Friday, October 22, 2021

Gorky in My Life by Viktor Shklovsky


 

I’ve decided to tell in this spot about Aleksei Maksimovich Peshlo- Maksim Gorky.

I first met Gorky in 1915, at the office of the Annals. He was tall, withy close-cropped hair – a little stooped, blue-eyes, very strong-looking.

Before I say anything else about Gorky, I must say that Aleksi Maksimovich saved my life several times. He interceded for me with Sverdlov* and gave me money when I was about to die, and, toward the end, my life in St. Pete was spent among several enterprises that he created.

I am writing this not as a character sketch of the man, but as a fact of my own biography.

I was often at Gorky’s place.

I’m a witty man and I love other peoples’ jokes. At Gorky’s place we laughed a lot.

There was a special conversational tone – a special attitude towards life. An ironic non-recognition of it.

Something on the order of the tone of conversation with the stepmother in Tolstoy’s Boyhood.

Gorky has an article in The New Life about a French officer who saw that his unit had been decimated and who cried out in the heat of battle, ‘Rise from the dead!’

He was French and consequently believed in fine words. And because many frightened soldiers had lain down during the battle and couldn’t stand up because of the bullets, the dead did rise.

The French have sublime faith and no fear of heroics. But we Russians died spouting curses. Both we and the French have a fear of the ridiculous, but we Russians fear specially the grandiose and the dashing.

And so we die with a laugh.

Gorky has had a long life. Of all the Russian writers, perhaps he alone used characters with the dashing quality of Dumas’s heroes. And in his first stories, the dead did rise.

Gorky’s bolshevism is ironic, a bolshevism without faith in man. By Bolshevism, I don’t mean membership in a political party. Gorky never belonged to a party.

It’s impossible to lead the dead into battle, but you can line them up, cover them with a little sand and use them for a roadbed.

I’ve gone off on a tangent, but everything that organizes an individual is external to him. He’s only the point where lines of force intersect.

A nation, however, can be organized. The Bolsheviks believed that it’s the design that matters, not the building material. They are willing to lose today, to lose biographies, in order to win the stake of history.

They wanted to organize everything so that the sun would rise on schedule and the weather would be made in their chancellery.
They couldn’t understand the anarchy of life, is subconscious, the fact that a tree knows best how it should grow.

It’s easy too see how the Bolsheviks made the mistake of mapping out of a plan for the whole world on paper.

At first, they believed that their formula didn’t conflict with life, that the mainstream of life was the ‘spontaneous activity of the masses,’ but regulated by their power.

 

A now their words lie in Russia like so many defunct rhinoceros and mammoths – so many of them!- ‘the spontaneous activities of the masses,’ ‘local power’ and that ichthyosaurus ‘peace without annexations and reparations’. Now the children laugh at the dead, but not yet decayed, monsters.

Gorky was a sincere Bolshevik.

The World Literature Publishing House – A Russian writer mustn’t write what he wants to: he must translate the classics, all the classics: everyone must translate and everyone must read. When everyone has red everything, he will know everything.

No need for hundreds of publishing houses: one will do –Gezhebin’s – and this one publishing house will need a catalogue projected to one hundred years – a catalogue one hundred printer’s signatures long, in English, French, Indo-Chinese and Sanskrit languages.

And all the literati  and all the writers, neatly classified and supervised by none other than S. Oldenburg and Alexander Benois, will work from diagrams and then shelves of books will be born and everyone will read all these books and everyone will know everything.

There’s no room in this scheme for either heroics or faith in people.

Why should the dead rise since everything will be organized for their benefit?

It wasn’t chance that brought Gorky and Lenin together.

But Gorky was the Noah of the Russian intelligentsia.

During the flood, people were saved in the arks of World Literature, the Grzhebin Publishing House and the House of Arts.

They were saved, not to make a counterrevolution, but so that literate people in Russia wouldn’t die out.

The Bolsheviks accepted these concentration camps for the intelligentsia. They didn’t break them up.

Without these centers, the intelligentsia would have degenerated and never done anything but hack work. Then the Bolsheviks would have gotten those who hadn’t died – the dregs, but their property in every sense of the words.

Consequently, Gorky was ideologically incorrect, but he was practically useful.

He had a way of organizing energetic people – of singling out the leftists. The last group he organized before his departure in the fall of 1921 was the Serapion Brothers. He has a very easy way with people.

Gorki has absolutely no faith in mankind.

Gorky doesn’t like everyone – just those who write well or work well . . .

 

               .   .   .   .   .   .  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .

I guess I forgot to write about how we lived. I lived in a lawyer’s bathroom, and when I couldn’t stay there, I settled in an apartment which people had once used for hiding; now people arrived there bearing various tidings, but they charged five rubles a night. Still, you could sleep. Hardly anyone had any money. I was still getting paid by my unit. Hardly anyone had an extra shirt.

And no one could figure out where the lice were coming from- such big ones!

The company was very fine. I remember one red-bearded former minister from Belorussia. I don’t know his name; we just called him Belorussia. He was a very fine man.

The Union got on everyone’s nerves. The party viewed its own military organization with serious misgivings and the military organization felt the same way about the party.

|People with any kind of connection joined the police force. Things were serious now (Sept. 1918), since gangs of marauders armed with machine guns were prowling the streets.

I attempted to work on a newspaper, but Pyotr Pilsky took it upon himself  to correct my first review article. I took offense and wouldn’t let him print it.

It was at the newspaper that I found out about the way Kolchak disbanded  the National Conference in Ufa ( ending the viable opposition of the Socialist Revolutionary Party to the Bolsheviks).

I was informed of this by a plump woman, wife of the publisher, who added, ‘That’s right, the ran the others out. Serves them right. Good for the Bolsheviks.’

I fell on the floor in a faint. Completely out. For the first and only time in my life, I fainted. I hadn’t realized that the fate of the Constitutional Assembly meant so much to me.

By this time, the party had veered sharply to the left. You’d be walking down the Kreshchatik and you’d meet a comrade.

‘What’s new?’

He’d answer: ‘Well, I’ve decided to recognize the Soviet regime!’ And so joyfully.

There was more than one occasion when the civil war in Russia could have been stopped. Of course, this can be blamed on the Bolsheviks. But they weren’t invented- they were discovered.

And at our meetings, the right wing said: ‘Let’s try out hand at cultural work.’ In party jargon, this meant the same as the army command, ‘Stand in place and smoke, if you want to.’

The ‘jig’ was up. It was ‘curtains’. You had to do something, so you did something with no causal connection, or, to put it in our philological terminology, something of another semantic norm.

I delivered a speech. My course wasn’t clear; I’m not quick to catch on. I too am of another semantic norm- I’m like a samovar used to drive nails.

I said: ’Let’s recognize this triple-damned Soviet regime! Like at the judgment of Solomon, let’s not demand half the baby. Let’s give up the baby to strangers: only let him live!’

They shouted at me, ‘He’ll die; they’ll kill him.’

But what could I do? In this game, I could see only one move at a time.

The party repudiated its military organization. Herman proposed that the organization be renamed the Union for the Defense of the Constituent Assembly: with that, he collected a few men and left for Odessa.

The others intended to head for the Don and fight with Krasnov.
But I intended to head for Russia, to my dear, stern Petersburg.

Most people just fretted.

The Dardanelles were wide open. The Whites were waiting for the French; they believed in the allies.

And they didn’t believe, but a man with property has to believe in something.

It was said that the French had  already landed in Odessa and blocked off part of the city with chairs. Those chairs marked the territory of a new French colony and not even cats could get through.

It was said that the French had a violet ray with which they could blind the Bolsheviks. Boris Mirsky wrote an article about this violet ray called ‘The Sick Beauty.” The beauty was the old world, which needed to be cured with a violet ray.

The Bolsheviks had never struck such terror as they did then. A somber draft was blowing out of somber, empty Russia.

It was said that the English had already landed in Baku a herd of apes trained in all the rules of warfare. The people who said this weren’t sick. It was said that you couldn’t propagandize these apes , that they went into battle completely without fear and that the could beat the Bolsheviks

People held their hands about two feet off the ground to indicate the size of these apes. They said that when Baku was taken, one of these apes was killed and it was buried with a band playing Scottish military music and the Scots cried.

That’s because the instructors of the ape legions were Scottish.

A somber draft was blowing out of Russia. The somber spot called Russia was growing. The ‘sick beauty’ was delirious.

People were heading for Constantinople

If I don’t tell it here, then where else can I tell this fact?



* Sverdlov, Yakov Mikhaillovich ( 1885-1919). Chairman of the Central Executive Committee of the Congress of Soviets and secretary of the Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party. Died of Spanish flu.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakov_Sverdlov

Wednesday, October 13, 2021

Monsignor Quixote by Graham Greene


 "Perhaps we are all fictions, father, in the mind of God.'



‘Oh, I understand . . . . That old saying of your prophet Marx – ‘Religion is the opium of the people.’ But you take it out of context Sancho. Just as our heretics have twisted the words of Our Lord.’

I don’t follow you, Monsignor.’

‘ When I was a student in Madrid I was encouraged to read a little in your holy book. One must know one’s enemy. Don’t you remember how Marx defended the monastic orders in England and condemned Henry the Eighth?’

‘I certainly do not.’

“ You should look at Das Kapital again. There is no talk of opium there.’

‘All the same, he wrote it –though I forget for a moment where.’

“Yes, but he wrote it in the nineteenth century, Sancho. Opium then was not an evil drug –laudanum was a tranquilizer, nothing worse. A tranquillizer for the well-to-do, one which the poor could not afford. Religion is the Valium of the poor –that was all he meant. Better for them than a visit to the gin palace. Better for them perhaps even than this wine. Man can’t live without a tranquillizer.”

‘ Then perhaps we should kill another bottle?’

‘Say half a bottle if we are to arrive safely in Madrid. Too much opium might be dangerous.’

‘We will make a Marxist of you yet, monsignor.’

“I have packed some half bottles to fill up the corners.’

The Mayor went to the car and returned with a half bottle.’

‘I have never denied that Marx was a good man,’ Father Quixote  said. ‘He wanted to help the poor, and that want of his certainly saved him at the last.’

 

“Your glass, monsignor.’

‘I asked you not to call me monsignor.

‘Then why not call me comrade- I prefer it to Sancho.’

‘In recent history, Sancho, too many comrades  have been killed by comrades. I don’t mind calling you friend. Friends are less  apt to kill each other.’

‘Isn’t friend going a little bit far between a Catholic priest and a Marxist?’

‘You said a few hours back that we must have something in common.’

‘Perhaps what we have in common is this Manchegan wine, friend.’

They both had a sense of growing comfort as the dark deepened and they teased each other. When the lorries passed on the road the headlights gleamed narrowly for a moment on the two empty bottles and what remained in the half bottle.

‘What puzzles me, friend, is how you can believe in so many incompatible ideas. For example, the Trinity. It’s worse than higher mathematics. Can you explain the Trinity to me? It was more than they could do in Salamanca.’

‘I can try.’

‘Try then.’

‘You see these two bottles?’

 ‘Of course.’

‘Two bottles of equal size. The wine they contained was of the same substance and it was born at the same time. There you have God the Father and God the Son and there, in the half bottle, God the Holy Ghost. Same substance. Same birth, They’re inseparable. Whoever partakes one partakes all three.’

“I was never, even in Salamanca, able to see the point of the Holy Ghost. He has always seem to me a bit redundant.’

‘Were not satisfied with two bottles, were we? That half bottle gave us the extra spark of life we both needed. We wouldn’t have been happy without it. Perhaps we wouldn’t have had the courage to continue our journey . Even our friendship might have ceased without the Holy Spirit.’

‘You are very ingenious, friend. I begin at least to understand what you mean by the Trinity. Not to believe in it, mind you. That I will never do.’

Father Quixote sat in silence looking at the bottles. When the Mayor struck a match to light a cigarette he saw the bowed head of his companion. It was as though he had been deserted by the Spirit he had praised. ‘What is the matter father?’ he asked.

 

‘May God forgive me,’ Father Quixote said, ‘for I have sinned.’

‘It was only a joke, father. Surely your God can understand a joke.’

 

“I have been guilty of heresy,’ Father Quixote replied. “I think –perhaps- I am unworthy to be a priest.’

“What have you done?’

’I have given the wrong instruction. The Holy Ghost is equal in all respects to the Father and the Son, and I have represented Him by this half-bottle.’

’Is that a serious error, father?’

 

‘It is anathema. It was condemned expressly at I forgot which Council. A very early Council. Perhaps it was Nicea.’

‘Don’t worry, father. The matter is easily put right. We will throw away and forget  this half bottle and I will bring a whole bottle from the car.’

 

‘I have drunk more than I should. If I hadn’t drunk so much I would never, never made that mistake. There is no sin worse than the sin against the Holy Ghost.’

“Forget about it. We will put matter right at once.’

And so it was they drank another bottle. Father Quixote felt comforted and he was touched too by the sympathy of his companion. The Manchegan wine was light, but it seemed wiser to them both to stretch out on the grass and sleep the night away where they were, and when the sun rose Father Quixote was able to smile at the sadness he had felt. There was no sin in a little forgetfulness and an inadvertent error. The Machegan wine had been the  guilty party – it was not, after all, quite so light a wine as he had believed.

As they set off he said, ‘I was a little foolish last night, Sancho.’

‘I thought you spoke very well.’

‘I did make you understand, perhaps, a little about the Holy Trinity?’

‘Understand, yes. Believe, no.’

‘Then will you please forget the half bottle? It was a mistake I never should have made.’

‘I will remember only the three full bottles, friend.’