178

p Y. Lukin

p The first aesthetic manifesto of the socialist proletariat, Lenin’s article Party Organisation and Party Literature, made a real discovery, defining the qualitative distinction of socialist art. In countering literary careerism and “aristocratic anarchism" Lenin advanced a new principle; the link between artistic culture and the cause of socialist transformation of society by the whole people.

p Lenin held that in retaining its cognitive, enlightening, educational, aesthetic and other functions, proletarian art becomes a powerful factor in the revolutionary struggle for the triumph of the ideals of socialism and communism.

p In his statements on general problems of literary creativity and in his concrete evaluations of individual works Lenin, just as Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, constantly drew attention to the special nature of art, in which, as he remarked in one of his conversations with Anatoly Lunacharsky, it is not the naked idea which is important, but rather that the reader or spectator should not doubt the truth of what is depicted or represented, and that he should feel with every nerve that everything happened in just this way, that that was what it felt like, that that is exactly what was said.

p Recognising and perfectly understanding the special nature of art as a specific form of aesthetic cognition and aesthetic activity, Lenin at the same time repeatedly noted that the art is bound up with the degree to which the great and noble task of uniting artistic creativity with the working-class movement and with the movement of the socialist proletariat is accomplished. In Lenin’s opinion, the only means of ensuring a genuine flourishing of art, of guaranteeing a real, and not merely imaginary freedom of artistic creation 179 and its true activeness is for it to merge with the movement of the truly progressive and consistently revolutionary class.

p Giving credit to the artistic legacy of the Narodniks, Lenin pointed out that while giving an authentic reflection of some vital aspects of reality, in particular the social psychology of the peasant masses, they did not understand and were unable to comprehend correctly those contradictions which they so profoundly and artistically convincingly reproduced in their essays, novels and stories. They regarded the peasant as an individualist by nature, psychology, and by mentality and shared the illusions of Utopian socialism. The Narodniks’ answer to the spread of capitalism to the village was unsatisfactory. This was mainly because of their petty-bourgeois attitude and their sentimental criticism of capitalism.

p It was in fact a socially limited outlook which prevented the old realism from ascending to an understanding of the role of the various classes of the population as independent historical forces, and from considering the conditions which could develop (or, on the contrary, paralyse) the independent and conscious activity of these creators of history. The discord between the authetic representation of reality and the degree to which this reality is comprehended, and the view of the working masses-as an object and not as the conscious creators of history are the factors which account for the limitedness of the old realism.

p In his articles on Tolstoy Lenin pointed out the contradictions in the writer’s views and the discord between his highly artistic, ruthlessly realistic reflection of reality, his passionate protest and the helplessness he displayed when attempting to comprehend events. Tolstoy as a vehement protestor, impassioned accuser and great artist should have reflected at least some of the essential aspects of the revolution, but this great artist “clearly did not understand" the revolution, and in his works showed such a lack of understanding of both the causes of the crisis and the means of getting out of it as could be expected from a patriarchal and naive peasants but not from a writer with European education. These glaring contradictions between representation and comprehension were not merely ah individual quirk of the writer’s personality but were unavoidable creations of reality itself, and of its own contradictions.

p It is essential to eliminate this discord between artistic reflection and the perception of what is reflected, and achieve harmony between them. This opens the road to socialist art. But there is only one way to eliminate this discord and establish harmony between all aspects of creativity and all functions of art, and that is to 180 eradicate all such contradictions of reality through socialist revolution. Thus the tasks of qualitatively renovating art are interwoven with those of renewing reality and with the necessity to reorganise the world socially.

p One of Lenin’s main and constant concerns was to combine revolutionary practice with scientific theory. Lenin’s concept of art is permeated by this very unity. Just as the working-class movement, having spontaneously set out towards socialism, should, in Lenin’s opinion, merge with the theory of scientific socialism, so classical art, as it passes to a higher phase in its development, should unite in one harmonious whole the deep realistic reflection of reality and its all-round comprehension and explanation.

p It is in the creative work of the socialist artist that such a real harmony between the realistic representation and the comprehension of reality, between all the facets of the artist’s consciousness—philosophy, outlook, aesthetics and ethics—and between reflection and creativity is established.

p What is the theoretical and social basis of the creative, constructive and transformative principle of socialist art?

p Gnosiologically, the activeness of socialist art is conditioned by the fact that it is based on the dialectical and materialist theory of knowledge which combines complete scientific objectivity with a consistent adherence to party principles.

p The whole of Marxist philosophy, and the theory of knowledge in particular, is a thoroughly consistent scientific world outlook which expresses the interests, point of view and culture of the revolutionary socialist proletariat. The dialectical and materialist theory of knowledge stands in opposition to contemplative, metaphysical materialism, whose fundamental shortcoming, as Marx pointed out, consists in the fact that reality, sensuality are only taken in the form of an object or in the form of contemplation, and not subjectively as a human, sensuous activity or practice. The great historical service performed by Marx and Lenin in the development of materialist philosophy is that in explaining the content of the reflection of reality in a person’s mind, they regarded the process of knowledge as a component part and one of the aspects of man’s practical and transformative attitude to the world, as a result of the subject’s constructive creativity.

p The transforming of reality in the name of a definite social ideal determines the salient feature both of the practical, material and transformative activity of man as well as his spiritual and practical cognition of the objective world.

p In cognition, which cannot be a “lifeless mirror-reflection" of reality, it is the demands of practice that predetermine the 181 activeness of the consciousness which passes through it from contemplation to the cognition of objective reality. Reflection and creation, as two inseparable elements in the cognition of the objective world, do not consequently oppose one another, but are rather in a dialectical unity. Moreover, truly practical activity is impossible without the transformation not only of nature but also of the subject of cognition itself.

p Art, being a part of the general process of cognition and of the spiritual and practical cognition of reality includes an active side—attitude, evaluation, and the expression of emotions, feelings, passions, desires and the “wantings” of man.

p Artistic cognition, i.e., art, was treated by Marx, Engels and Lenin in their analysis of general problems of aesthetics and of individual works of art, both as a specific form of the reflection of reality and as an active aesthetic activity aimed at transforming the world.

p In true art the creator of things of aesthetic value is not only the subject but also the object of reproduction. The content of works of art reflects not only reality, but also the artist’s experience of life, his social, political, philosophical and moral views and ideas, his world outlook and his aspirations. The reflection of reality, which existed before, and independent of, the creator of things of aesthetic value nevertheless takes place in works of art in accordance with the possibilities and intentions of the artist to organise his observations and experience, and to generalise it and to bring out its regularities.

p In its social aspect the creative nature of socialist art is determined by the fact that it is based on the activeness of millions of people who are building a new world, on the historical creativity of the broad masses. The main condition necessary for the fruitful development of socialist art is the creative endeavours of the people, their activeness in all spheres of productive and social work, and the drawing of millions of conscious builders of a new society into the making of history. To a greater degree than ever before, the essential feature of our society at the present stage of its development is determined by an active, creative attitude to reality, an irreconcilability to shortcomings and everything which hinders the advancement of our society, and a striving to make life better, richer and more beautiful.

p Gorky’s tradition of making active incursions into life, the striving to promote the birth of the new and the progressive was continued and is still being continued today by socialist art, which not only introduced a new hero, the revolutionary, the fighter, the creator, but also demonstrated the qualitatively new features 182 of the socialist artist, a type of artist hitherto unknown in the history of art.

p The activeness of socialist art is first and foremost manifested in the solving of the problem of artistic truth which, in its turn, is inextricably tied in with the principles of artistically graphic generalisation and typification. The strength of realist art consists in the truthful portrayal of typical characters in typical circumstances, in the fact that there “the whole essence is in the individual circumstances, the analysis of characters and psychology of particular types".  [182•1 

p True art is marked by a ruthless veracity in showing all the complexity and contradiction of social development. At the same time, artistic truth’is incompatible with a demonstration of “facts” and “little facts" taken out of context, out of the whole, and with no connection. It is incompatible with subjectivism and revolutionary phrasemongering which replace objective analysis with “feeling”.

p The essence of the cognition of reality consists in learning to understand the world more profoundly and discover the laws which govern it. Abstractions and generalisations which lead to a deeper, more truthful, and fuller reflection of nature serve these ends. At the same time, such “correct, serious" (Lenin) generalisations embody all the richness of the particular and the individual. This also helps to reveal the nature of such a specific form of cognition as artistic cognition, in which a special place is occupied by generalisation and typification. Realism implies typification of the regular processes and the essential in life, showing the general through the particular and the individual.

p Referring to the behaviour of individual representatives of various social forces and ideological and political trends, the classics of Marxism demonstrated a profound understanding of the complex interweaving of personal qualities, of the psychology of various people and their social and class involvement Lenin, for example, pointed out that the Russian Machists considered Bogdanov to be an individual phenomenon, a chance, “an isolated case”. In fact, his standpoints and philosophy are not a separate case and are not a solitary phenomenon. Bogdanov was but one of the phenomena “of that ‘socially organised experience’ which testifies to the growth of Machism into idealism."  [182•2  Before us, as Lenin said, we have an evolution of man, an evolution typical of everyone who breaks with materialism and as a result inevitably 183 falls into the arms of idealism. The analysis of the correlation of the personal, the individual, the casual and the general, the lawgoverned which is given in Lenin’s works also bears a direct relation to typification as an ideological and aesthetic category, since in realist art social analysis forms the basis of the typication of characters and circumstances. In this we find one of the radical distinctions between realism, as a creative method, and other trends in art. In truly realist art the’individual serves the ends of the generalisation and, in the final analysis, the comprehension of the social essence of phenomena.

p Thus the actual, and not imaginary activeness of art consists not in the “creation of myths”, but in the revealing of objective regular processes and in the ability to record them in typical images, and by so doing to inspire the reader or viewer to strive towards a creative transformation of the world. An all-round penetration into the dialectics of the development of life phenomena, events and human characters and actions, the revealing of the essential and characteristic in life objectively makes realism, and in particular socialist realism, the most revolutionary creative method, a method which helps not only to explain but also to change, to transform reality.

p Artistic truth, like any other aesthetic category, is a concrete historical concept which changes and acquires a new content in each stage in the development of society and its art. Artistic truth is inseparable from the analysis of the objective concrete historical situation.

p For that reason, for example, the examinations made by the classics of Marxism-Leninism of individual phenomena of art as well as of general problems of artistic creativity, associate the true depth of artistic generalisation and the truth in art with the depiction of the “rebellious reaction of the working class against the oppressive medium which surrounds them...."  [183•1 , to the depiction of “the new building of a new life".  [183•2  Thus, in this new stage in the development of human society and art, artistic truth and typification become inseparably linked to “the truth of the century”, to the artistic recreation of a progressive, revolutionary development.

p As far as the art of pre-socialist formations is concerned and, in particular, Russian classical art of the second half of the 19th century, artistic truth, according to Lenin, was expressed in the 184 most sober realism, in the depiction of the glaring contradictions of reality, the tearing-off of all masks, the ruthless criticism of capitalist society, and in the revelation of the depth of the contradictions between the growth of wealth and the growth of poverty.

p The socialist working-class movement and, more so, socialist construction following the triumph of the socialist revolution, which eliminate the contradictions inherent in an antagonistic society and also a result of these contradictions, the frequently tragic gulf between objective and subjective truth—are creating other, different conditions for the artist to actively grasp the new phenomena.

p In view of this, the problem of the correlation of the critical and affirmative principles in socialist realism becomes particularly acute in modern aesthetics.

p Bourgeois aestheticians and revisionists consider a destructive, negative principle to be the immanent characteristic of artistic creativity, distinguishing it from all other spheres of human activity. That is why they are particularly unhappy with the “absence” of critical fervour in socialist art, which they accuse of varnishing, “embellishing”, and ousting reality, diverging from the truth of life.

p The difference of principle between the Marxist-Leninist conception of socialist art and the fabrications of our opponents consists in the fact that the Marxist-Leninist conception makes a concrete historical examination of the functions of art in the structure of various socio-economic formations. The greatness of an artist in an antagonistic society, as one may conclude from Lenin’s articles on Tolstoy, is in his ruthless criticism and unmasking of bourgeois social relations, whereas in socialist society art performs fundamentally different functions where the destructive and critical approach gives way to an affirmative and positive approach. As a part of the cause of the party and the whole people, art in the structure of socialist society solves, by its special means, the same problems as do the people as a whole.

p The affirmative enthusiasm of the art of socialist realism by no means amounts to an “apology”, as the revisionists claim. It also contains a critical element, the ruthless criticism and negation of everything which hinders the progress of the socialist proletariat and socialist society. This is not, however, negation for the sake of negation; it always stems from the standpoint of communist social ideals.

p Soviet people appreciate works of art which, not covering up the difficulties which fall to the people’s lot, describe deprivation and 185 loss, but which none the less emphasise the triumph and irrepressibility of the new, of the communist.

p Lenin is known to have commented positively on Mayakovsky’s poem “Conference-Crazy”, which derides conference fuss. Then, during the Great Patriotic War, Pravda published the play The Front by Alexander Korneichuk, which contains a severe criticism of the military commanders who tried to decide the fate of a modern battle by means of a dashing cavalry charge on an armada of tanks. Following the war, a series of essays by V. Ovechkin entitled “Rural Life" appeared in Pravda. Here the author turned a sharp eye on the problems of agricultural development and criticised individual managers who were unable to work under the new conditions of highly mechanised and complex production. A few years ago, the film “Chairman”, which tells of the difficult process of rebuilding the war-ruined economy, evoked a truly nation-wide response.

p Soviet art has never avoided and will never avoid a depiction of the at times tragic collisions, sharp conflicts, social upheavals, errors, frustration of illusions, and personal dramas which attend the establishment of the new world and the formation of the new man.

p The artistic reflection of reality is a creative process in which the artist penetrates into the regular processes of life, reveals its essential aspects, and prevailing trends and affirms the new, which is born in the struggle with the old, the negative and the obsolete. Such reflection is incompatible both with “apologetics” and with what Lenin called “vain” negation. Socialist art has a great power of influence, but while unmasking and condemning the negative, the old and that which hinders progress, it sees its prime task in supporting and nurturing the young shoots of the new life by setting a positive example, which only under socialism has been given the opportunity to exert its mass influence.

Socialist realism, the product of life itself and the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat, has renewed and enriched all the vital functions of art which are designed to have an active effect upon man, the cognitive, educational, social and aesthetic functions. The creative activeness of the art of socialist realism is also its qualitatively new feature which makes this art a step forward in the development of world art.