1. Inostrannaia literatura, 1964, no. 1, pp. 134-81. The following works were published: “In the Penal Colony,” “The Metamorphosis,” “Before the Law” (from The Trial), “The Passengers,” “The Truth about Sancho Panza,” “Home-Coming,” and “At Night.” Prior to publication in Russian, some Kafka stories were published in book form in Tallinn in 1962 in Estonian and then in Ukrainian in the journal Vsevit, 6, no. 12 (1963): 69-87.

2. As the Soviets use the term, “modernism” refers to a movement in literature and the arts which began at the end of the nineteenth century and made a decisive break with the realistic tradition. Many Western critics use the term in the same way, although without the pejorative connotation. The Soviets regard Proust, Kafka, and Joyce as the fathers of the modernist novel. Many of the arguments used by the Soviets against modernism in general and Kafka in particular can be found in the volume published in 1958 by the noted Marxist critic Gyorgy Lukacs, Ober den missverstandenen Realismus (available in English as Realism in Our Time [New York: Harper & Row, 1964]).

3. The best account of this campaign is in Johnson, Priscilla, Khrushchev and the Arts: The Politics of Soviet Culture 1962-64 (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1965).Google Scholar

4. See Guy de Mallac, “Kafka publie en U.R.S.S.,” Le Monde, March 28, 1964; Mayer, Hans and Bondy, Frangois, “The Struggle for Kafka and Joyce,” Encounter , 22, no. 5 (1964): 83–89 Google Scholar; Rees, Goronwy, “A Visa for Kafka,” Encounter , 23, no. 3 (1964): 27–34 Google Scholar; Struc, Roman S., “Franz Kafka in the Soviet Union: A Report,” Monatshejte , 57, no. 4 (April-May 1965): 193–97 Google Scholar; and Herling-Grudzinski, Gustav, “Kafka w Rosji,” Kultura (Paris), December 1965, pp. 8–13 Google Scholar. For an account of some later developments, see Struc, Roman S., “Critical Reception of Franz Kafka in the Soviet Union,” The Annals of the Ukrainian Academy of Arts and Sciences in the U.S ., 11, nos. 1-2 (nos. 31-32) (1964-68): 129–42Google Scholar. The situation in Eastern Europe is discussed in Politzer, Heinz, Franz Kafka: Parable and Paradox, 2nd ed. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1966 Google Scholar, Bahr, E, “Kafka and the Prague Spring,” Mosaic , 3, no. 4 (Summer 1970): 15–29 Google Scholar, and Liehm, A. J., “Franz Kafka in Eastern Europe,” Telos , no. 3 (Spring 1975): 53–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5. The pre-Stalinist Literaturnaia entstklopediia contained a Kafka entry (1931), but there was no entry under his name in either the first edition of the Bol'shaia sovetskaia enlsiklopediia (1936) or the second (1953). In regard to knowledge of Kafka in the Soviet Union during the 1920s and 1930s, Guy de Mallac writes that “copies of some of Kafka's texts in the original (notably ‘In the Penal Colony, ’ The Trial, and The Castle) circulated in the early 1930s among certain Leningrad intellectuals (the Oberiu group, the practitioners of zaum A. V. Tufanov, Evgeny Schwartz)” (Letter to the Editor: “Postscript to ‘Kafka in Russia, '” Russian Review, 31, no. 2 [April 1972]: 212- 13). According to an acquaintance of Oberiu member Daniil Kharms, quoted by de Mallac, Kafka influenced Kharms, but this is disputed by Robin Milner-Gulland in his Letter to the Editor, Russian Review, 32, no. 1 (January 1973): 114.

6. Mayer and Bondy, “The Struggle for Kafka and Joyce,” p. 84.

7. Johnson, Khrushchev and the Arts, p. 83.

8. Bahr, “Kafka and the Prague Spring,” pp. 20-21; and Politzer, Franz Kafka, pp. 363-64. Fischer's essay on Kafka is available in English in Fischer, Ernst, Art Against Ideology (New York: George Braziller, 1969 Google Scholar.

9. Anisimov, Ivan I. and El'sberg, Iakov E., eds., Problemy realizma (Moscow, 1959), p. 18.Google Scholar

10. Ibid., p. 586.

11. See, for example, Shcherbina, Vladimir R., Voprosy rasvitiia sotsialisticheskogo realisma v sovctskoi literature (Moscow, 1958)Google Scholar; and Tsarelli, I., ed., Protiv revizionizma v estetike (Moscow, 1960)Google Scholar.

12. Zatonskii, Dmitrii V., “Smert1 i rozhdenie Frantsa Kafki,” Inostrannaia literatura, 1959, no. 2, pp. 202–12Google Scholar. Zatonskii has also written on Kafka in Ukrainian. See, for example, Zatonskii, D. and Libman, Z., Otruiena zbroia: Reaktsiini literatura ta mystetsvo u borofbi proty rozumu, ludianosti, progresu (The Poisoned Weapons: Reactionary literature and arts in their struggle against reason, humanity, and progress) (Kiev, 1959).Google Scholar

13. “Conservatives,” as I use the term, refers to critics who opposed Kafka. I am not concerned here with their positions on other issues.

14. Il'ia G. Erenburg, “V predvidenii vesny,” Literaturnaia gazeta, November 5, 1959, p. 3.

15. Personal conversation in the Soviet Union.

16. Zatonskii, Dmitrii V., “Chelovek i mir v literature sovremennogo zapada,” in Anisimov, Ivan I. et al., eds., Gumanizm i sovremennaia literatura (Moscow, 1963), p. 307–18.Google Scholar

17. For a Western critique of the Soviet concept of man, see De George, Richard T., “The Soviet Concept of Man,” Studies in Soviet Thought , 4, no. 4 (December 1964): 261–76 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On Marxism and humanism, see Demaitre, Edmund, “In Search of Humanism,” Problems of Communism, 14, no. 5 (1965): 18–30 Google Scholar, and Hook, Sidney, “Marx's Second Coming,” Problems of Communism, 15, no. 4 (1966): 26–29 Google Scholar. For a defense of the Soviet position, see Griniuk, V, “Otpoved’ kritikam sotsialisticheskogo gumanizma,” Kommunist , 41, no. 1 (January 1964): 124–25.Google Scholar

18. Zatonskii, Dmitrii V., “K probleme modernizma,” in Andreev, Leonid G. and Sokolov, A. G., eds., 0 litcrahimo-khudoshcstvennykh techeniiakh XX vcka (Moscow, 1966), p. 156–76.Google Scholar

19. An example of the embarrassment felt by Soviet intellectuals as a result of the ban on Kafka was provided by the writer Viktor Nekrasov. Nekrasov related that, in 1957 when Alberto Moravia asked him and some other Soviet writers about Kafka, “we silently looked at each other and could not answer; at that time we had never even heard of him” (Viktor Nekrasov, “Po obe storony okeana,” Novyi mir, 1962, no. 11, p. 131).

20. I have interpreted any liberalization in Soviet policy toward Kafka as a result of pressures brought to bear upon conservative forces. It was suggested to me in the Soviet Union, however, that this is not entirely correct, and that after 1956 all segments of the Soviet intelligentsia had come to believe that Stalinist cultural policies—such as the ban on Kafka— “were standing in the way of progress” and that Soviet “cultural horizons” had to be “broadened.”

21. Mayer and Bondy, “The Struggle for Kafka and Joyce,” p. 83. The speech was summarized in “Pisateli mira za kruglym stolom,” Pravda, July 14, 1962, p. 1, and excerpts were published in Literaturnaia gazeta, July 14, 1962. Neither version contained Sartre's remarks on Kafka, however.

22. Sartre, Jean-Paul, “Kholodnaia voina i edinstvo kul'tury,” Inostrannaia literatura , 1963, no. 1, pp. 222–29.Google Scholar

23. Ibid., p. 223.

24. Anisimov, Ivan I., “Aktual'nost’ gumanizma,” Inostrannaia literatura, 1963, no. 4, pp. 192–99.Google Scholar

25. The proceedings of the conference are contained in Goldstiicker, Edward, Kautman, Frantisek, and Reimann, Paul, eds., Franz Kafka aus Prager Sicht (Prague, 1965)Google Scholar.

26. Zatonskii, Dmitrii V., “Kafka bez retushi,” Voprosy literatury, 1964, no. 5, p. 70.Google Scholar

27. Knipovich, Evgeniia F., “Frants Kafka,” Inostrannaia literatura, 1964, no. 1, p. 195.Google Scholar

28. “Roman, chelovek, obshchestvo,” Inostrannaia literatura, 1963, no. 11, p. 244.

29. Il'ia G. Erenburg, “Otstaivat’ chelovecheskie tsennosti,” Literaturnaia gaseta, August 13, 1963, p. 2.

30. “Roman, chelovek, obshchestvo,” Inostrannaia literatura, 1963, no. 11, pp. 204-45.

31. Roger Garaudy, “Kafka, die moderne Kunst und vvir,” in Goldstiicker et al., pp. 199-207.

32. Garaudy, Roger, D'un realisme sans rivages (Paris, 1963)Google Scholar. All Garaudy quotes are from this volume. The translations are mine.

33. Rozhe Garodi, “O realizme i ego beregakh,” Inostrannaia literatura, 1965, no. 4, pp. 202-8.

34. Naumov, N, “Rozhe Garodi v ‘Inostrannoi literature, '” Inostrannaia literatura, 1965, no. 1, p. 252.Google Scholar

35. Garodi, Rozhe, Realism bez beregov (Moscow, 1966).Google Scholar

36. See Cranston, Maurice, “The Thought of Roger Garaudy,” Problems of Communism, 29, no. 5 (1970): 11.Google Scholar

37. See, for example, “Protiv antikommunizma v literaturovedenii i estetike,” Voprosy Hteratury, 1970, no. 5, p. 5, and Momdzhian, Kh. N., Marksism i renegdt Garodi (Moscow, 1973).Google Scholar

38. See, for example, Motyleva, Tamara L., “Tak li nado izuchat’ zarubezhnuiu literaturu?” Inostrannaia literatura, 1956, no. 9, pp. 209—18.Google Scholar

39. Motyleva, Tamara L., “V sporakh o romane,” Novyi mir, 1963, no. 11, p. 207.Google Scholar

40. Knipovich, Evgeniia F., “Frants Kafka,” Inostrannaio literatura, 1964, no. 1, pp. 195–204.Google Scholar

41. Dmitrii V. Zatonskii, “Kafka bez retushi,” pp. 65-109.

42. Suchkov, Boris L., “Kafka, ego sud'ba i ego tvorchestvo,” Znamia , 1964, no. 10, pp. 212-18, and 1964, no. 11, pp. 229–46Google Scholar. My characterization of Suchkov derives from his critical writings, in which he condemns any work of literature which does not conform to his narrow definition of realism. From the point of view of those closer to the scene, however, he looked somewhat different. One Soviet critic pointed out to me that it was Suchkov who edited the Soviet edition of Kafka which came out in 1965, and that negative criticism of an author is, after all, a means of popularizing him. Yuri Glazov, a Soviet scholar now residing in Canada, has remarked that Suchkov, who succeeded Anisimov as head of the Gorky Institute of World Literature “invite [to the Institute] those who are … very unorthodox” (private correspondence). (Suchkov died in 1974.) The real configuration of forces in Soviet criticism is, to say the least, much more complicated than it appears on the pages of literary journals.

43. Anisimov, Ivan I. et al., eds., Sovremennye problcmy realisma i modernism (Moscow, 1965).Google Scholar

44. Ibid., p. 17.

45. Ibid., pp. 605-6.

46. Samarii I. Velikovskii, “Otchuzhdenie i literatura Zapada,” in Anisimov et al., Sovremennye problemy, pp. 522-35.

47. Ibid., p. 531.

48. According to Yuri Glazov: “In the fifties Kafka was considered by many of my friends to be one of the most fascinating authors banned in Russia. We tried to read him in German and English, even in Polish and Czech, and our impression of him was nothing short of fantastic. He saw the world that we could not depict truly and in detail. Various stories and his two novels and parables struck at the system … more strongly than G. Orwell or A. Huxley. The appearance of his stories in Russia … was … a sensation. The books could not be bought anywhere … and the price on the black market was exceedingly high. Soviet reality was such that what Kafka showed was only everyday Russian reality” (private correspondence).

49. Velikovskii, “Otchuzhdenie i literatura Zapada,” pp. 534-35.

50. “Veter veka—v parusa realizma,” Literaturnaia gazeta, February 2, 1965, p. 4. Velikovskii's speech was summarized for the scholarly public in Grishunin, A. L., “Nauchnaia konferentsiia ‘sovremennye problemy realizma i modernizm, '” Isvestiia Akadcmii nattk SSSR: Seriia literatury i iazyka , vol. 3 (1965), pp. 270–76Google Scholar, and a similar version of it was published as “Priglashenie porazymslit’ (k probleme ‘otchuzhdeniia’),” Voprosy literatury, 1965, no. 9, pp. 166-89.

51. Zatonskii, Dmitrii, Fronts Kafka i problemy modernizma (Moscow, 1965).Google Scholar

52. Kafka, F., Roman [Protsess]. Novelty. Pritchi (Moscow, 1965)Google Scholar. An Estonian edition of Kafka's work was published in Tallinn in 1966.

53. Kafka, F, “Pis'mo k ottsu,” Zvezda , 1968, no. 8, pp. 175–95Google Scholar, with commentary by A. Dymshits, “Kak ‘ukorachivaiut’ cheloveka,” pp. 196-97.

54. “Iz dnevnikov Frantsa Kafki,” Voprosy literatury, 1968, no. 2, pp. 136-68.

55. Gulyga, A, “Filosofskaia proza Frantsa Kafki,” Voprosy estetiki, no. 8 (1968), pp. 293–323.Google Scholar

56. See, for example, Gei, Nikolai K. and Piskunov, Vladimir M., Mir, chelovek, iskusstvo (Moscow, 1965)Google Scholar; Gus, Mikhail S., Modernism bes maski (Moscow, 1966)Google Scholar; and Suchkov, Boris L., Istoricheskie sud'by rcalizma (Moscow, 1967).Google Scholar

57. See, for example, Shcherbina, Vladimir R., Puti iskusstva (Moscow, 1970)Google Scholar. Commenting on the current situation, Professor Hans Mayer stated in August 1974 that he was certain that “in connection with the campaign against Soviet writers and scholars from Solzhenitsyn to Sakharov, no new and unorthodox interpretations of Kafka can appear” (private correspondence).

58. Andreev, Leonid G. and Samarin, Roman M., eds., Istoriia zarubezhnoi literatury posle oktiabr'skoi revoliutsii. Chasf 1: 1917-45 (Moscow, 1969), pp. 5–6, 8, 14.Google Scholar

59. Kopelev, Lev Z., “Kafka,” Kratkaia literaturnaia entsiklopediia, vol. 3 (1966), pp. 454–56.Google Scholar

60. Motyleva, Tamara L., “Realizm,” Kratkaia literaturnaia entsiklopediia, vol. 6 (1971), p. 221.Google Scholar

61. See, for example, Roman M. Samarin, “Bez chetkikh orientirov: zametki o kratkoi literaturnoi entsiklopedii,” Pravda, June 30, 1969, p. 3; P. S. Vykhodtsev, “Kritika i nauka o literature,” Russkaia literatura, 1972, no. 3, p. 20; and V. M. Ozerov, “Literaturno-khudozhestvennaia kritika i sovremennost',” Literaturnaia gazeta, February 2, 1972, p. 3.

62. See footnote 55.

63. Gulyga, A, “Puti mifotvorchestva i puti iskusstva,” Novyi mir, 1969, no. 5, pp. 217–32.Google Scholar

64. Gulyga, “Filosofskaia proza,” p. 298.

65. Ibid., p. 307.

66. Ibid., pp. 299 and 303, passim

67. See, for example, Fischer, Art Against Ideology, and Vasquez, Adolfo Sanchez, Art and Society: Essays in Marxist Aesthetics (New York and London: Monthly Review Press, 1973), pp. 136–54.Google Scholar

68. On Proust, see Dneprov, Vladimir, “Iskusstvo Marselia Prusta,” Inostrannaia literatura, 1973, no. 4, pp. 194–203.Google Scholar

69. Demaitre, Edmund, “The New Treason of the Clerks,” Problems of Communism, 13, no. 5 (1964): 27.Google Scholar

70. Private conversations in the USSR. Printed sources also occasionally reveal that Soviet intellectuals continue to be interested in Kafka. Thus Viktor Shklovsky discusses him briefly in his recent book, Tetiva: 0 neskhodstve neskhodnogo (Moscow, 1970, pp. 74 and 366), and, in a Kafkaesque mini-story entitled “Understanding” (Looming, May 1974 [Tallinn]), the Estonian writer Toomas Liiv brings in a mouse whose name is Franz Kafka and who is “pronounced guilty of not understanding his guilt.” Also, in an article in Literattirnaia gazeta (February 26, 1975, p. 4), the critic Iurii Andreev refers enigmatically to “enormous efforts” still being made “before our very eyes” by “certain circles” to “galvanize and exaggerate the significance of this sorrowful writer.”