552
PARTISAN R.EVIEW
the arts. It would be foolish of us not to take note of this , but this does
not mean that we are about to capitulate.
Question:
Many writers have said that history repeats itself; perhaps that
has been true. If history were to repeat itself in the former Soviet Union,
what should we expect?
Joseph Brodsky:
First of all, history never does repeat itself, for the very
simple reason that one of the primary mediums of history is murder: each
time a different man dies. I think that you are asking your question more
narrowly, though: whether Russia is going to return to its former cir–
cumstances. In my view, there is no chance of that whatsoever. The
processes that have taken place there are entirely irreversible . That is, you
may in some sense have some resurfacing of one or another version of
Communist rule, but it will be nothing compared to what transpired in
the course of the last seventy years. Russia is going to be a creeping
disaster for the next decade or so; the trouble is that geography, at least
European geography, doesn't leave history very many options. The big–
ger the country, the smal1er the number of its options. The options are
either to be strong or intimidating and wring the necks of its neighbors
like dishrags, or to be insignificant, splintered, impoverished. For seventy
years in this century, Russia has played the former role; now it is time for
it to play the second role. By the year 1995, I think, Russia wil1 be
enjoying, if that is the word, this more insignificant role.
Question:
I represent several Russian writers in the United States.
Mr.
Brodsky and Mr. Milosz, do you have any advice
to
give your colleagues
across the Atlantic about working in a market economy?
Czeslaw Milosz:
The worry that book publishing would suffer with–
out state subsidies seems
to
be unconfirmed, since there is a new
proliferation of publishing enterprises. Of course, the government subsidies
for writers were a considerable factor in the past. There is great trouble,
because, for instance, under the Communist system, al1 writers received
pensions. These pensions are still being maintained but are threatened. At
the moment, in the East writers and their community are groping for
new solutions, because the axiom there had been that culture should be
subsidized by the state; it should not be left to private enterprise and
private initiative. This is very deeply ingrained, not necessarily because of
Communism alone. Take for example the theater in Poland and
Czechoslovakia. It was a national institution. It served to protect the
national identity, since it was an institution of the language. And so
