CARLOS RIPOLL
579
meant that the government would judge cultural activity and literary
creation on the basis of usefulness to the party.
The purges of intellectuals intensified immediately after the
disastrous 1970
~ugar
cane harvest and continued in succeeding years.
All those who did not conform to "parameters" established by the De–
partment of Culture as standards of conduct, morality, thought, and
preferences were to be excluded from a variety of occupations and
professions. Numerous members of the faculty at the University of
Havana were dismissed in the early 1970s for failure to fit the pre–
scribed mold. Several of those singled out were professors of philoso–
phy who were also editors of
Pensamiento Cdtieo,
the only remaining
journal permitted to print interpretations of Marxist-Leninist doctrine
that deviated from the official line. With the purge of its editors,
Pensamiento Cdtieo
ceased to exist. Similar purges were carried out at
cultural institutions and government offices, in theatre and dance
companies, and in the student body at the University of Oriente. At
the same time, the persecution of writers continued. Once labelled
"parametrados" (misfits), some were expelled from cultural organi–
zations and dismissed from their jobs. Others were denied permission
to publish their works and shunted into obscurity. Still others landed
in jail.
In this atmosphere, those who wished to continue writing pro–
fessionally had to submit to official directives. As editors and judges
in literary contests, they could not express their reservations about
the quality of the works presented as long as those works satisfied
requirements of subject and taste. To secure their professional sur–
vival, many felt obliged to keep watch over and inform on their
colleagues, since such behavior was considered the best proof of rev–
olutionary conscience.
Those who chose not to submit or whose past did not clearly be–
speak loyalty to the government were excluded from cultural life.
The number of writers who were restricted in varying degrees or si–
lenced altogether is easily gleaned from a review of Cuban bibliogra–
phies from the 1960s on.
In Communist countries writers generally have three ways of
making their works known: "state publishing," "self-publishing," and
"publishing
abroad"-gosizdat, samizdat,
and
tamizdat-as
they are
called in the Soviet Union.
In Cuba writers are prepared for state publishing in
talleres liter–
arios,
literary workshops scattered throughout the island and pat–
terned after the literary studios promoted by Lunacharsky after the
