ON RESTRUCTURING LITERARY-ARTISTIC ORGANIZATIONS

Decree of the Central Committee of the VKP(b)1

23 April 1932
The following Central Committee decree, published on
23 April 1932, liquidated all independent literary organizations and called for the
creation of the Union of Soviet Writers
The Central Committee asserts that in recent years, on the basis of
significant successes in socialist construction, there has been a
considerable growth, both qualitatively and quantitatively, in the spheres of
literature and art.
Several years ago, when there was still a strong influence of alien elements
in literature, which flourished particularly in the first years of the NEP, and
when the cadres of proletarian literature were still weak, the Party, by all
means possible, helped in the creation and strengthening of certain
proletarian organizations in the spheres of literature and other forms of art, so
as to firm up the position of proletarian writers and art workers.
Now, when the cadres of proletarian literature and art have had time to grow
and when new writers have come forward from factories, mills, and collective
farms, the framework of the existing literary-artistic organizations (VOAPP 2,
RAPP3, RAPM4, etc.) have become too narrow and are impeding the serious
development of artistic creation.
This situation creates the danger of transforming these organizations from a
means of mobilizing Soviet writers and artists around the tasks of socialist
construction into a means of cultivating group insulation as well as
isolation from the political tasks of the day and from large groups of writers
and artists who sympathize with socialist construction.
From this arises the necessity for an appropriate restructuring of the
literary-artistic organizations and a widening of the bases of their work.
Therefore, the Central Committee of the VKP(b) resolves:
1) To liquidate the Association of Proletarian Writers (VOAPP, RAPP);
2) To unite all writers who support the platform of Soviet power and who
strive to participate in socialist construction into a single Union of Soviet
Writers with a communist faction in it;
3) To carry out an analogous change in policy for other forms of art;
4) To entrust the Organization Bureau with working out the practical
measure for implementing this decision.
Footnotes:
1
VKP(b): All Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)
2
VOAPP: All-Union Organization of Associations of Proletarian Writers.
3
RAPP: Russian Association of Proletarian Writers.
4
RAPM: Russian Association of Proletarian Musicians.
Translated by Eric Konkol
http://www.sovlit.net/decree1932/

Decree of the Politburo of the Central Committee of Russian Communist Party (Bolshevik)
ON THE POLICY OF THE PARTY IN THE SPHERE OF ARTISTIC LITERATURE

1
1. The improvement in the material well-being of the masses in recent times,
in connection with the transformation in the attitude of people that has been
brought about by the revolution, the intensification of mass activity, the
colossal broadening of the world view, etc., creates a tremendous growth of
cultural needs and demands. Thus we have entered into the sphere of a
cultural revolution, which forms the precondition for further movement
toward a Communist society.
2. A part of this massive cultural growth is the growth in literature--proletarian
and peasant in the first instance, beginning with its embryonic forms, which at
the same time are unbelievably wide in scope (worker-correspondents,
peasant-correspondents, wall newspapers, etc.), and ending with ideologically
based literary-artistic production.
3. On the other hand, the complexity of the economic process; the
simultaneous growth of contradictory and even blatantly inimical economic
forms; the birth and strengthening of a new bourgeoisie brought about by
the development of these processes; the inevitable, although not always
immediately recognized attraction to it by part of the old and new
intelligentsia; the chemical-like secretion from the social depths of new
ideological agents of this bourgeoisie--all this must inevitably be revealed
on the literary surface of social life.
4. Thus, as the class struggle has not ceased among us in general, so, too,
it has not ceased on the literary front. In a class society there is not and
cannot be neutral art, although the forms of the class significance of art in
general and of literature in particular are endlessly more varied than, for
example, the forms of the class significance of politics.
5. However, it would be completely incorrect to ignore the basic fact of our
social life, namely, the fact of the conquest of power by the working class and
the existence of a proletarian dictatorship in our country. While prior to the
seizure of power the proletarian party whipped up the class struggle and
carried on a policy aimed at the destruction of society as a whole, in the
period of proletarian dictatorship, the party of the proletariat is faced with the
question of how to get along with the peasantry while slowly
transforming it; the question of how to allow a certain cooperation with
the bourgeoisie while slowly squeezing it out; and the question of how to
place the technical and other types of intelligentsia at the service of the
revolution while winning it ideologically away from the bourgeoisie.
Thus, although the class struggle has not ceased, its form has changed,
because for the proletariat, the goal of the struggle was one thing before the
seizure of power and is another thing now, in the theoretical sense. In place
of the goal of destruction, there is now a goal of affirmative construction
into which--under the leadership of the proletariat--ever broader strata of
society must be drawn.
6. While preserving, strengthening, and continually expanding its leadership,
the proletariat must occupy an appropriate position on a whole series of new
sectors of the ideological front. The process of dialectical materialism

penetrating into totally new spheres (biology, psychology, and the natural
sciences in general) has already begun. In the same way, the conquest of
positions in the sphere of artistic literature must, sooner or later,
become a fact.
7. It must be remembered, however, that this problem is infinitely more
complex than the other problems being solved by the proletariat, for even
within the limitations of capitalist society, the working class can prepare itself
for a victorious revolution, creating cadres of fighters and leaders and
developing for itself a magnificent ideological weapon for the political struggle.
But it cannot work out questions of the natural sciences or technology; and so,
too, the culturally repressed class cannot work out its own artistic
literature, its own unique artistic form, or its own style. While the
proletariat already has in its hands infallible criteria for the social-political
content of any literary work, it does not yet have definite answers for all
questions relating to artistic form.
8. What has been stated above should determine the policy of the leading
party of the proletariat in the sphere of artistic literature. In this regard, first of
all, we should consider the following questions: the relationship between
proletarian and peasant writers with the so-called "fellow travelers" and
others; the policy of the party in relation to proletarian writers themselves;
questions of criticism; questions about the style and form of artistic works and
the methods of working out new artistic forms; and, finally, questions of an
organizational character.
9. The relationship between different groups of writers--in terms of their socialclass or social-group substance--is determined by our general policy.
However, we must keep in mind here that leadership in the sphere of literature
belongs to the working class as a whole, with all its material and ideological
resources. There is not yet a hegemony of proletarian writers, and the
Party must help these writers win for themselves the historic right to
this hegemony. Peasant writers should be met with friendly acceptance and
be accorded our unconditional support. Our task lies in leading their growing
cadres onto the tracks of proletarian ideology while at the same time making
no attempt to destroy the peasant literary-artistic images in their creative
work, images which are a necessary prerequisite for influencing the
peasantry.
10. In regards to the "fellow-travelers", we must keep in mind: 1) their
differentiation; 2) the significance of many of them as qualified "specialists"
of literary technique; 3) the presence of vacillation in this stratum of writers.
The general directive here should be one of a tactful and careful attitude
toward them, i.e., an approach that would establish the conditions necessary
for them to come over to side of Communist ideology as quickly as possible.
While discouraging anti-proletarian and anti-revolutionary elements (which
nowadays are quite insignificant) and struggling against the ideology of a new
bourgeoisie that is forming among a segment of the "fellow-travelers" of the
"Change of Landmarks"1 persuasion, the Party must deal tolerantly with
interim ideological forms, patiently helping those unavoidably numerous forms
to develop in a process of ever closer comradely cooperation with the cultural
forces of Communism.
11. In dealing with proletarian writers, the Party must take this position: while
helping their growth in all possible ways and taking all measures to support

them, the Party must do all it can to prevent the emergence among them of
Communist arrogance, a most pernicious phenomenon. The Party-precisely because it sees in these proletarian writers the future ideological
leaders of Soviet literature--must fight in every way possible against a lightminded, scornful approach to the old cultural heritage as well as to
specialists of the artistic word. Against capitulationism, on the one hand,
and against Communist arrogance on the other--this must be the slogan of
the Party. The Party must also struggle against attempts to establish a purely
hothouse proletarian literature. A broad grasp of phenomena in all their
complexity; not being limited to the borders of the factory only; to be a
literature not of the workshop, but of a great, fighting class, leading millions of
peasants--thus should be the scope of the content of proletarian literature.
12. Everything which has been mentioned above determines--in general and
in particular--the tasks of criticism, which is one of the main educational
weapons in the Party's hands. Not conceding, even for a minute, the position
of Communism, not retreating by so much as an iota from proletarian
ideology, uncovering the objective class meaning of various literary works,
Communist criticism must fight mercilessly against counter-revolutionary
manifestations in literature and expose "Change-of-Landmark" liberalism,
etc., while, at the same time, displaying the greatest tact, caution, and
tolerance to all those literary strata which can and will join the proletariat.
Communist criticism must banish the tone of command from its approach.
Only then will this criticism have a deep educational significance, when it
relies upon its own ideological superiority. Marxist criticism should decisively
banish from its midst any pretentious, semi-literate, and self-satisfied
Communist arrogance. Marxist criticism should adopt "to learn" as its slogan
and rebuff any hack-work and ad-libbing in its own milieu.
13. While infallibly identifying the social-class content of literary trends, the
Party as a whole cannot prematurely tie itself to any one tendency in the area
of literary form. Leading literature as a whole, the Party can hardly
support any one literary faction (classifying these factions according to their
differences on form and style), just as it can hardly issue resolutions to solve
questions of the form of the family, even though, in general, the Party
undoubtedly leads and should lead the construction of a new way of life. A
style appropriate to the epoch will be created, but it will be created by other
means, and the solution to this question has still not taken shape. In the
current phase of cultural development, all attempts to tie the Party in this
direction must be repulsed.
14. Therefore, the Party must declare itself in favor of the free competition
among various groups and trends in this given sphere of activity. Any other
solution to the question would be an official, bureaucratic pseudo-solution. In
the same way, it is inadmissible to award by decree or Party resolution a
legalized monopoly over literary publishing to any one group or literary
organization. While giving material and moral support to proletarian and
proletarian-peasant literature and assisting "fellow travelers", etc., the Party
cannot offer a monopoly to any one group, even the most proletarian in its
ideological content. To do so would signal the destruction of proletarian
literature itself.
15. The Party must, in every way possible, root out attempts at haphazard
and incompetent administrative interference in literary affairs. The Party

must concern itself with a careful selection of personnel in those

establishments which have authority over printing, so as to ensure a
genuinely correct, useful, and tactful leadership of our literature.
16. The Party must point out to all workers of artistic literature the necessity
for the correct separation of functions between critics and artistic writers. The
latter must transfer the center of gravity of their work into literary production, in
the exact sense of the term, making use of the vast array of material from
contemporary society. Increased attention must be directed at the
development of national literature in the numerous republics and oblasts of
our Union.
The Party must stress the necessity of the creation of artistic literature
intended for the mass readership of workers and peasants; we must more
boldly and decisively break with the prejudices of gentility in literature, and,
utilizing all the technical accomplishments of the old masters, choose an
appropriate form that will be understandable to millions. Only when this great
problem is solved will Soviet literature and its future proletarian avant-garde
be able to complete its cultural-historical mission.
Source: Pravda, 1 July 1925.
Footnotes:
1
Change of Landmarks [Smena vekh]. Title of a collection of essays and a
movement among certain emigre writers urging a cessation in their struggle
against the Bolsheviks and the beginning of collaboration with them instead.
http://www.sovlit.net/decreejuly1925/