH. ABT06HOrpacJ)HH H nopTpeTbi coBpeMeHHux pyccKHX nposaHKOB. MocKBa, 1926. . „0 c e 6 e , o K p H T H K a x H O cBoeft pa6oTe", MHxaHJi 3omeHKO. C T S T B H H MaxepHaJibi, JleHHHrpafl, 1928. . CTaTBH B cSopHHKe KaK Mbi nHineM, HeHHHrpan, 1930, pp. 48-58. . CTaTBH B c6opHHKe JlHTepaTypHan y q e 6 a , No. 3, 1930, pp. 107-113. . Co6paHHe coTOHeHHK. TOM I-IV. J l e H H H r p a n ; , 1931. ' ' ' . H36paHHoe OflHOTOMHHK. HeHHHrpan;, 1934. Conepxa-H H e : „PaccKa3bi 1925-1933"; „ IIOB e c T H 1922-1932"; M $ e J i B e T O H b i 1923-1933". . R u s s i a Laughs. T r a n s l a t e d by Helena C l a y t o n . Toronto, 1 935. Longmans. . H36paHHbie noBecTH. CO B e T C K H f i n n c a T e j i B , 1937. ConepKaHHe: nepBbie noBecra: „My,npocTB" , „Ko3a"; „PaccKa3bi Ha3apa H.nBH*ia" ; „ B e J i H K o c B e T C K a H HCTOPHH"; „BHKTOPHH Ka3HMHpoBHa"; „yepTOBHHKa"; „rH6.noe MecTo" ; ,fCeHTHMeH— TajiBHbie noBecra" : ..ripeflHCJiOBHe" ; „Ano.n.noH H TaMapa" ; „CTpaiuHaH HO^B"; „0 ^ eM neJi cojioBeH"; ..Becenoe npHKJiio-HeHHe"; „CHpeHb UBerer"; „MHiueJib CHHHFHH: I l p e f l H C J i O B H e " ; „M. n. CHHHTHH: HCTOPHH OflHOft KH3HH". . The Woman Who Could Not Read, and Other T a l e s , t r a n s l by E l i z a v e t a Fen. London: Methuen. 1940. __________ Wonderful Dog, and Other T a l e s , t r a n s l . by E l i z a -v e t a Fen. London: Methuen, 1942. 80 3omeHKO, M. M. IIoBecTH H paccKa3bi. H3«. HMeHH lexoBa. Hbio KopK. 1952. . Scenes from the Bathhouse and Other Stories of Communist Russia. (Including abridged e d i t i o n of "Before Sunrise".) University of Michigan Press. Ann Arbor, 1962. . Nervous People, and Other S t o r i e s . Edited by Hugh McLean, translated by Maria Gordon and Hugh McLean. New York. 1963. . nepen BocxoflOM cojTHna. Me)KHyHapoflHoe JlHTepaTypHoe ConpyHcecTBO. 1967. . H36paHHbie npon3BefleHHfl. B flByx TOMax. JleHHHrpan:. H 3 f l . XyflOKecTBeHHan JiHTepaTypa, 1968. . PaccKa3bi flBaauaTbix roaoB. Bradda Books, Ltd., 1969 . . „ABToBHorpaOHH", 5 HIOJIH 19 53 r. B HsQpaHHbix npoH3Befl6HH3X B anyx T O M a x . H3n. XyflosecTBeHHaH J i H T e p a -T y p a , J l e H H H r p a n , 1968. Pp. 47-48. . BHpeH, B. H. ( C O C T a B H T e J I b ) , OPOHTOBQH K I M O p . „njioxaH BeMjiH", p a c c K a 3 a j i c T a p u i H H J i e f t T e H a H T H. JIV^HHCKHH, 3 a n H c a n M. M. 3omeHKo: „PoryjibKa", pp. 31-17. BoeHHoe H3naTenbCTBO, 1970. Tpy3neB, H. A. „Be^epa CepanHOHOBbix BpaTbeB", KHHra H PeBorac^HH, No. 2 (1922), pp. 110-111. H B a H O B , B. B. napTH3aHbi. I I o B e c T b . H3fl. „KOCMHCT", IleTep-6ypr, 1921. ' . HneTbie BeTpa. noBecTB. „3noxa", neTep6ypr, 1922. ronySHe n e c K H . P o M a H . B e p J i H H , 1923. . „0 ce6e KaK 06 HCKyccTBe", nHcaTeJTH 06 HCKyccTBe H o ce6e. CSopHHK cTaTefi. No. 1 (1924), pp. 55-63. TaftHoe TaHHbix. PaccKa3bi. MocKBa, 1927. 81 KaBepHH, B. A. KoHeu; Xa3H. PoMaH (naMHTH JIbBa JlyHixa) . ..KOBIU", No. 1 ( 1 9 2 5 ) , pp. 161-236. . „PeBH3op", 3Be3fla, No. 4 ( 1 9 2 6 ) , pp. 5-33. . „ABT06HOrpaCi)HH" B c60pHHKe IlHCaTSJTH . ABToSHorpa-$HH B nopTpeTti coBpeMeHHUx pyccKHX npo3anKOB. MocKBa, 1926. __. CTaTBH B c6opHHKe Kan MM nHUieM, JleHHHrpaa, 1930, pp. 59-74. HyHii, JI. H. „B nycTbiHe, PaccKa3", CepannoHOBH BpaTbH. AJibMaHax nepBbia. rieTepSypr, 1922. . „BHe 3axoHa, TpareflHH B 5 R. H 7 aKT.", Eecena, No. 1 ( 1 9 2 3 ) , pp. 43-125. . „Ha 3ana«", Eecega, No. 3 ( 1 9 2 3 ) , pp. 259-274. . „ropofl npaBflu, Ilbeca B 3 p,.", Eeceaa, No. 5 ( 1 9 2 4 ) , pp. 63- 1 0 1 . . „CepanHOHOBbi BpaTbH o ce6e", JlHTepaTypHbie 3anHCKH, No. 3 (1922) , pp. 25-31. (JlyHU, „no^eMy MHI CepnaHOHOBbi BpaTbH", pp. 30-31.) . „ A B T o 6 H o r p a c i ) H H " , B c6opHHKe riHcaTejiH. ABToSHorpa-$HH H nopTpeTbl COBpeMeHHblX pyCCKHX npo3anKOB. MOCKBa, 1926, pp. 169-171. HHKHTHH, H. H. AMepHKaHCKoe c^acTbe. PaccKaaH. n.eTep6ypr, 1922. . „fle3H", CepanHOHOBbi BpaTbH. AJibMaHax IlepBbift, 1922. EyHT. PaccKa3bi. IIeTep6ypr, 1 9 2 3 . H3JJ;. „Kpyr". nojieT. PaccKa3U. JleHHHrpafl, 1 9 2 5 . T H 3 . . „ABTo6Horpa$HH" , B cdopHHKe riHcaTejiH. A B T o 6 H o r p a -Cj)HH H nopTpeTbl COBpeMeHHblX pyCCKHX np03 3HKOB . MOCKBa, 1926, pp. 201-202. 82 rioJioHCKaH, E. r . CTHXH : „Ha naMHTb o- THJKGJIOM r o f l e . . . " , „CyxoH H ryjiKHfi meJiKHyji 6apa6aH...", CepannoHOBbi EpaTbH. 3arpaHH^Hbia AjiBMaHax, 1922. CJIOHHMCKHH, M. JI. LOecTOH C T p e j i K O B b i a . r. PaccKa3bi. IIeTep6ypr, „BpeMH", 1922. . MauiHHa SMepH. PaccKa3H. JleHHHrpan;, H3fl. „ A T e H e a " , 1924. . CTaTBH B CepHH 3BTOpCKHX 3 3MeTOK „CepanHOHOBbl EpaTbH o ce6e", JlHTepaTypHbie 3anncKH, No.3 ( 1 9 2 2 ) , p. 25. . n ABTo6HorpacJ)H^[ecKHe CBeRetmn" , B cSopHHKe IlHcaTejiH . A B T 0 6 H O r p a$HH H n O p T p e T b l COBpeMeHHblX pyCCKHX npo3anKOB. MocKBa, 1926. Pp. 285-286. . CTaTBH B c6opHHKe KaK Mbi nHmeM. JleHHHrpan;, 1930. Pp. 130-133. THXOHOB, H. C. ,,MaxHo. CTHXH", CepanHOHOBhi EpaTbH. 3arpaHH^HHR AJibMaHax, 1922. . Opga. CTHXH (1920-1921 r r . ) neTep6ypr. H3fl. M O C T p O B H T f l H S 1 ' , 1922. . IIOHCKH repoH (CTHXH 1 9 2 3 - 1 9 2 6 ) . JleHHHrpan;, 1927. . H35paHHbie CTHXH. MocKBa, 1928. . „KaK H pa6oTaio", JlHTepaTypHan y**e6a, No. 5 (1930), pp. 92-106. . CTaTBH B cSopHHKe KaK Mbi nnuieM, JleHHHrpan;, 1930. Pp. 134-142. . „ A B T o 6 H o r p a$Hf l ", CoBSTCKHe riHcaTejiH. ABTo6norpa-$HH B flByx TOMax (MocKBa, 1959), T . I I , pp. 426-433. OeflHH, K. A. ropofla H roflbi. PoMaH. JleHHHrpan;, 1924. ' . Caa. H3H. „neTporpafl", 1923. . r o p B K H a cpenH Hac: flBa,rr,rr,aTbie ronta. OrH3, MocKBa, 1943. 83 <&ep,KH, K. A. C i t i e s a n d Years. Novel. T r a n s l a t e d by M i c h a e l Scammell. New York, 1962. . ,,ABTo6HorpaHH" , I7.HcaTe.nH . ABTo6HorpacJ>HH H nopTpeTBi coBpeMeHHbix p y c c K H X n p o 3 a H K O B , MocKBa, 1926. . . . O e J l B e T O H O H3bIKe H K p H T H K e " , 3jBj23fla , No. 9 (1929). _ _ _ _ _ _ _ C T a T B H B „Cnope o coijHajibHOM 3 a K a 3 e " , Ile ^ a T b H P e B Q J u o q H H , KH. 1 (1929) , p p . 74-75. . „KaK H pa6oTaio", JlHTepaTypHan y^eSa, No. 4 (1930), p p . 111-118. . C T a T B H B c 6 o p H H K e K a K Mbi nHUieM (U3R. l ( r i H c a T e J i e H B JleHHHrpafle") , 1930, p p . 169-181. UIKJIOBCKHH, B . B. . . C e p a n H O H O B H S p a T B H " , KHWKHHIH yroji, No. 7 (1921), p p . 18-21. . C s H T H M S H T a j i b H o e nyTewecTBHe. BocnoMHHaHHH 1918-1923 r r . JleHHHrpan;, H3fl. „ A T e H e H " , 1924 . . „0 3omeHKe H 6oJibiuoH J i H T e p a T y p e " , MuxaHJi 3 o m e H K Q . CtaTbH H MaTepnajtbi. JleHHHrpan;, 1928. SELECTED BACKGROUND READINGS Alexandrovna, V. H i s t o r y of S o v i e t L i t e r a t u r e . Doubleday & Co. Inc., 1963. B a b e l , I . The C o l l e c t e d S t o r i e s . E d i t e d and T r a n s l a t e d by' Walter Morison. C l e v e l a n d : M e r i d i a n Books,, 1960. Barghoorn, F. C. The S o v i e t Image of the U n i t e d S t a t e s : A Study i n D i s t o r t i o n . New York: Ha r c o u r t , Brace, 1950. Bauer, R. A. The New Man i n S o v i e t Psychology. Cambridge: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1952. B e l o v , F. H i s t o r y o f a S o v i e t C o l l e c t i v e Farm. New York: Praeger, 1955. B l a c k , C y r i l E. The T r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f Russian S o c i e t y . Cambridge: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1960. B o r l a n d , H a r r i e t . S o v i e t L i t e r a r y Theory and P r a c t i c e d u r i n g the F i r s t F i v e - Y e a r P l a n : 1928-1932. New York: King's Crown P r e s s , 1950. Brown, Edward J . The P r o l e t a r i a n Episode i n Russian L i t e r a - t u r e . New York! Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1953. B r z e z i n s k i , Z. The Permanent Purge. Cambridge: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1956. C a r r , Edward H. A H i s t o r y of S o v i e t R u s s i a : The B o l s h e v i k R e v o l u t i o n 1917-1923. Volumes I and I I . London: Mac m i l l a n , 1951-1960. . A H i s t o r y o f S o v i e t R u s s i a : S o c i a l i s m i n One Country 1924-1926. Volumes I and I I . New York: The M a c m i l l a n Co., 1958-1960. Chizhevsky, Dmitry. "Comenius 1 L a b y r i n t h of the World: I t s themes and t h e i r s o u r c e s , " Harvard S l a v i c S t u d i e s , V o l . I (Cambridge, Mass., 1953). Da n z i g e r , M. K. and W. S. Johnson. An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o L i t e r a r y C r i t i c i s m . Boston: D. C. Heath & Co., 1961. de B a s i l y , N. R u s s i a Under S o v i e t Rule: Twenty Years o f B o l s h e v i k Experiment. London, A l l e n and Unwm, 19 38. 85 DeWitt, N. E d u c a t i o n and P r o f e s s i o n a l Employment i n the U.S.S. R. Washington: N a t i o n a l S c i e n c e Foundation, T961. Eastman, M. A r t i s t i n Uniform: A Study of L i t e r a t u r e and Bure a u c r a t i s m . London: A l l e n and Unwin, 1934. Eng-Liedmeier, A. S o v i e t L i t e r a r y C h a r a c t e r s ; an I n v e s t i g a -t i o n i n t o the P o r t r a y a l o f S o v i e t Men i n Russian Prose, 1917-1953. The Hague: Mouton, 19 59. E r . l i c h , A lexander. The S o v i e t I n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n Debate, 1924-19 28. Cambridge: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1960. E r l i c h , V i c t o r . Russian Formalism. H i s t o r y — D o c t r i n e . T h i r d E d i t i o n . The Hague: Mouton, 1969. F a i n s o d , M e r l e . How R u s s i a Is Ruled. Cambridge: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1964. F i s c h e r , L. The S o v i e t s i n World A f f a i r s . P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1960. ( F i r s t p u b l i s h e d by Random House, 1930.) . Machines and Men i n R u s s i a . London, Cape: H a r r i s o n Smith, 1932. Freeman, Joseph. The S o v i e t Worker: An Account o f the Economic, S o c i a l and C u l t u r a l S t a t u s of Labor i n the U.S.S.R. New York: L i v e r i g h t Inc., 1932. Guerney, B. G. Treasury o f Russian L i t e r a t u r e . New York: The Vanguard P r e s s , 1943, pp. 1031-1037. Hazard, John N. S o v i e t Housing Law. New Haven: Y a l e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 19 39. Hunt, R. N. C. The Theory and P r a c t i c e o f Communism. London, New York: Macmillan,. 19 50. I n k e l e s , A. P u b l i c O p i n i o n i n S o v i e t R u s s i a . Cambridge: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 19 50. , and R. A. Bauer. The S o v i e t C i t i z e n . Cambridge: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1959. Mathewson, R. W., J r . The P o s i t i v e Hero i n Russian L i t e r a -t u r e . New York, 19 58. 86 Mead, Margaret. S o v i e t A t t i t u d e s Toward A u t h o r i t y . New York: McGraw-Hill, 19 51. Medvedev, Roy A. L e t H i s t o r y Judge. The O r i g i n s and Conse-quences o f S t a l i n i s m . A l f r e d A. Knopf, N. Y., 1972. Meyendorff, A. Baron. The Background of the Russian Revolu-t i o n . New York: Henry H o l t , 1929. M i r s k y , D. S. A H i s t o r y o f Russian L i t e r a t u r e . New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1955. Muchnic, Helen. From Gorky t o Pasternak. New York: Random House, 1961. O u l a n o f f , Hongor. The S e r a p i o n B r o t h e r s . Theory and P r a c t i c e . The Hague, P a r i s : Mouton & Co., 19661 P i p e r , D. G. D. V. A. K a v e r i n . A S o v i e t W r i t e r ' s Response to the Problem o f Commitment. Duquesne U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1970. P i p e s , R. (e d . ) . The Russian I n t e l l i g e n t s i a . New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1961. Robinson, G e r o i d . R u r a l R u s s i a under the Old Regime. New York: Longmans, Green, 1932. Seton-Watson, Hugh. The P a t t e r n of Communist R e v o l u t i o n . Second ed. 19 60. ( P u b l i s h e d i n U.S.A. under the t i t l e : From L e n i n t o Khrushchev.) New York: Praeger. S c h a p i r o , L. The Government and P o l i t i c s o f the S o v i e t Union. New York: Random House, 19 65. S c h l e s i n g e r , Rudolf. Changing A t t i t u d e s i n S o v i e t R u s s i a — The F a m i l y . London: Routledge & Kegan P a u l , 1949. Simmons, E. J . (ed.). C o n t i n u i t y and Change i n Russian and S o v i e t Thought. Cambridge: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1955. (ed . ) . Through the G l a s s of S o v i e t L i t e r a t u r e ; Views o f R u s s i a n S o c i e t y . New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1953. Russian F i c t i o n and S o v i e t Ideology: I n t r o d u c t i o n to F e d i n , Leonov and Sholokhov. New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1958. 87 Slonim, M. Modern Russian L i t e r a t u r e from Chekhov to the P r e s e n t . New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1953. (pp. 303-306, and o t h e r b r i e f r e f e r e n c e s . ) S o v i e t Russian L i t e r a t u r e . W r i t e r s and Problems. New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1964. Towster, J u l i a n . P o l i t i c a l Power i n the U.S.S.R. 1917-1947. New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1948. V u c i n i c h , A. S o v i e t Economic I n s t i t u t i o n s . S t a n f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1952. ABepSax, JI. JI. KyjiBTypnan peBOJHou,HH H Bonpoctj coBpeMeHHOft jiHTepaTypta. MocKBa, JleHHHrpan: rocn3jiaT, 1928. TopSa^eB, r . O^epKH c o B p e M e H H O f i p y c c K o f i jiKTepaTypbi. JleHHHrpafl: TocH3jj;aT, 1928. TnaBa IV, pp. 76-88: „CepanHOHOBbi BpaTBH". EptuoB, JI. O. C o B e T C K a n caTHpnqecKaH n p o 3 a 20-x r o f l O B . H3n. AKaneMHH HayK, 19 60. KBHTOBCKHH, A. noaTH^ecKHH cjioBapB. MocKBa: H374. CoBeTCKan 3HU,HKnonej4HH, 19 66. JleacHeB, A. H J4. TopSoB. JlHTepaTypa peBomouHOHHoro jtecHTH- J i e T H H . XapBKOB, 1929. JlHSeflHHCKHH, KDpHH. reHepaiiBHbie 3aaaqH nponeTapcKofl jiHTepa-Typbi. MOCKBa, JIeHHHrpa,a: OrH3 , 1931. MypaTOBa, K. IlepHOflHKa no JiHTepaType H H C K y c c T B y 3a ronBi PeBOJiionHH: 1917-1932. JleHHHrpan: H3fl. AxaneMHH Hayx CCCP, 1933. IIOJIHHCKHH, BaJiepHfi. BOnpOCbl COBpeMeHHOR KpHTHKH . MOCKBa, 1927, pp. 156-162. T n M O$eeB, JI. H. H H. BeHrpoB. KpaTKHH c J i O B a p B J i H T e p a T y p o -BeanecKHX TepMHHOB. y^:nejJirH3, 19 63. TPOIIKHH, J leB . JtoTepaTypa H PeBOJiionHH. ( J l H T e p a T y p H u e nonyT^ H K H peBOJiwmiH. CepanHOHOBbi BpaTBH.) MocKBa: H3fl. KpacHan HOBB, 1923. ARTICLES Dobb, Mau r i c e . "The S i g n i f i c a n c e o f the F i v e - Y e a r P l a n . " The S l a v o n i c (and E a s t European) Review, X, No. 28 (June, 1931), pp. 80-89. Edgerton, W i l l i a m . "The Serapion B r o t h e r s : An E a r l y S o v i e t C o n t r o v e r s y , " The American S l a v i c and Ea s t European Review, V I I I , No. 1 (February, 1949), pp. 47-64. Lu d k e v i c h , S. " S o v i e t L i t e r a t u r e as the F o r e p o s t o f World L i t e r a t u r e , " i n M. A p l e s i n (ed.), L i t e r a t u r e o f the Peoples o f the U.S.S.R. VOKS I l l u s t r a t e d Almanac, Nos. 7-8 (1934), pp. 20-26. McLean, Hugh, J r . " V o r o n s k i j and VAPP," The American S l a v i c and E a s t European Review, V I I I , No. 3 (1949), pp. 185-200. S c o t t , H. G. (ed.). Problems o f S o v i e t L i t e r a t u r e . Report and Speeches a t the F i r s t W r i t e r s ' Congress, Lawrence. London, 1935 ( I n c l u d i n g A. Zhdanov's speech: " S o v i e t L i t e r a t u r e — the R i c h e s t i n Ideas, the Most P r o g r e s s i v e L i t e r a t u r e i n the World," Moscow, 1934). Wixley, Anthony ( t r a n s l . ) . "The F i r s t C r u i s e , " I n t e r n a t i o n a l L i t e r a t u r e , No. 1 (1932), pp. 3-15. B a p M H H , A. T. „nyTH 3 0 m e H K H " , MHXaHJI 3omeHKO : CTaTBH H MaTepHajibi. AKaneMHH, JleHHHrpan, 1928, pp. 27-50. BHUHJIJIH, n. M. „3oiueHKO H roronb", ^ H C J i a (nappm) KH. 6 (1932), p p . 211-215. BHHOrpaflOB, B. „H3bIK 3omeHKH", MHXaHJI 3 0 L q e H K O : CTaTBH H MaTepnajm. AKan;eMHH. JleHHHrpani/ 1928, pp. 51-92. BOPOHCKHH, AneKcaHnp K. „JlHTepaTypHbie OTKJIHKH", KpaCHan HOBB No. 2 (1923), (pen. 3omeHKO „Ko3a"). ropBKna, M. O JiHTepaType. CTaTBH H pe^H 1928-1936. MOCKBa, 1937. T r a n s l a t e d (only p a r t l y ) by E d i t h Bone: L i t e r a t u r e and L i f e : A S e l e c t i o n from the W r i t i n g s o f Maxim Gorky. London, New York: Hutchinson I n t e r n a t i o n a l Authors, 19 46. 3aMHTHH, EBreHHH. CTaTBH B c6opHHKe KaK MBi nHineM. JleHHHrpafl: H3fl. nHcaTejien, 1930, p p 29-47.
Thesis/Dissertation
eng
Slavonic Studies
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use.
Graduate
Mikhail Zoshchenko and the Serapion brothers
Text