205 206   207

p F. Kondratenko

p One of the tasks during the transition to communism is to educate a harmoniously developed individual. Aesthetic upbringing is called upon to play an exceptional role in this, since an aesthetic outlook, the goal of aesthetic education, is, by its very nature and essence, related to communism in the closest possible manner.

p The all-round developed individual is one in whom all aspects are harmoniously developed to perfection—the intellectual, emontional, volitional, his psychical and spiritual strengths and creative abilities and talents.

p The all-round development of the individual cannot be a purely internal one, only potentially inherent in man. It must be freely realised in practice, in social activity.

p One of the basic conditions of such a development of the personality is the complete freedom of his creative manifestation and above all, as the, classics of Marxism showed, the freedom from want and outward expediency and the freedom from material incentive. “In fact, the realm of freedom actually begins only where labour which is determined by necessity and mundane considerations ceases; thus in the very nature of things it lies beyond the sphere of actual material production.... Beyond it begins that development of human energy which is the end in itself....”  [207•1 

p Does socialist society create the necessary conditions for this? Unquestionably all-round development of the individual “...has been made possible by historic social gains—freedom from exploitation, unemployment and poverty, from discrimination on account of sex, origin, nationality or race. Every member of society is provided with equal opportunities for education and creative 208 labour. Relations of dependence and inequality between people in public affairs and family life disappear. The personal dignity of each citizen is protected by society. Each is guaranteed an equal and free choice of occupation and profession with due regard to the interests of society. As less and less time is spent on material production, the individual is afforded ever greater opportunities to develop his abilities, gifts, and talents in the fields of production, science, engineering, literature, and the arts."  [208•1 

p These conditions, which have been created under socialism, are sufficient for beginning the process of the all-round, harmonious development of all and everyone but not, however, for the consummation of that process.

p The Programme of the CPSU states that “in the period of transition to communism, there are greater opportunities of educating a new man, who will harmoniously combine spiritual wealth, moral purity and a perfect physique."  [208•2  As we see, the Programme quite distinctly shows that “the possibilities for educating a new man increase during the transitional period”.

p The all-round development of the individual cannot, however, be a condition for the transition to communism. Firstly, where is the limit to this all-round development? If it is natural and definite for each individual it cannot exist for man in general. To establish any limit to the development of man’s creative spiritual potential would mean to halt that development, to set up a certain boundary, beyond which mankind must either perish or turn backwards and begin to degrade. Secondly, to set such a task would mean to consider communism that point where the process of the all-round development of man would be complete. Karl Marx thought otherwise. He considered that it is not all-round developed individuals that are necessary for communism but rather that communism is necessary for the all-round development of all and everyone, that under communism the complete and free development of each individual does not end, but only begins,  [208•3  “...that development of human energy which is the end in itself’,  [208•4  the genuine history of the development of man as Man.

p For the first time in history, in the period of the transition from socialism to communism, the task of harmoniously educating and developing man has actually been set realistically, and not speculatively.

209

p Communism means not only an abundance of the articles of consumption, not only a satisfaction of material needs. Abundance is not an end in itself for communism, but a necessary condition for the free labour and creativity of all and everyone, for the unimpeded manifestation of creative and constructive capabilities, and for self-revelation in creativity, which is a genuine human need.

p The creative principle or “creative instinct" of mankind is as powerful as hunger and thirst. It is inherent in all mentally sound people, though in varying degrees. The more talented the person, the stronger the creative impetus in him, the more irresistibly and impetuously he thirsts for the realisation and consummation of his capabilities. From here, strictly speaking, comes the prime task of upbringing, the forming and developing of creative capabilities, gifts and talents. However the scholars who limit the tasks of upbringing to this alone and reduce all its aspects and forms, including the aesthetic, to this are profoundly mistaken. Tjhey give the “creative impetus" a “disinterestedness” which is not inherent in it claiming it to be free from “essential needs" and selfdirected only towards beneficial ends, and this is in flagrant contradiction to the concrete facts of life.

p The creative impetus in man is not only as powerful as hunger and thirst but also manifests itself if not together with physiological requirements then in any case with the first signs of consciousness. Everyone well knows the manifestations of the creative impetus in small children. And it can be directed not only towards beneficial ends, not only towards constructiveness, but also towards destruction, and can find outlet in mischief, rowdyism and criminal acts. How much inventiveness, creativity and even talent is sometimes displayed by criminals, how many creative abilities, gifts and brilliant talents have been wasted on money-grubbing, the destruction and subordination of other people.... Did creativity, the intentions of which were well aimed—the creation of genuine material and spiritual values for the benefit of the entire society, the whole of mankind—always have as its bases the motive of free self-manifestation, self-realisation, and not other, purely mercantile intentions, as, for example, the obtaining of material benefits or a thirst for glory and ambition?

p In a society where material, social and political inequality existed or continues to exist, free, disinterested creativity, creativity as the self-realisation of capabilities is exclusive, the lot of outstanding gifts and talents.

p In socialist society moral and political inequality has been eliminated, however a difference in the material and spiritual conditions of the life of certain members of society still exists as yet, 210 and the principle of material incentive and payment according to labour remains; and this inevitably leads to the fact that creativity is far from always free of self-interest, ambition and utilitarian goals; and it happens that it can be directed to the detriment of society and can manifest itself in crime. Therefore to educate and develop the creative impetus in man and his capabilities and talents is important and necessary, but this is far from everything. The main task is to direct it in the proper channel, free it from petty mercantilism, and make it a disinterested, inner need.

p No small role in solving this task lies in aesthetic education. However for concrete explanation of the role and significance of aesthetic education it is necessary to proceed not from the abstract notion of what a man “will be" or “won’t be" in communist society but rather from what we should instil in man (in our presentday, socialist man) in order that he might become an active builder of communist society and a full-fledged citizen in it. And for that we have to examine where the essential difference of the second phase of communism from the first lies, what will be demanded of man under communism and what it will offer hirn, what is the nature of relations in such a society and on what principles and elements they are formed.

p The division of labour amongst the classes in society, as a result of which the creative aspect of labour turned out to be in the hands of the bourgeoisie and under its direct control, led to the fact that the social function of labour as a means for the development and improvement of man actually proved to be reduced to zero. The socialist revolution, in liquidating the exploiting classes, thus eliminated the preferential right of any class whatsoever to engage in creative work or assume the leading role in all spheres of activity while retaining, however, the division of labour along historically formed lines. In the transition to communism many of them will probably be altered and others will die off completely (for example the protection of social and personal property), but they are not subject to destruction.

p It may be presumed that in communist society, like in socialist, the specialisation of labour,i.e., its division by professions among members of society, will be retained; it would be naive utopianism to assume the possibility (in any remote perspective) of such “universal” development of man that he could with equal success work and be creative in any and every sphere of activity, in any occupation, even with our modern development of science and technology, not to speak of the development they will achieve under communism.

p In order to understand namely what remaining elements of the 211 division of labour we must eliminate in the transition from socialism to communism it is necessary to compare the role of work in the life of people in a socialist society with the role that work will play in the life of people under communism.

p In socialist society work for the benefit of society is the sacred obligation of every person. In communist society it has to become the prime necessity of life. The attitude towards work in socialist society is based on moral and economic compulsion “he who doesn’t work, neither shall he eat”. The attitude towards work in communist society must be based on the free manifestation of an inner need. The basic individual (personal) motive to work and concern about the quality and quantity of its results in socialist society is material and moral incentive: “from each according to his ability, to each according to his work”. In communist society (“from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”), in place of the no longer needed material incentive, aesthetic incentive in the results of labour—the striving for a more complete realisation of creative possibilities and talents—becomes the basic motive.

p Such a comparison is sufficient in order to see that it is a question of two diverse functions of labour: when we speak of socialism we take labour as a necessary condition for supporting the life of the individual person and society, as a means of existence, i.e., we regard it as an external need; when we speak of communism, then we take labour as a means for the “distinctive and free development of the individual”, i.e., we characterise it as man’s internal need;

p But there is another way of reasoning which, in my view, must proceed from the fact that labour, notwithstanding its dual nature, is a single entity. No matter how paradoxical it may seem, its unity is contained in its duality. The possibility of the division of labour was objectively dependent on labour’s dual nature in which the objective possibility of its unification is also contained. And if it is impossible to do without labour as a means of existence then it is necessary to subordinate it to labour as a means of development and improvement, uniting them on a higher basis. Labour as a means of existence, being an external and not internal need, appears as the realm of necessity. But from here it still does not follow that labour as an inner need, as a means of free development, cannot create the means for existence, cannot be beneficial in its results.

p The free development of the individual, or the development of human energies, which is the end in itself, can be realised only through labour. Labour is the basic and, in fact, the only means of 212 the social development of man; such a development is not possible outside of labour, if by labour we understand not only work or a job, but any of man’s activities (including games, if they are not for amusement during rest) demanding expenditures of not only physical, but also mental energy. Labour as a means of selfdevelopment is always directed towards the individual and not outside, therefore not all such labour is productive and effective, i.e., beneficial to society. But it would not be rignt to think that such work must always be non-productive and ineffective.

p The essence of the division of labour lies in the fact that in labour’s being denied its creativity, it was reduced to work or a job, i.e., to a “bare” means of existence which is not only not conducive to free development but rather impedes it. Therefore any activity Of man (any labour) directed to free development came to be interpreted as something incompatible with productive labour, the opposite of work. However man can really develop only through creativity, only in displaying in practice his creative abilities in producing material and spiritual values. Inner motives and stimuli also attract him to this: the desire for self-realisation, the desire to see what he is capable of through performing activities and actions which alone are capable of giving him true satisfaction and pleasure. Being by nature an active and functioning creature man feels the need of active self-expression much more strongly than that of a passive accumulation of knowledge and development of capabilities.

p Thus the free development of the personality is not in irreconcilable contradiction to the creation of material and spiritual values, to the production of consumer products—the creation of the means of existence. It is in contradiction to thoughtless, mechanical, non-creative labour. In order to eliminate the existing contradictions between free development and material production it is necessary to annul the division of labour, to return labour the unity it has lost and man the universal character of activity. Strictly speaking the word “return” is not precise because that unity in question never existed before in the history of man.

p We observe the unity of labour, in which both its functions are indissolubly fused, only in the early stages of man’s development when work was not as yet divided either into definite work processes or into various spheres of production. Here the basis of the unity of labour lay in external need—the obtaining of the means of existence. The second function of labour—the development and improvement of man—followed from the first: in making and improving the implements of labour with the aim of simplifying it and raising its productivity, and in improving the organisation of 213 the work processes man broadened his cognitive capabilities developed physically, tempered his will, and improved the social organisation of the labour collective.

p In the higher stage of the development of man the unity of labour must be achieved in the exact opposite manner: by engaging in creative labour, which is an inner need, the basic means for free development, man, in this way, will penetrate more deeply into the secrets of nature, conquer the Universe and make and improve the implements and means of production for utilising more broadly the inexhaustible riches of nature, for satisfying his growing needs Such labour, being “non-beneficial” in its goal—the goal of the free development and creative self-realisation of man for the sake of satisfaction and pleasure—will at the same time be to the highest degree beneficial and productive in its results.

I foresee that only by means of achieving such a unity of labour can the “realm of necessity" be eliminated and the real possibility be created for the free development of all and everyone, the result and condition of which is the creating of an abundance of items of material and spiritual consumption. The practical realisation of this task will signify the transition from socialism to communism, the building of a communist society.