WRITERS IN EXILE
35
VIKTOR NEKRASSOV : But what signs do you have to think that
way? What grounds for such optimistic thoughts?
EFIM ETKIND: The only reason I have been able to cite until now
is historical development, which has gone in one direction, despite
possible zigzags. I am sure that there are always zigzags in history,
but I still believe in history, despite the fact that this morning some–
one said that perhaps history does not exist at all. So my optimism
stems from an examination of historical laws and the historical de–
velopment of the past.
WILLIAM PHILLIPS: Mr. Grigorenko may have to leave early for
personal reasons, and he would like to speak.
GENERAL GRIGORENKO: I am also a democrat. But I'm very
much afraid of being the only one who is right, very afraid. I doubt
whether I'm right, even though I'm a democrat. Do you think that
the person who tries to prove that he is the only one who is right and
that everyone else is wrong would be better in power than the pres–
ent rulers? I think that a broad discussion should be conducted, and
I think that my opponent is right only in the measure that I am right.
Of all the speeches I have heard, I was unpleasantly struck only by
the one in which Maximov was criticized while Siniavski was praised.
If
I received such praise I would not be pleased. I could take the
label, Soviet, from Maximov and pin it on the person who spoke
here. I think that probably half of those present here have never read
Rhinoceri.
Nothing was said about it, except that it was Soviet. I
think that we must avoid this labeling.
To tell the truth, there is another phenomenon that I don't like,
that
samizdat
has made its appearance at this conference, which is
abominable. Here any sort of publication can be created and used to
make trivial attacks on serious newspapers . Create your own news–
paper and then attack! Look how many we had in New York. They
sprang up everywhere like mushrooms after a rain. In the Soviet
Union
samizdat
is a heroic feat, but here , it is a petty squabble.
One more thing. My friend Korzhavin spoke with much praise
about my book, but he did question the title. He said that the book
was one thing and the title another. Here the author is at fault for
not being able to show the connection. But the reader has to play his
part. Misunderstandings arise because terms get mixed up. In the
Russian language "underground" and "illegal" battles are very simi–
lar concepts. Solidarity is not underground. Solidarity has now be–
come illegal, but it operates openly on the streets. The underground
