ZIGZAGS IN SOVIET CULTURAL POLICY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-00927A004100010004-4
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Sequence Number: 4
• Content Type: REPORT

lease 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-00927A004100010004-4
&'1122-pl M
Nwo~
OCI No. 0284/63B
Copy No. 81
SPECIAL REPORT
OFFICE OF CURRENT INTELLIGENCE
ZIGZAGS IN SOVIET CULTURAL POLICY
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
EyA~OPIICDF Pages
SECRET
GROUP I Excluded from automatic
downgrading and declassification
Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-OP927A004100010004-4
 Approved For ER-elease 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-009204100010004-4
THIS MATERIAL CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECT-
ING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES
WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE LAWS,
TITLE 18, USC, SECTIONS 793 AND 794, THE TRANSMIS-
SION OR REVELATION OF WHICH IN ANY MANNER TO
AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW.
This document MUST NOT BE RELEASED TO FOREIGN
GOVERNMENTS, If marked with specific dissemination
controls in accordance with the provisions of DCID 1/7,
the document must be handled within the framework of
the limitation so imposed.
Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-00927AO04100010004-4
 Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-00927A004100010004-4
%nor
SECRET
In marked contrast to its crackdown on the
liberals in March, the Soviet regime has recently
reverted to a public posture of relative neutral-
ity between conserative and liberal cultural groups.
Nonconformity has been muffled for the time being,
and campaigning for orthodoxy in the arts is being
left, in the main, to the hard-core conservatives.
The regime seems to have settled for a few ambig-
uously phrased recantations extracted from young
writers and artists and for the recent silence of
the older ones. There is little evidence, however,
that this is more than a temporary truce in the
liberal intelligentsia's struggle since 1953 against
regime controls. Still scheduled for 18 June is
a party central committee plenum on "ideology."
Guilt for Crimes Under Stalin
The latest cultural storm
stemmed from Khrushchev''s de-
cision last fall to permit fur-
ther literary exposds of the
suffering under Stalin. In
mid-October 1962 he reportedly
told a group of writers that
de-Stalinization (which he did
not define) was not a short-
term campaign but a policy.
The anniversary of the removal
of Stalin's body from the mau-
soleum in Red Square on 21 Oc-
tober was marked by Pravda's
publication of Yevgeny
Yevtushenko's poem, "Stalin's
Heirs," and was followed by a
wave of anti-Stalin literature.
As a result, art, sculpture,
and music were quickly infused
with a sense of increased free-
dom of creativity and long-
hidden experimental works were
brought out for public dis-
cussion.
SECRET
More than artistic exper-
iment was involved, however.
For many Soviet intellectuals,
the question of guilt for the
crimes committed under Stalin
has not been solved by the
party's bland explanations--
in 1953 that it was all Beria,
in 1956 that it was all Beria
and Stalin, and in 1961 that
it was Beria, Stalin, and their
"accomplices," Malenkov, Molotov,
and Kaganovich. Official in-
sistence that no one knew what
was going on until the "truth"
was "revealed" in 1956 has
constituted a special sticking
point. The older intellectuals
remember. Moreover, some of
the "rehabilitated" have sur-
vived to return to a society
where their old persecutors
are still in positions of
authority.
Aleksey Romanov now holds
a string of party and state
titles, including first deputy
chairman of the Central Com-
mittee's Ideological Department,
Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-OD927A004100010004-4
 Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-00927A004100010004-4
SECRET
which is responsible for con-
formity among intellectuals.
During World War II, however,
he was the secret police officer
responsible for the arrest and
imprisonment of a schoolteacher
turned soldier, Aleksandr
Solzhenitsyn. Twenty years
later, the "rehabilitated"
Solzhenitsyn returned to Moscow
as the author of the account of
prison camp life, One Day in
the Life of Ivan Denisovich,
published last fall, reportedly
with Khrushchev's personal ap-
proval. Presumably Solzhenitsyn
will some day face Romanov.
Soviet intellectuals have
identified the most vocal cul-
tural conservatives--Vsevelod
Kochetov, Anatoly Sofronov, and
Nikolay Gribachev--as among the
initiators of the 1948 anti-
Semitic campaign against "cos-
mopolitanism." Literary critic
Aleksandr Borshchagovsky, who
was arrested in 1948 as a
"homeless cosmopolitan," has
returned to Moscow as one of
the staunchest supporters of
the young liberals, confronting
his old accusers whenever writ-
ers meet professionally.
Many of the younger writers
and artists are or claim to be
children of Stalin's victims--
the "unjustly repressed"--with
bitter memories of murdered
parents and ruined childhoods.
Their ambivalent attitude to-
ward the older generation was
expressed by novelist Vasily
Aksenov last November: "It is
true that we feel the need for
some sort of accounting with
our elders: how could they
allow 1937 to happen! Many of
them allowed their holy causes
and slogans to be used for
unworthy purposes. But this is
not our only attitude toward
our elders. There is also
the fact that they were the
martyrs of the cult of person-
ality. In our eyes this pro-
vides them with a sort of halo."
The guilt of Stalin's as-
sistants, in lowly positions
as well as high, is an emotion-
charged issue. According to
reports in early 1962, liberals
in the Writers Union were de-
termined to punish some 40 to
50 of their colleagues for
having used police oppression
to further their own careers
during Stalin's purges of the
intellectuals. Three conserv-
atives, Yakov Yelsburg, Nikolay
Lesyuchevsky, and Vladimir
Yermilov, reportedly headed
the list. The regime refused
to countenance anything so
widespread, but did release
Yelsburg's dossier to a Writ-
ers Union commission for inves-
tigation. On 27 November an ob-
scure Moscow literary paper
carried the news of Yelsburg's
expulsion from the Writers
Union for having acted as a
volunteer provocateur and in-
former during the purges.
A Winter of Struggle
The first storm warning
for the liberals came on 1 De-
cember, when Khrushchev was
introduced to Soviet experi-
mental painting and sculpture.
There were widespread rumors
among Moscow intellectuals that
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-OP927A004100010004-4
 Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-00927A004100010004-4
Nw~ %0
SE CRE T
his visit to an exhibition of
works by young artists had
been engineered by the conserv-
atives, who saw their authority
being undermined or who feared
a fate similar to Yelsburg's.
If so, they must have been well
satisfied by his explosion of
surprise and disapproval.
Two formal meetings of
regime spokesmen with the in-
tellectuals followed, one on
17 December and one from 24 to
26 December. Leonid Ilichev,
as chairman of the Ideological
Commission, attacked stylistic
experimentation in art, music,
and literature as alien to
socialism. He reaffirmed the
principles of socialist realism
and party-mindedness and warned
against debilitating "humanism."
Neither meeting brought
the intellectuals into line,
however. Their mood was ex-
pressed by film director
Mikhail Romm's remark that he
saw no need to remain silent
in the face of attacks from the
same people who had inspired
the 1948 "anticosmopolitanism"
campaign: "We reason thus--
after all, now they do not ar-
rest anyone. It is quite clear.
No one will be imprisoned, nor
forbidden to work, nor driven
out of Moscow and deprived of
an income." Citing Khrushchev's
1959 advice to the writers to
settle their quarrels among
themselves, he urged: "So let
us look into what is going on.
We have kept silent long enough."
The liberals counter-
attacked--this time from within
the party itself. On 18 De-
cember the party organ of the
Moscow branch of the Writers
Union held its annual election;
not a single conservative was
elected to the new bureau. Re-
portedly the bureau's first act
was to petition the party den-
tral dommittee for the removal
of the second on the liberals'
list of Stalin's informers--
Nikolay Lesyuchevsky--from his
job as head of a publishing
house.
No further information is
available on the Lesyuchevsky
case nor was the story ever
carried in the Soviet press.
The battle against Stalin's
informers crept into the press,
however, in late January and
early February, when Izvestia
published a sharp exchange
between Ilya Ehrenburg and
Vladimir Yermilov, the third
conservative target of the lib-
erals. In his memoirs Ehrenburg
had said that he, and by impli-
cation others, had known of the
injustices in the mass arrests
of the thirties but had "gritted
his teeth in silence"; not only
was protest futile but in the
long run the country was still
on the right road to communism.
Yermilov, who had not cho-
sen silence but active partici-
pation in the purges, charged
Ehrenburg with cowardice in not
protesting and with claiming
knowledge after the fact, since
the "truth" was not known to
anyone until 1956. In an ac-
companying editorial note, Iz-
vestia gave lukewarm supporE
to Yermilov but carried the
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-OP927A004100010004-4
 Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-00927AO04100010004-4
vkw~ %0
SECRET
letters of both men, suggesting
that it lacked authoritative
guidance on this very delicate
issue.
The following day Izvestia
ran an unusual "human interest
story of Khrushchev's exploits
in World War II in which Khru-
shchev was credited with having
rescued an honest Soviet colo-
nel from the attempts of Beria's
agents to "frame" him on charges
of sabotage. There was no
reference in the Khrushchev
story to the Ehrenburg-Yermilov
argument which had immediately
preceded it. The promptness
with which it appeared, how-
ever, suggested a recognition
at least on the part of Izvest-
ia's editorial board thaT_
party leaders who made their
careers under Stalin are now
vulnerable to charges of com-
plicity in his crimes.
Fiction published during
the fall and winter reflected
the intelligentsia's concern
with the crimes of the Stalin
years. To stories of suffering
in "overhasty" collectivization
campaigns, and heroic soldiers
returning from the war only to
be charged with treason, there
began to be added a veiled ques-
tion--why were these things al-
lowed to happen? Other writers
depicted "father and son" prob-
lems--a father who had deserted
his son because the mother had
been falsely arrested, a son
unable to communicate with his
party-minded father because for
the youth the party program was
"nichevo"--nothing.
In Yevtushenko's auto-
biography, published for the
first time in France in Febru-
ary and March, he quoted a dis-
cussion with a group of students:
"Suddenly an 18-year-old girl
cried out in the weary voice
of a 60-year-old woman: 'The
revolution is dead!' But another
young poet answered her: 'The
revolution is not dead! It is
ill, and we (poets) must help
bring it back to health!"'
Khrushchev Cracks Down
On 8 March an angry Khru-
shchev again confronted the as-
sembled intellectuals. He re-
iterated defensively that no
one in the leadership had known
during Stalin's lifetime that
the mass "repressions" were
directed against innocent peo-
ple. He undercut this picture
of ignorance, however, by his
praise of novelist Mikhail
Sholokhov for having remonstrat-
ed (unsuccessfully) with Stalin
as early as 1932 about the
collectivization campaigns, and
by his own claim that he had
twice personally thwarted
Stalin's plans for further
purges. He insisted that
Stalin's merits must be recog-
nized, despite the latter's
"errors" and "abuse of power
entrusted to him," and for all
practical purposes called a
halt to literary presentations
of popular suffering under
Stalin. Khrushchev denounced
modern elements in art, music,
literature, and architecture
and bluntly warned that the
party would insist on conform-
ity from all intellectuals.
A series of regional meet-
ings "on ideology" chaired by
high-ranking party spokesmen
directed attacks against both
the nationally known cultural
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-0 927AO04100010004-4
 Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-00927A004100010004-4
*400 W
SECRET
liberals in Moscow and Lenin-
grad and local intelligentsia
who had copied their "errors."
The USSR and RSFSR Writers
Union plenums in late March
and early April also provided
platforms for attacks on the
nonconformists and for specific
demands for recantations. The
chief targets were Ehrenburg
and Viktor Nekrasov among the
older generation and Yevtushenko,
Aksenov, and poet Andrey Voz-
nesensky among the "sons."
Their "spiritual fathers"--
senior writers and chief ed-
itors who had encouraged them--
were also heavily criticized.
Few critics were hardy enough,
however, to raise explicitly
the sensitive central issue
of complicity in the crimes of
the Stalin years, and attacks
on Ehrenburg were generally
confined to his taste for modern
art. Scattered attacks were
also launched against several
formerly stalwart conservatives
who had joined the liberals.
In the course of these
attacks it became evident that
the extreme conservatives were
attempting to make up in viru-
lence what they lacked in numbers.
The majority of the intellectuals
who were not under attack re-
mained aloof from the storm; a
few conventional and respected
artists and writers defended
the victims, and several warned
publicly against a return to
"the methods of the cult of
personality."'
Under heavy pressure,
several of the younger "cul-
prits," including Aksenov, Yev-
tushenko, Voznesensky, and sculp-
ter Ernst Neizvestny, finally
produced ambiguously worded
"apologies." Neizvestny promised
to work "more and better" in
the future. Ehrenburg and the
other "spiritual fathers" ap-
parently refused to respond at
all. Nekrasov publicly de-
fended his own actions as those
of a "true Communist."
Despite their recalcitrance,
no major public actions were
taken against them. Aleksandr
Tvardovsky remains chief editor
of the liberals' stronghold,
Novy Mir; Yevtushenko and Aks-
enov are still on the editorial
board of the magazine Yunost'
The moderate head of the Moscow
writers was replaced by a con-
servative, but the other liberals
elected to the board in the
spring of 1962, including Yev-
tushenko and Voznesensky, have
not been removed. There has
been no announcement of any
change in the membership of the
party bureau, captured by the
liberals last December. Aksenov
has apparently been sent off to
visit construction sites in
Siberia and Voznesensky to in-
spect factories near Moscow--
both "trips" are undoubtedly
inconvenient, but can scarcely
be expected to break two angry
young men. This is also true of
the cancellation of projected
trips abroad for several of the
nonconformists.
A Milder Cultural Climate
In late April the public
storm began to abate; criticism
was transferred out of the
general press to literary and
artistic newspapers and journals.
Three unorthodox writers who
had been confined in insane
asylums earlier this year re-
portedly were released. On
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-0Q927A004100010004-4
 Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-00927A004100010004-4
SECRET
12 May Pravda published an
interview by American correspond-
ent Henry Shapiro with liberal
Aleksandr Tvardovsky. In his
first public statement since the
crackdown, Tvardovsky paid lip
service to conformity but made
no reference to his earlier
"errors" as chief editor of
Novy Mir. In outlining his
pl~ansTor the future, he showed
every intention of continuing
to encourage unorthodox liter-
ature, promising his readers
works by several writers who
had been most harshly attacked.
On 19 May both Pravda and
Izvestia publishednnotably mod-
erate ticles on literature,
confirming the milder cultural
climate.
Several factors may have
contributed to this change.
On 17 April the Italian Com-
munist Party, deeply engaged in
the Italian election campaign,
publicly dissociated itself from
the hard cultural line in the
USSR. Western press criticism
and the publicly expressed
fears inside the USSR lest
there be a return to Stalinist
methods may have further in-
hibited the regime, already
limited in the weapons it could
bring to bear against the re-
calcitrants by concern about a
public image of respectability.
The hospitalization of party
secretary Frol Kozlov in April
removed from policy-making
circles the man who reportedly
had been the extreme conserva-
tives' staunch protector, in
contrast to Khrushchev who had
on occasion lent a sympathetic
ear to the liberals. Finally
SECRET
there have been continuing
hints of widespread although
muted public support for the
liberals. Readings of non-
conformists! poetry and exhi-
bitions of modern art continue
to be held quietly, and the
attacks served to focus public
interest on these "undesirable"
works.
Plenum on Ideology
With the quieting of the
cultural storm there has been
evidence in the press of a
further change in plans for the
next central committee plenum. A
plenum reportedly had been scheduled
for late March or early April
to discuss problems in the
chemical industry. With the
March crackdown in culture,
however, the subject was changed
to "ideology" and the plenum
was postponed until 28 May.
Then,following the announcement
of Kozlov's illness, it was
again postponed, this time to
18 June.
During the disturbance
over culture there had first
been rumors and then press
discussions of organizational
measures to tighten and centralize
controls over art and literature.
Soviet intellectuals expected
details of the reorganization
to be announced at the plenum,
which was also expected to
provide a platform for recanta-
tions by the leading noncon-
formists.
As the violent criticism
abated, however, discussions
of organizational changes
Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-09927A004100010004-4
 Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-009274100010004-4
SECRET
and recantations ceased. Ili-
chev is still scheduled to re-
port on "Current Tasks in the
Party's Ideological Work," but
"ideology" is no longer being
cited in connection with the
recalcitrant intellectuals.
Press discussions instead have
turned to the education of young
Communists of tomorrow, who are
to be taught "honesty, modesty,
a sense of duty, tactful
behavior toward comrades, old
people, and especially women,"
and generally "cultured"
behavior. The same considera-
tions which led the regime to
moderate its cultural crack-
down may also have contributed
to a change in the context in
which "ideology" is to be dis-
cussed. (CONFIDENTIAL)
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-00927A004100010004-4
 Approved For Lease 2006/1 t f jP79-0092704100010004-4
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/11/06: CIA-RDP79-00927AO04100010004-4