Evening star., 1930-11-30
GAG ON LITERATURE
in RUSSIA is FIRM
Soviet Regime Demands Propaganda in
ALI Writing Efforts, Thereby
Killing Originality.

OAS
q revolutionary art"
In artistic clubs of Moscow endless
debates have been raging over the queS-
ton, What landscape, feminine beauty,
musical rhythm or verse are proletartan
and revolutionary and what reaction
ary?" In the quest of revolutionary
forms" Soviet Bohemiars literally have
not left stone unturned. V. Meyer
hold, the famous theatrical producer,
'revolutioniZes" the texts of classtcal'
plays and makes his actors work during
the performance as physical laborers.
Some of the artists draw only machine
like compositions QndustrializationD
"Proletarian poets" express the spirit OF
collectivism by using in their poems
I'VE" instead of the individualistic II"
And so forth-absurditie to which So
Wet artists go in this direction cannot
be enumerated.
A considerable number of Soviet prose
writer's also have Succumbed to 1t. In
an attempt to find dynamic, revolu-
tionary STYLE" they distort the Russian
grammar and language, invent hideous
neologiSmS, resort to all imaginable
rule hopelessly spoils their narrative.
State Controls All Publications.
Yet this is not the only cause of the
artistic weakness of Soviet literature.
Like industry. literature is a state
controlled activity in Russia. This con-
troll Is exercised not so much by the
Soviet government in the technical
sense of the word as by the real ruler
of the country-by the Communist
party.
At its yearly congresses in Moscow
the Communist party always reviews,
among other things, the situation on
the literary front" (this being an off,
cial term), and adopts resolutions or
dering literature to follow now Such
and-such line" and now another line.
Russian publishing houses, magazines
and papers are nationaliZed and their
responsible editors all are Communists.
The resolution of the latest party con-
greSs is law to them; they accept or
reject manuscripts in strict accordance
with its stipulations. Thus literature is
held tight in the grip of this 'selective
ma achinery"
In so far as pure politics go, the Com
munist control is bearable. Doubtless q
writer cannot declare himself an enemy
of the Soviets: that merely would land
him in the hands of the o. G. p. U.
(the political police). But If he SYM
pathizeS with the Soviet regime in prin-
ciple he even Is permitted to Satirize its
minor defects, such as the bribery, dis
honesty and bureaucratiSm Of Soviet
officials. Communists control not only
the writer's political views. but also his
historical, social and any
other views. And this censorship of
ideas Is very oppressive because it
amounts to q systematic and relentless
forcing of the writer's mind and work
into the ProcruStean bed of the "L.enin-
iSt doctrine"
Intellectual Class Scorned.
The writer's hands are tied, no mat
ter what subject, what problem he
tackles. He writes a novel in which in
tellectuals (or noblemen) of the old
regime figure alongside of workmen.
Woe to him II he makes his intellec-
tuals tiny bit more attractive than his
workmen! This is obvious Rlorifica-
ton Of the past and hidden counter
revolution; the novel Is rejected and
the author looked at askance. A poet
writes an excellent lyrical poem; the
editor Of magazine to which he takes
It shrugs his shoulders regretfully:
Cannot be printed. We have no space
for psychological subleties, comrade.
Why don't you write something socially
the Chinese proletariat; what subject
for q poetl" (Such cases are told Of
by A. Veressayev. Soviet writer.)
Condemned, likewise, are all love
novels which are free of motives of
"class struggle; indeed, I do not know
If single love novel, in the precise
meaning Of the word, has been pub
lished In these 13 years in Moscow.
For, according to the communist gospel.
"love does not exist; to write about it
means Ito resuscitate socially harm
ful bourgeois deceit" and this is "cul-
tural counter-revolution." (The de-
ferent matter; although communists in
theory do not approve of lust, they well
come this anarchy as 'the passing to
the new order of things.D
Originality Is Condemned.
Finally-and this is most essential
the Communist control eradicates from
the writer all originality of thought
For to be original means to deviate from
the holy dogma of communism. All
new attitudes toward life, all new per-
ceptions of the world are dubbed heresy.
1t is with extreme indignation that e.
Blum, q Communist critic, accuses q
writer of having laid aside the Marxist
principles" and of trying to think for
himself" And what an uproar started
against A. Voronsky, q Communist
thinker. when he dared to say that i'm
mediate impressions (and not the Boil
shevist reason) are the real bases of
artn Let 1t be noted that literary
criticism in Russia is, as some put It,
the literary o. @. p. ": its main
function is to sniff and denounce de
viations from Marxist line"
1t Is this slavery to communism that
blights Soviet literature. With but rare
exceptions Soviet novels remind one of
spiritual prisons; they are drab and
lifeless; there Is no Joy in them, no
fresh air. Afraid to think, afraid to be
human instead of being "class con-
scious," even talented writer becomes
impersonal-and therefore impotent. It
is typical that In these 13 years no
Soviet novel has been really successful
abroad, although quite few have been
translated. Foreign readers instinctively
shrink from these products Of convict
labor"
And things go from bad to worse In
times OF the new economic policy"
Communists were comparatively liberal.
The Communist Congress of 1925
preached tolerance" on both the eco
nomic and on literary fronts" It was
then that Soviet prose lived through its
Spring" But during these last two
years Of Stains communist offensive"
SLdLe cOntTOl over literature has DccIl
tightening further and further
Literature must serve the indus
triAlization of the country"-such Is
the new slogan. Writers are compelled
to write So-called production novels, I"
which are the latest invention Of Mos
COW. The subject of such works is the
building of some factory or the organ
ization of a collective farm" the fates
Of individual heroes playing only sec
ondary role. The writer must show IN
such works the "socialistic enthusiasm
Of the masses. For instance, immense
dificulties, lack Of materials, dishonesty
of some offlcials, ETC., rendered the
building Of the factory almost impossi-
BILE: and yet, thanks TO the 'proletarian
heroism" Of such-and-such workmen,