310
SOVIET COMMENT
But every free association (and a party too) is also free to expel such
members who use the party's platform
to
preach anti-party views. Free–
dom of speech and of the press must be absolute. But the freedom of
association must also be absolute." By 1934, as Mr. Dementiev should
know, there was no longer freedom of association in the Soviet Union,
nor is there to this day. It disappeared together with freedom of speech
and freedom of the press, for which Lenin was so concerned, in 1905
(not as Mr. Dementiev rightly points out in 1906). The part of Lenin's
article which appears to appeal mostly to Mr. Dementiev is the one
which refers
to
literary prostitution in the West. Literary prostitution
is
no doubt a feature of all societies, but at least literary prostitutes
in
countries not controlled by a single party have a wide choice of clients;
and it is even possible for those who wish to tread the path of what
they hold to be virtue.
Dementiev says that the dissolution of RAPP did not come out of
the blue and was preceded by criticism in the party press beginning in
1929-1930. We have no knowledge of such criticism, and would
be
glad
to have examples from Dementiev, particularly for the years 1929-1930,
in which we seem to remember RAPP was so all-powerful that even
the great Mayakovsky was forced to abandon his own literary organiza–
tion and apply for membership in RAPP.
Dementiev's objection to our statement that the period 1947-1953
was one of "utter sterility" scarcely needs a reply. It is true that some
of the people he mentions did indeed "make their way" into Soviet
literature during this period, and that some of them, like Vera Panova
and Victor Nekrasov, have emerged as writers of stature since Stalin's
death, but what they wrote during the last years of his life was, through
no fault of theirs, scarcely a major contribution to letters.
If
Dementiev
imagines that Vsevolod Kochetov, who made his debut in this period, is
to be regarded as anything but a linear descendant of Grech and
Bulgarin, then his sense of literary values and of elementary human
decency must indeed be atrophied.
Finally we must comment on the offensive remark at the end of
Dementiev's article in which he implies that we have nothing but
contempt for Soviet writers and for Soviet literature as a whole. In fact
the whole point of our anthology and of the introduction was to il–
lustrate as vividly as possible to American and English readers that the
majority of Soviet writers, with certain notorious exceptions, have
courageously maintained the high standards of their tradition.
Max Hayward
