THE CULTURE CONFERENCE
507
can intellectuals are now willing to work with them, some because of in–
tellectual conviction and others because it is no longer safe or fashion–
able ; the only literary highbrow of wide reputation who spoke at the
conference was F. O. Matthiessen. Having lost most of its support in
both intellectual circles and the labor movement, the C.P. retains strength
only in the urban middle classes, particularly the professions and the mass
culture and amusement industries. There can be for it no adequate com–
pensation for losses in the unions, but in some ways the C.P. finds Holly–
wood and Broadway a profitable substitute for the intelligentsia. The
Broadway people are less troublesome, ask fewer questions than the in–
tellectuals; they are less prone to fool with notions about independent
thought; and they have much more money to contribute. Yet this shift
from quality has certain disadvantages: the Stalinists could find no
"big name" intellectual-no Dos Passos or Richard Wright or Edmund
Wilson-to lead off at the conference. That they were forced to use such
intellectual fly-weights as Rogge and Thackrey is a telling indication of
how serious has been their recent decline.
The two ideologies at the conference, the outright Stalinist one and
the other which, for lack of a better label, I have called the Schuman–
Rogge position, were not in conflict but neither were they in com–
plete harmony. Fadeyev, head of the Russian delegation and the warden
who runs the Russian "Writers Union," severely and with obvious pleas–
ure chastized Schuman for his unfavorable remarks about Russia. (Be–
hind Fadeyev's behavior there was probably a certain non-political fac–
tor: how the commissar loves to lord it over the deviating "civilized"
foreigners. . . . ) Officially, however, the two ideologies melted into
One emotional whine: a call for "cultural understanding" and "peace."
The phrase "cultural understanding" is one of the more vicious bits
of obscurantist political verbiage. We are supposed to believe that the
international crisis arose from a misunderstanding ... the reception on
the phone was bad, perhaps, and the Americans and Russians did nol
hear each other rightly .. . if only the Americans read a few more Rus–
sian novels and the Russians realized that there
are
good Americans
who want to share sincerely ... to share in what? ... well, in cultural
understanding. Similarly, the word "peace" was repeated endlessly, as
if in some desperate incantation. Yet what did the word refer to at
this conference, other than the Stalinists' program for Russian conquest
and the all too legitimate fears and yearnings of the innocents?
The audience, one felt, was uneasy. Picket lines outside, opposi–
tionist intellectuals both in the hotel and the conference, attacks on
Russia by
our
speakers- was this the emotional solace and bolstering
