478
have become even more unendur–
able." Ah
I
So now we know that
because So lzhenitsyn demands
spiritual and intellectual liberties,
he is in fact helping the omnipotent
state strangle the sou l of his nation
even more. Mr. Belotserkovsky has
effectively squared the circle and
called it a triangle in the very same
breath.
I
hope that in the future
Parti–
san Review
will publish a perceptive
critique ofMr. Solzhenitsyn's high–
ly stimulating thoughts, if not a
piece by the author himself. In the
past his ideas have unfortunately
been distorted to the point of ludi–
crousness-a fact he has comment–
ed upon many times.
Terry Copple, Moscow, Idaho
Mr. Belotserkovsky replies:
Terry Copple writes that I
accuse So lzhenitsyn of being
against science. But even in the
passage quoted from my article,
what is said is something quite
different ; namely that Solzhenit–
syn and his sympathizers reject the
scientific
approach to social and
economic problems.
I see this, for
instance, in the fact that Solzhen–
itsyn confuses Marxist
ideology,
which - however one regards it-is
not practised by the CPSU, with
the Marxist
phraseology
which the
CPSU does emp loy. I also see this
in the fact that Solzhenitsyn hopes
that a renunciation of this phrase-
ology without any serious change
in the socio-economic structure
and without any democratization
wi ll be capable of radically alter–
ing life in Russia. Academician
Andrei Sakharov has criticized
Solzhenitsyn on the same points.
Terry Copp le also distorts the
conclusion to which I come in my
art icle. The words quoted (about
the danger of Solzhenitsyn' s ideas
and proposals) are concerned not
with his request for freedom in
literature and art (which,
I
believe ,
impossible without political free–
dom) but with his main idea for
replacing" Marxism" with nation–
a li sm and Orthodox religion ,
while
retaining authon"tanan rule.
This dream which Solzhenitsyn
cherishes for Russia is also consid –
ered extremely dangerous by Aca–
demician Sakharov, by Mihajlo
Mihailov (who has called Solzhen–
itsyn's ideas both anti-Russian and
anti-Christian, writing in
Novoe
msskoe slovo
and
Posev,
1974),
by
Levitin-Krasnov, the religious writ–
er (in
Zemlya dybom [The World
on End], samizdat,
1974) ,
and by
many others.
Terry Copple may not be in
agreement with this, but , there
again, one does not need to distort
the meaning of our polemic and
wanton ly manipulate quotations.
