The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-06-28


great writer's resemble each other
only in their lives. Both came from
poor, ignorant parents. Neither got
any training or education to speak
Of. Both were vagabonds.
In early youth they began to feel
the burden Of life. AS boys they had
been thrown on their own resources,
condemned to hard toll for their sus-
tenance. They tried their hands at
all sorts of trades, and engaged in
dozen occupations, enduring humilia
ton, insult, starvation and misery.
They wallowed in the mire of the
worst elements of society, in the
darkest dens of the underworld, and
witnessed the most nauseating spec
tacles of sin and crime. They wan
dered incessantly, got entangled in
numerous adventures and encountered
all sorts and conditions of men. More
than once they stood on the brink of
a precipice. Eventually they strug
gled out of the noxious quagmires,
and by sheer innate force hewed their
way thru to a bright comprehensive
life, acquiring extensive culture, de-
veloping conspicuous talent and be
coming world-renowned writer's.
Thus far the resemblance between
Jack London and Maxine Gorky hold.
In their creative art they often stand
in contrast to each other. Altho in
their conception of life both were led
to Socialism, yet they greatly differ
in its application to life. While with
London it is purely external, with
Gorky it is entirely internal.
The past American tramp" con-
ceives life altogether differently from
the past Russian Bossiak.* The for
mer sees in man all that is bad, all
that is savage and beastly; the latter
sees in man only the beautiful, the
noble, the ideal. The main thing with
London is the accidental circum-
stance and not the man. With Gorky
the circumstance is incidental and
secondary; the essential thing is man,
his inner life, his souls strivings.
Londoa's heroes adapt themselves
to their surroundings, but Gorky's
heroes reach above the surroundings;
they strive to change and dominate
their environment. London's writings
breathe deep pessimism; Gorky's-
deep optimism.
Gorky is now a thorough-going col
lectfvist; he believes in the inexhaust-
ible force and unlimited power of the
COLLECTIVELY, and he embodies this idea
in his creations. At one time he was
a pure individualist. Then the indi-
yidual personality played the primary
rule in his work; then he held that
the will of the individual surpassed
everything. But even in his works of
that period there is no similarity be-
tween him and London In his crea-
tive art London was and has remained
an individualist, notwithstanding his
strong personal belief in Collect
ivism as conceived in the Socialist
philosophy. His individualism, how
ever, is not the same as that of Gorky.
Gorky's individualism is more philo-
sophie, more abstract; it has reference
to universal world problems The in
dividualism of London, on the other
hand, is more practical, more con-
crete, applicable to definite facts.
Fundamentally, London, in all his
works, is an anarchist, and therein
consists the contradiction between
London the artist and London the
man. Both are tremendously inter
esting, but they do not harmonic. On
the other hand, Gorky the artist is the
very embodiment of Gorly the man.
The Russian Bossiak in vivid colors
has portrayed the barefooted vaga-
bonds, and the American TRAMP"
has, in bold strokes painted the
tramps. But what a difference be-
tween the two types of vagabonds?
Gorky's illiterate KonovaIov attains
to high moral altitude. Brought up
in the worst circumstances abound
ing with filthy and disgusting con.
duct, he is nevertheless purity per.
sonifed. His environment has not ex-