ebook img

AMERICAN AUTHORS IN SOVIET RUSSIA: 1917-1941 PDF

591 Pages·028.537 MB·English
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview AMERICAN AUTHORS IN SOVIET RUSSIA: 1917-1941

Copyright by Deming B. Brown 1952 AMERICAN AUTHORS IN SOVIET RUSSIA: 1917-1941 By Deming Bronson Brown Submitted in p artial fulfillm ent of the requirements fo r the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, in the Faculty of Philosophy, Columbia University TABLE OP CONTENTS Chapter Page INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 1 I, THE PUBLICATION OF AMERICAN LITERATURE IN RUSSIA FROM 191? TO 1 9 ^ 1 ................................................. 10 I I . AMERICAN LITERATURE OF THE PERIOD PRECEDING THE CIVIL W A R ........................................................................... 60 I I I . AMERICAN LITERATURE FROM THE CIVIL WAR TO THE TURN OF THE CENTURY........................................................... 127 IV. AMERICAN LITERATURE SINCE 1900: UPTON SINCLAIR 229 V. JACK LONDON AND 0. HENRY.............................. 293 VI. SHERWOOD ANDERSON AND THEODORE DREISER . , . 6 i- ~ ' V II. SINCLAIR LEWIS........................................................................... JI22 V III. JOHN DOS PASSO0 AND ERNEST HEMINGWAY . . . . ^51 IX. CONCLUSION ..................................................................... 537 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . ...................................................................... 5^5 11 INTRODUCTION This study 00011)11168 a survey of the pu b licatio n of American lite ra tu re in the Soviet Union w ith an in v estig atio n of the Soviet criticism which has been devoted to much of th at lite ra tu re . The f ir s t chapter considers the publication from 1917 to 19^1. The next two chapters are concerned w ith pre- Soviet American lite ra tu re in the USSR, and follow the chronol­ ogy of American h isto ry . (In the case of those w riters in th is group who were known in R ussia before the October Revolu­ tio n , background m aterial is provided fo r the purpose of com­ paring pre-Soviet reputations w ith Soviet re p u ta tio n s.) The follow ing fiv e chapters consider the p u b licatio n , reputation and criticism of eight of the most prominent tw entieth-century American authors in Russia in the Soviet period. The conclud­ ing chapter contains a summary of the findings of the f ir s t eight chapters and an evaluation of these findings. The aims of the in v estig atio n are (1 ) to determ ine the kinds of American lite ra tu re which were made available to So­ v ie t readers during the period under study; (2) to d isclo se the a ttitu d e s of Soviet c ritic s in regard to a sig n ifican t segment of th a t lite ra tu re and (3 ) to determ ine, so fa r as p o ssib le, the reactions of Soviet readers to th a t lite ra tu re and to the p ictu re of American culture which i t rep resen ts. I t is hoped th a t these findings w ill contribute to our general 1 2 understanding of th e impact of American c iv iliz a tio n on Russian c iv iliz a tio n . The extent to which the p u blication of a booh in the Soviet Union is an in d icatio n of popular demand, or m erely the re s u lt of a policy decision w ithin the publishing hierarchy is unknown, and the answer probably v aries w ith the Individual instance. The ch ief governing facto r in publishing decisions in the Soviet Union since 1928, and to a great extent even before th a t year, has been the w ill of the Communist P arty. The a ttitu d e s of the P arty a t any given tim e do not necessari­ ly correspond w ith those of the Soviet people, and i t is clear th a t P arty decisions frequently run counter to popular se n ti­ ment. Yet i t can be presumed th a t Soviet p u b lish ers, w hether under War Communism, the NEP, or the Five Year Plans, have not made a p ractice of issu in g books which are not read, and th a t the re -issu in g of a work of American lite ra tu re is generally a response to public enthusiasm . On th e other hand, i t cannot be concluded th a t the absence of an American work from Soviet bookshelves is an in ­ d icatio n of publie apathy toward th a t work. The fa ilu re of an American book to appear in Russian tra n sla tio n , or to achieve more than one ed itio n once i t has been published, can be the re su lt of several facto rs p ecu liar to the Soviet scene, and the preference of the reading public is only one of these..T he fa c t th a t throughout the whole Soviet period, publishing has been subject to varying degrees of cen tralized d irectio n and oensorship would in d icate th a t p ublication s ta tis tic s can 3 show only those enthusiasm s among the reading public which the co n tro llers of Soviet publishing have allowed to develop. This does not mean th at those enthusiasms are not genuine. R ather, i t means th a t they are not the kind of enthusiasm s which might be expected to develop in a hypothetical free market* Subject to the above q u alificatio n s, th is study w ill examine q u an titativ e trends in the publication of American lite ra tu re , in an attem pt to determ ine the degree of popular­ ity which th a t lite ra tu re as a whole has enjoyed in d iffe re n t periods of Soviet development from 1917 to 19^1. Close a tte n ­ tio n w ill be paid to the selectio n of authors and schools of authors fo r publication w ithin sp ecific periods. P articu lar a tte n tio n w ill be paid to 'the growth and decline of the re­ p u tatio n s of individual authors, as indicated by the number, choice, and size of ed itio n s of th e ir works published over the years. Likew ise, trends in respect to the themes and subject m atter of the American lite ra tu re which is selected fo r pub­ lic a tio n w ill be examined. The re su lts w ill be considered as a P a rtia l ind icatio n of the preferences of the Soviet public in respect to American lite ra tu re . A lso, they w ill show trends in Soviet publishing policy concerning American lite ra tu re . But more im portantly, they w ill show what has been read, and w ill th erefo re suggest the p ictu re of American lif e which has been av ailab le, through American lite ra tu re , to Soviet readers w ithin given periods. The focus of a tten tio n in respect to lite ra ry criticism w ill “be su b stan tially the same as th a t in respect to publica­ tion* The criticism of Individual American w riters w ill be examined to determ ine the re la tiv e evaluations accorded them in successive periods by Soviet criticism as a whole. Where th ere seems to be no clear consensus among Soviet c ritic s , major areas of disagreem ent w ill be defined. On a b asis of these fin d in g s, the constants in the Soviet c ritic a l approach to American lite ra tu re w ill be pointed out, and the variables w ill be discussed in term s of the h isto ric a l and cu ltu ral trends they m anifest. F in ally , the opinions of lite ra ry c ri­ tic s w ill be considered in term s of the evaluations of authors and schools which are indicated by publication fig u res. The aim in combining a study of publication w ith a study of criticism is to find out what works of lite ra tu re are lik e d and why they are lik ed . Beyond th a t, the aim is to shed lig h t on the workings of a cu ltu re, and th is can be done most c le a rly in terms of p attern s of ideas and im pressions. There­ fore an attem pt is made to reconstruct in its essen tials the p ic tu re of America which the Soviet reader must derive from reading sp ecific authors. I t should be stressed , however, th at such an attem pt is founded not only on a knowledge of what has been published, but also on the assumption th a t lite ra ry c ritic s in the Soviet Union try , at le a st to a certain extent, to follow , as w ell as to guide the in clin atio n s of the reading p u b lic. There is a l­ ways a g u lf between lite ra ry c ritic s and the public in any country, and there is ample reason to believe th a t in the 5 Soviet Union th at gulf Is wide. N evertheless, the function of the lite ra ry c ritic In the Soviet Union, p a rtic u la rly since the inception of the Five Year P lans, has "been a p ecu liarly d id actic one, and lik e a ll functionaries In the fie ld of So­ v ie t a rts , he Is under a p a rtic u la rly strong obligation to keep Informed as to the current ta ste s and asp iratio n s of the pu b lic. His w ritings are tendentious, and he Is expected to mould public ta s te , but he Is also expected to be -practical In the ap p licatio n of h is Ideas. This Im plies th at he Is ob­ lig a te d to make Judgments which w ill be meaningful not only to a,sm all co terie of lite ra ry p ro fessio n als, but also to the broad public. The Judgments of the c r itic , however, are also re­ quired to be in close harmony w ith th e current o ffic ia l ideo­ lo g ic al Hlin e ,M as determ ined by the Communist P arty. P a rti­ cu larly in the years since 1932, I t has been im possible for a c r itic to publish, fo r any appreciable length of tim e, opinions which c o n flic t w ith current P arty views. This has undoubtedly meant th a t, in many Instances, the utterances of c ritic s re ­ fle c t opinions which the P arty wants to estab lish among the p u b lic, ra th e r than the opinions which the pu iaic curren tly holds. I t is probable, nev erth eless, th at the frame of re fe r­ ence which the c ritic applies in discussing American lite ra tu re is shared by the general p u b lic, and tb at the c r itie 8s p ictu re of America is su b stan tially the same as. th at of the public fo r which he w rites. For the Soviet public is certain ly not allowed 6 to read American lite ra tu re in an ideological vacuum. Many Soviet readers, lik e readers in any country, probably do not trouble them selves w ith book reviews and lite ra ry eritio ism . There are, however, other Inducements fo r in terp retin g American lite ra tu re along the lin e s th a t lite ra ry c ritic s striv e to estab lish . To the extent th at the sources of public opinion in the USSR, suoh as the p ress, radio and the vast ag itatio n al apparatus of the Communist P arty, Influence the Soviet c i ti­ zen, i t can be presumed th at the Soviet reader adopts a bias th a t is essen tially Blm ilar to th a t of the lite ra ry c r itic in hlB approach to American cu ltu ral h isto ry . There are several facto rs which might be expected to lend homogeneity to Soviet criticism of American lite ra tu re . F irst of a ll, pre-revolutionary p o litic a l, economic and cul­ tu ra l rela tio n s between the two countries established in the minds of Russians a tra d itio n a l image of America which was p a rtia lly carried over into Soviet criticism . I t can be assumed th a t certain basic ingredients in th is image were shared by a ll c ritic s . Second, p o litic a l, economic and cul­ tu ra l rela tio n s during the Soviet period would have engendered common a ttitu d e s in a ll c ritic s , regardless of the ideological framework in which these rela tio n s were viewed. But the most Im portant facto r making fo r homogeneity was the adoption of Marxism as a national In te lle c tu a l d iscip lin e. As applied in the Soviet Union, th is d isc ip lin e, u n til recent years, has perm itted a certain fle x ib ility in c ritic a l approach, so th a t criticism w ithin the period under discussion never became 7 com pletely stereotyped. N evertheless, the trium ph of Marxism as a single guiding Ideology was a re la tiv e ly sw ift one, and every c ritic had sooner or la te r to adopt it in order to con­ tinue functioning. ■Despite the M arxist constants, a fu ll consideration of the Soviet approach must involve atten tio n to a complex and changing p attern of p o litic a l, social, end esth etic ideas. There was actu ally very l i t t l e of a s ta tic nature in Soviet lite ra ry criticism from 1917 to 194-1 • The abundance of c r iti­ cal schools (p articu larly In the tw enties), the Inevitable clash of Ideas among M arxists them selves In th e ir attem pts to work out esth etic p rin cip les, and the alignment and realig n ­ ment of cu ltu ral forces during the Soviet period, n atu rally found re fle c tio n in the outlooks of individual c ritic s . An equally im portant facto r was the growing Influence of the Com­ munist Party I ts e lf on Soviet cu ltu ral a ffa irs. During the period to 1928, the P arty was prom inently Involved in lite ra ry questions, but its ro le was most frequently th at of referee In the disputes between lite ra ry factio n s. Beginning in 1928, however, the Party undertook sharp Interference both in the production of domestic lite ra tu re and In the publication and criticism of foreign lite ra tu re w ithin Soviet borders. By 1932, these increasing controls affected not only M arxist lite ra ry theory in its broad usage, but also the concrete ap­ p lic atio n of the Judgments of Individual c ritic s on sp ecific workB of lite ra tu re . F urther, the Party "line" on sp ecific ideas and issues was subject to change in terms of a sh iftin g

See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.