Vsesojuznoe soveščanie kritikov [12-08-1934] - [D008]

Concise description of the directive:

G. Lelevich: one of the central problems of the meeting must be that of classical heritage. Yet we must not overestimate the value of capitalist artists at the expense of revolutionary democratic works. We must thoroughly study the opinions of the great masters of Marxism regarding democratic revolutionary literature. A. Efros: the level of Soviet criticism is higher than that of Western criticism, but while the times we live in require critics to be encyclopaedists, they are guilty of clichés, quotations, vulgarisations, etc. A. Romm notes one of the weakest points of Soviet criticism, namely the almost total absence of criticism of translated literature. B. Yasensky criticises Yudin for his theses on the two types of writers in the USSR and the need to take away the right of low-level critics to criticise the best communist writers. Stavsky, Ermilov and Usievich criticise Yasensky’s intervention and insist that Soviet literature still represents a field of class struggle, so even writers closest to the party may need critical correction. Usievich: Litfront’s idea that reality can only be realistically described using the method of dialectical materialism is deeply flawed.