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 pro­l 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 spark­l 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 enthu­s 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.

. ,,ABTo6Horpa<i>HH" , 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 Conse­quences 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 Revolu­t 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.