comrade Stalin in the portrait, and then even gouged out the eyes.—He put on his coat and hat, slammed the door, and left. I sat and cried, and felt sorry for the calendar, and felt sorry for myself. To be sure, if he could have he’d cut my throat, too. He served that sentence for something—they don’t put you in prison for nothing. And here comes Praskov’ia, and without malice, but out of kindness to me, says, so what are you doing, she says, you’re crying. So I went and told her everything. She immediately began to tremble and said to me that we had to destroy the calendar right away. You know what might happen, she said, on account of that. She took the portrait part, nailed the pages back up to the wall, and left. Well, my Lenka returned, and we made up.
Only, three days later, my Lenia comes home at an unusual time—I was sleeping after a night shift. He’s pale and trembling and says to me that he was called to the MGB. There they showed him that same sliced-up portrait and said, how is it that you could bring yourself to commit such an offense against a portrait of comrade Stalin. So, Lenka says to me, “You know, Aneta, (he called me Aneta, in the foreign fashion), I’ve already served one sentence and got out on amnesty. The absolute least they’ll give me for recidivism is ten years. But you’re a leading citizen, with irreproachable service, an exemplary worker. So I ask you, I beg you, go and say that this is your doing. They’ll swear at you for it, maybe give you a reprimand, but you’ll save a person’s life.”
The lad is right, I think. The next day, we went to the MGB. We no sooner approached the watchman, than Lenka goes and says to him, “This is about the business of the portrait of comrade Stalin. “ They immediately let us in and led us to the investigator’s office. Lenka says, “I’ve brought her. She’ll tell you everything herself.” And he left. I told them everything, just as Lenka taught me. The investigator wrote everything down and then gave it to me to read over. “Everything’s written down correctly?” he says. “It’s correct.” “Then sign it.” He showed me where to sign. I signed. “Now, I say, may I go home?” “No, now I’ll send for the man on duty and he’ll take you to a cell.” “What kind of cell?” “A prison cell. You’ll sit there until the trial, and then we’ll see.”
“What do you mean, until the trial? What trial?” “Well,” he says, “We’re going to try you.” “What are you going to try me for? What’s all this about?” “We’re going to try you for crimes against the state, according to the law.” Here I started to cry, and for three days in the cell I kept crying. After three days, they led me to the trial. They didn’t even want to hear what I had to say. “Is it you,” they say, “who signed your statement?” “Yes,” I answer, “but I didn’t know they would be passing judgment on it.” “Now,” they say, “it’s too
264
late. You should have thought about that earlier.” And the witnesses were Lenka and Praskov’ia. The judges retired for five minutes. Then they returned and read out my sentence: in accordance with article fifty-eight, point eight, for a terroristic act against a portrait of our leader and teacher, friend of all the nations, comrade Stalin,— twenty-five years in a corrective labor camp. And so they brought me here.
Apogee and Fracture: 1954–1991
Whatever the Soviet Union was under Stalin, it began to assume another face after him, though this was not always apparent. Nikita Khrushchev, impetuous and brash, seemed to contain many contrasting elements in his policies and character alike. A party official of the highest ranks, he was a faithful supporter of Stalin, and there was much blood on his hands.
However, it was Khrushchev who shocked the party (and then the world) by being the architect of de- Stalinization. The secret speech to the 20th Party Congress on February 24, 1956, attacked Stalin for numerous crimes and the cult of personality. Among the beneficial results, besides those of opening a vast new forum for discussion, was the release of millions of prisoners from the GULAG. What could be more anti-Stalinist than this? Thousands of prisoners were also rehabilitated, though this honor was initially reserved for high-ranking Communist Party members. The number of those released from the camps is generally cited to be close to eight million; at least a million continued life in the camps, however.
The other major shift credited to Khrushchev was the gradual relaxation of the strictures on literature and the arts. The term “thaw” is now universally used to denote this. If the Party itself admitted Stalin’s errors, it could relax the reins in the field of cultural expression. Vladimir Dudintsev’s 1956 novel
266
Khrushchev’s salutary gestures in these areas must be contrasted with his frequently bellicose foreign policy. The great de-Stalinizer was also the figure who fomented the Berlin Crisis of 1958 and the inordinately dangerous Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. Simultaneously, Khrushchev sought summit meetings with western leaders and spoke of “peaceful co-existence” in quieter moments. The latter phrasing was inherited by his successor Leonid Brezhnev who replaced him in 1964. Both leaders maintained resolutely that communism would ultimately win out even if “peaceful co-existence” prevailed.
Brezhnev’s rule is generally viewed as one of stagnation, especially from the 1970’s on. The system seemed often to be set in stone and major shifts in agriculture and industry could not be effected. The disproportionate percentage of the national budget allotted to the military did not help. The USSR’s military posture and space program were still powerful and prestigious and were useful elements in the political wars aimed at gaining adherents in the Third World. Yet, fissures began to surface. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 turned into stalemate, then loss, something no one predicted.
China took a strong anti-Soviet position on the Afghanistan war. This only exemplified a truism apparent from the mid-1950’s – the two dominant communist powers never consolidated their political might and agendas. The fact that Brezhnev’s era saw nuclear test ban treaties signed, as well as those limiting strategic arms (e.g. SALT I in 1972), though viewed positively in the West, were seen as appeasement in Mao’s China. The political heritage of Brezhnev was broken by Gorbachev.
Mikhail Gorbachev is generally seen as one of the ten most influential leaders of the 20th century. Though committed to communism, he nevertheless realized that overhaul was mandated at all levels of the Soviet enterprise. He was prepared to go to lengths whose outcomes he could not begin to guess. The effort, most noticed internationally via the twin political dictums of
Nickolas Lupinin
