The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History


 © 2004 E.A. Kornilov


The Soviet and Russian samizdat - one of the most powerful subcultures of the latest time, the phenomenal, significant and bright public and literary and journalistic phenomenon.

The term "samizdat" began to function in the second half of the 50th and after the publication in the Izvestia newspaper of September 2, 1960 about issue of the typewritten magazine "Sintaxis" (an edition A. Ginzburg) began to be used widely. It is obvious that the term "samizdat" (independent publishing house) was created as an analog of the term "State publishing house" (state publishing house) and entered a historiography of the Soviet and Russian social literary thought as the phenomenon symbolizing the second parallel official the direction of domestic culture, and the richest source study well without which it is impossible to recreate a true story of Russia and its press of the latest time.

D.S. Likhachev said that the samizdat existed always. It must be assumed that it arose almost along with publishing, however as the public and literary phenomenon it was issued in the second half of the 20th century. This period (beginning of a modern samizdat) was the most secret for the public owing to difficult availability of texts, certificates, documents. Opening of a number of archives, including so-called "Red archive the" of Radio Freedom collecting documents of a samizdat since March, 1953 [1], studying library and archival stocks in Russia and abroad, the translations of English-speaking researchers of a samizdat allow to conduct the generalizing research covering the Stalin period and 50 - the 60th

The major issue consists in assessment of existence of underground editions and a samizdat at Stalin. Some researchers consider that any samizdat, underground, illegal literature at Stalin was not and could not be.

"Ezhovshchina, Stalin terror of the 30th made a samizdat impossible, and at those who entered life in this terrible time, there are even no memories that the samizdat once prospered in Russia" [2]. What samizdat is possible at the mode when repressed for a hint, a joke, a smile, a hint! The political protest, reaction to suppression of spiritual and physical freedom found realization generally in the form of an oral joke - one of genres of city folklore. The fear and isolation for the outside world and for own compatriots were destructive. World of obligatory collectivism and podozri-

Article represents the section of the monograph prepared for printing by E.A. Kornilov.

telnost regenerated in a paradoxical form of individualism, i.e. who could not but write, wrote "to a table", without showing anybody, hoping for publications in the future [3]. These works, without having become public, did not become also the samizdat phenomena, laying, however, the foundation of its realization during the periods of "thaw" and "spring". In fact such manuscripts needed to be hidden in much safer place, than a usual table. Solzhenitsyn, for example, speaking about the difficulties facing the underground writer paid attention to the continuous efforts directed to concealing existence of works and to hide manuscripts. He also wrote that he remembered the works during stay in labor camp where he forced itself to learn thousands of words in hope sometime to write down and even to publish them.

On this background, hardly heroic separate known attempts of production and distribution of protest leaflets and other materials in 30 - look the 40th desperate. Perhaps, the underground leaflet prepared and distributed in days of one of the most large-scale and aggressive party actions of the 30th - the first All-Union congress of the Soviet writers which took place on August 15, 1934 became the brightest fact. A problem of a congress was not only to acquaint writers with official ideology, to turn them into her apologists, but also to create the certain self-served environment designed to supervise behind views and outlook of the members. One of the documents found today in FSB archives, - the underground leaflet multiplied under carbon paper and distributed among delegates caused shock both in the security officers who found it, and in the authorities.

The underground leaflet intercepted by the staff of confidential and political department of GUGB People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs of the USSR in days of work of the All-Union congress of writers (no later than August 20, 1934), turned to foreign writers calls for rescue "the victims from our Soviet fascism which is carried out by Stalin" [4].

"These victims, really innocent, revolting and offending feelings of modern mankind, it is more, it is much more, - authors of the leaflet write, - than all victims of all globe combined since the end of world war". Authors of the leaflet ask foreign writers a question why they arranging various committees on rescue of the victims of Hitlerite fascism do not see that the USSR is 17 years in the state which is absolutely excluding any possibility of a free statement. "We, the Russian writers, remind ourselves prostitutes of brothel with that only

a difference that they trade in the body, and we soul; as for them there is no exit from brothel, except starvation, and for us..." Authors of the leaflet ask foreign writers to take writers of Russia under the protection, to give them the international moral support.

Also separate certificates on creation and production of leaflets of protest contents in the 40th post-war years are known. B.F. Egorov, the chairman of an editorial board of the academic series "Literary Monuments", remembered that in the late forties he took expulsions in an Asian part of the country of the people of the Caucasus, the Crimean Tatars, Kalmyks, the beginning of anti-Semitic campaigns hard. "I just (1948) graduated from the university, dreamed of creation of the underground revolutionary organization and decided to distribute leaflets. I do not remember how I entitled the leaflet. It looked the semi-periodical, after heading there was lime serial number. Contents - an appeal in all possible ways to fight against a fashization of the country and to protect the rights of the repressed people" [5]. The leaflet was hanged out on walls and doors, scattered in audiences, on steps of ladders.

The called facts of production and distribution of underground leaflets in the period of the Stalin mode were isolated. Main types of a samizdat existed and others were widespread quite widely, - in so unusual forms which still, perhaps, were not known by history.

Solzhenitsyn, Shalamov, Ginzburg still pined in camps, time of their author's samizdat did not come yet; the samizdat existed in the form of, so to speak, copy - the hand-written and typewritten copies forbidden, withdrawn from libraries of poems, philosophical essays and stories. The young intellectuals, students read that is called to holes halfblind, sixth or seventh copies of poems of Tsvetaeva and Mandelstam, Gumilev and Pasternak. "So quite naturally, nobody, except life, not imposed, the courageous and bitter romanticism of Gumilev came most, instead of Bagritsky and Svetlov's pre-war romanticism," [6, page 6].

However production and reading of a samizdat, works by any of the "withdrawn" authors was so dangerous that the vast majority of their poems, stories existed and functioned in society in an oral form. It was special, still whom not called and not noted "oral samizdat". People studied by heart the forbidden poems, read them in the circle at parties and meetings, gathered outdoors, being afraid of "exposure" and a denunciation. Just as in the fantastic novel by Ray Bradbury "Fahrenheit 451" where the state destroyed all book culture. And then intellectuals began to learn by heart monuments to a human thought.

Fortunately, there passed not enough time, and already more mature written, author's samizdat in which on -

became available to the subsequent generations

many writers who made subsequently pride of domestic culture chat the creativity. But the copy oral samizdat of Stalin time, undoubtedly, played the enduring role already owing to the fact that it "found classics height at once" [6, page 7], put certain traditions, became the first manifestation of free-thinking of a nonconformist part of society in post-war time.

Already by the end of 1953, after I.V. Stalin's death, in officially published literature and the periodical press motives which were not possible before and became the beginning of the phenomenon called "the first thaw", which affected to a great extent a samizdat exit from a deep, irrational underground and gave the chance of the first contacts (polemic, a discussion) with officially presented journalism and literature began to sound.

Publications of 1953 of I. Ehrenburg and V. Pomerantsev became the first signals of modern times. In article "About Work of the Writer" I. Ehrenburg proclaimed the right of the writer for a private judgment in the image of life, own hallmark that contradicted semi-official collectivist postulates [7]. And to a certain extent article "About Sincerity in Literature" of V. Pomerantsev became an esthetic sign of the times ideological [8]. As well as I. Ehrenburg, V. Pomerantsev stood up for a variety of approaches to the image of reality, to reproduction of its conflict and negative sides. Its postulate that literature - not only a sermon, but also a confession, gave ideology to the whole direction of modern prose which received the name of confessionary.

Certainly, the squall of charges of substitution of category of outlook lacking ideas concepts of sincerity, an ispovedalnost, etc. fell upon I. Ehrenburg and, first of all, V. Pomerantsev [9]. However the signal was given, and a number of authors appear in open print from much more radical, than before positions - the "Rural diaries" of E. Dorosh, stories by A. Yashin added and edited in comparison with publications of 1952 "Regional everyday life" of V. Ovechkin, etc.

After I. Stalin's death the process of interference of publications in Gosizdat and a samizdat was very close. The mentioned V. Pomerantsev's manifesto "About sincerity in literature" was published in officially published press. It is undoubted that furious attack to which it was subjected in it initiated emergence - already later in a samizdat of the manifesto of A. Sinyavsky (Abram Terts) "About socialist realism" [10]. Both manifestos published one in the open Soviet press, another - abroad, were of great importance for development of ways of further development of domestic literature.

Pomerantsev claimed that not only great, but also readable literature can be created only if authors are free from any ideological or any other stereotypes and remain honest in relation to themselves, to the judgments, the ideas and to the true, not embellished observations. It a wasp -

dit "the industrial story" for absence in it these qualities and for submission of people to cars, implementation of plans, etc. Thus, it meant that "the communistic enthusiasm" and "ideological devotion" of orthodox writers were insincere and that, therefore, the school of socialist realism was fraud.

Sinyavsky was to some extent more indulgent in relation to socialist realism. He saw in him the ideological art enslaving the facts and realities for the sake of the purposes and values of communism. The suffering inflicted on people for the sake of achievement of this ideal as it understood led to full discredit of an ideal, especially after Stalin's death. In it he saw inevitable death of socialist realism as the direction capable to inspire true art creativity. Actually it predicted a necrosis of modern Soviet literary institutions and their works. Realizing modern to it the world as something awful, Sinyavsky believed that the true future of the Russian literature needs to be looked for not in return to realism of the 19th century, but in new art of a phantasmagoria with hypotheses instead of the purposes and grotesque instead of the image of surrounding reality (U1or1 of $ате).

Sinyavsky and Pomerantsev's reflections are based on the tradition connected with M. Bulgakov and A. Platonov's creativity, but their categoriality is strictly disproved not only by huge history of realistic Russian literature, but also works of modern writers - A. Solzhenitsyn, K. Paustovsky, V. Maximov, V. Voynovich, G. Troyepolsky, V. Ovechkin, etc. The novel "In a circle the first" is close to documentary literature as "most of heroes are almost completely taken from life and practically all described events really happened". In general the book, by recognition of all famous critics, - undoubtedly, the work of art [11]. "The archipelago GULAG" - the biggest social and documentary and historical research of forty years of a system of suppression of dissent in the country, the large work of art, the phenomenon of national literature.

However Pomerantsev and Sinyavsky's categoriality, as well as any categoriality, odnostoronna. But the fact of the publication of their manifestos testified to a new trend - joint discussion of important literary problems in Gosizdat and a samizdat.

Inflow of authors to a samizdat, formation of self-published literature after the resolution of presidium of board of the Union of the Soviet writers "About errors of the Novy Mir magazine" and A. Tvardovsky's removals from a post of the editor-in-chief of the magazine became especially powerful [12].

It should be noted also close, but a bit different trend which was washing away borders between a samizdat and official ideology. This emergence in the environment of the communistic intellectuals of research works and periodicals of anti-dogmatic, anti-Stalinist character which carried during this period in essence dissident character and carefully konspirirovatsya or became on -

to waters for an exception of party and repressions. An example are "The political diary" which was edited in 1964 - 1971. Roy Medvedev among 40 - 50 party members (the edition is in detail studied by Stephen F. Coen), and later the HKH Vek magazine also extended. Editions concerned political affairs, problems of neostalinism, dissent and reflected views of socialist opposition.

Expressing opinion and hope of many writers and readers, V. Kaverin at the Second congress of the Union of the Soviet writers in December, 1954 so stated the vision of future literature: "I see literature in which the strong independent criticism defines a way of the author, his opportunity and prospect. I see literature in which editorial councils of literary magazines safely defend the works published in their magazines, protecting their independent ideas and their authors. I see literature in which any, even the most authoritative opinion, does not disturb a release of the work to the public because the fate of the book - the fate of her author, and the fate of the writer needs to be cherished and loved. I see literature in which the personal relations do not play any role. in which gluing of labels is a shame and is pursued under the law; literature which remembers and loves the past" [13].

I. Ehrenburg, V. Pomerantsev, F. Abramov's publications, V. Kaverin's performance and others became especially strong signals for illegal literature. The exciting smell of the first signs of freedom gave a powerful spur to that phenomenon which became actually a samizdat in his modern understanding, laid the foundation for a welfare phenomenon which per se in the history of domestic literature and journalism just was not. However first "thaw" could not be long and steady as it most often happens in the nature, and in spiritual life of society "winter motives" began to sound again. The state publishing houses refused to print "Doctor Zhivago" of B. Pasternak, and he transferred the novel on informal channels for the publication abroad.

In many respects this case and others, followed it, became an occasion and an incentive of the birth of a samizdat in that sense which it needs to give - as the competitor and creative opponent Gosizdat as second, parallel subculture of national literature and journalism.

Paradoxically, during the post-Stalin period in more liberal conditions there was a degradation of the Writers' Union, and many talented representatives of the senior generation were discredited that objectively stimulated development of a samizdat. The young shots attracted increasingly from regions on senior positions in the Union forced out talented writers of the senior generation of national scale who ceased to feel the belonging to this organization and finally perceived exile from it as a point of honor as though they went in the footsteps of Zoshchenko, Akhmatova and Pasternak [14]. As a result it ended with their leaving in the samizdat which received a powerful incentive of development.

Authors of the collection "According to Pages of a Samizdat" consider that its valid birth coincided, to be exact, was a consequence of sharp and sudden curtailment in 1964 - 1965 of information concerning that the sphere of our life and history over which veil was hardly managed to be lifted "One day Ivan Denisovich" and "Matryona's Place" [15, page 6].

And therefore the samizdat at once and powerfully began with a severe monosubject, and in its basis lay "An abrupt route" E. Ginzburg, "The cancer case" and "In a circle the first" A. Solzhenitsyna. Then stories by V. Shalamov, "Great terror" of V. Konkvest, "The blinding darkness" A. Kestler, "Memoirs" N.Ya. Mandelstam, V.G. Korolenko's letters to A.V. Lunacharsky, etc. followed. Its range constantly and more and more considerably extended. In self-published publications many for the first time read "Doctor Zhivago" of Pasternak, "Requiem" by Akhmatova, Gumilev and Mandelstam's poem, Zoshchenko and Bulgakov's prose, not to mention absolutely "forbidden" Russian philosophy of the beginning of the century (Berdyaev, Florensky, S. Bulgakov).

Many researchers note that from the middle of the 50th the circle of authors and readers of not subacceptable press quickly extended. Despite some weakening of censorship in the 50th, a framework of the bans remained rigid, the publishing policy was strictly regulated by ideological intelligence agencies. "As a result of the work, rejected by an official seal, but demanded by society, were forced out in the press not subacceptable - in a samizdat. In a samizdat all original ideological diversity in the country, variety of literary creativity was reflected... In the USSR there was no freedom of press, but the free press developed" [16, page 10]. The samizdat became mass attempt of return to the habitual ways of literary creativity dictated not by "instances", not editions, and personal representations of writers and journalists [17].

Along with further development of a copy samizdat in which literature of the Silver age prevailed and also the poetry and prose of the authors who were not published in the Soviet Union - M. Bulgakov, O. Mandelstam, B. Pasternak, A. Akhmatova, etc., came to a samizdat the authors who left Stalin the camp. Some of them had the literary experience interrupted with arrest, others, as they say, started from scratch. Their works about GULAG were unpacked and sold out in big circulations. A. Solzhenitsyn, Yu. Dombrovsky, E. Vladimirov's works and others discovered the whole layer of the unknown before subculture, helped to begin to see clearly to society, to see itself from within and from the outside. The readership of a samizdat began to extend promptly at the expense of the new layers which did not have before contact with this type of literature.

The reason of why people became authors of a samizdat, is simple. Many authors in the Soviet Union wrote "to a table", often even without trying to offer the works to official publishing house as they knew that such works will not be published. Some allowed to read the works to friends,

but were categorically against their uncontrolled distribution. They hoped that they in the future will be able to publish the works, and knew that emergence of their works in a samizdat can prevent this hypothetical opportunity to be carried out as will cause indignation of the authorities. However there were also those who did not wait for "the best times", and wanted their works to reach readers immediately. They placed the works in a samizdat, perhaps understanding that the best times will not come and that existence of free literature which is really read, will accelerate changes to the best.

All this is also applicable to creators of selections of documents, witnesses of important events, scientists - to all who regarded the "written products" as having social value. Desire to be published, in Russian - "publicity", covered such concepts as "openness" and "freedom of information and expressions", and was the main driving force of a documentary samizdat.

Along with a copy samizdat and works of art of the modern forbidden writers, the works, articles, documents and materials relating to social and political life of the country are widely presented in illegal publications. In a samizdat there were "A technology of the power" of A. Avtorkhanov, collections of poems of I. Gabaya and N. Gorbanevskaya, the forbidden works by V. Aksenov, A. Kuznetsova,

And. Of an alich, the brochure by A.D. Sakharov of "Reflection about progress, peaceful co-existence and intellectual freedom" and R.A. Medvedev "Before court of history", "The truth about the present".

Among documents and materials it should be noted A. Tvardovsky and V. Kaverin's letters - K. Fedina, P. Antokolsky - to P. Demichev, three letters of L. Chukovskaya - to M. Sholokhov, A. Chakovsky and in the editorial office of Izvestia. In the last of the called letters the author speaks about that the huge, not estimated yet role which is played by a samizdat in spiritual revival of the country: "Today one by one trials follow: under different pretexts - it is open, covered and half-closed - judge a word oral and written. The word is subjected to persecution kind of once again to confirm the old truth which is fallen in love to Leo Tolstoy: "The word is an act". Probably, the word and really - an act if, the great poetry and great prose is not able to break through to the reader, is essential necessary for everyone. I would tell: necessary as bread, but actually the shrill truth they is more necessary, than bread" [18].

The middle of the 50th was marked also by issue of the first self-published periodicals. Their preparation and release are connected first of all with philological faculties of a number of the universities. The "Blue bud" released students of faculty of philology was the first self-published magazine as researchers rather convincingly claim, I LIE in November, 1955. Stories and poems by students which appeared in them in political aspect were rather neutral. "Aggressive reaction from the party management was caused not so much by contents of the magazine how many

the fact of a release of the unauthorized, not subacceptable edition" [16, page 11]. Authors underwent repressions, and article "Why " the Blue Bud " Was Dismissed" of devastating contents was published in the Komsomol newspaper "Smena". Authorities and "competent authorities", without realizing fully that, reported about existence in the country of a free literary thought.

In 1956 in Leningrad new self-published student's magazines - "Fresh Voices" in MIIZHTE and "Heresy" at Library institute appeared. The magazines conceived as periodicals, unfortunately, at once stopped the existence under pressure of Communist Party committees and KGB.

At the beginning of the 60th in Leningrad not subacceptable literary editions began to be issued. In 1960 - 1962 students of evening department of faculty of philology I LIE the Optima magazine (an edition E. Schneiderman) which content of five numbers were poems, prose, literary criticism, the translations was issued. In 1961 - 1962 there were two issues of the poetic magazine "Prizma" prepared by B. Taygin and K. Kuzminsky; they published in a samizdat "The anthology of the Soviet pathology" [16, page 13].

The wall newspapers which were issued as it was written in party documents of that time, "personally", out of control of ideological bodies became other form of a journalistic samizdat which arose almost along with the first student's magazines in 1956 at the universities and institutes of several cities - Moscow, Leningrad, Rostov, Voronezh,-. Many participants of these editions were subjected to repressions, in Rostov the students and teachers who hung out the wall newspaper were repressed and accused of espionage. The special role in it was played by information on the wall newspaper which is the BBC reported in the way which is not explained so far in day of its emergence.

The first wave of poststalin nonconformism was connected considerably with the students representing a new view, a new wave in estimates of literary, public and historical events. But it does not mean that the youth did not find in the history of literature and the culture of carriers of related type of consciousness. "Early Mayakovsky became our password, the admission to Pasternak", - L. Losev writes [19].

For the 60th the influence of literature on society amplifies. It belongs both to typographical large-circulation, and to self-published literature. A reader's stir was caused not only new, left in Gosizdat or a samizdat of the work, but also published by circulations of the work of A. Green, M. Prishvin, Yu. Olesha, I. Babel, early A. Tolstoy, huge, traditional for the country. The strongest impressions on society were made by translated literature - Hemingway, Remarque, T. Mann, Saint-Exupéry, Márquez, Updike, Salinger, Faulkner's works [20].

It is undoubted that the release of a samizdat during the entire periods was provoked by the bans, concealment of documents, deception. An example is N.S. Khrushchev's report at the XX congress of the CPSU "About a cult of personality and it posledst-

viya" (on February 24 - 25, 1956) which within 33 years, marked with a signature stamp "confidentially", disappeared from the public of the country. Khrushchev considered that "we cannot take out this question out of limits of party. It is necessary to know when to stop, not to feed enemies, not to bare before them our ulcers". But already on June 4 the text of the report was published in New York Times, two days later - on pages Parisian Mond [21], and then during more than 3G years in various languages extended through a samizdat including in the distorted options to which fabrication the western intelligence agencies laid a hand. Only in 1989 the full text of the report was published and that not in the popular edition, and in the party monthly journal [22]. Already in 6G^ which are characterized by many authors as the beginning of an author's samizdat of modern times illegal hand-written and typewritten editions began to represent rather mass phenomenon.

The Sintaxis magazine became the herald of many self-published traditions. There were three issues of the magazine: No. 1 - in December, 1959; No. 2 - in February 196G; No. 3 - in April 196G of g. Eighteen people, including young Bella Akhmadullina with the poem "Fifteen Boys" opening feelings of the girl before whom the world swung open became participants of the first number. The editor of the magazine A. Ginzburg after an exit of "Syntax" was arrested and banished. For it I. Eren-burg strove, and to A. Ginzburg allowed to return to Moscow. In 1964 he was again arrested for "communications with the Russian emigrants" [18], and issued "White paper" in the matter of A. Sinyavsky and Yu. Daniel later.

In a samizdat of this time, including illegal editions of theological literature and rock magazines, "fought threadlike, ready to be interrupted pulse broken off on the part which is bleeding profusely cultural tradition. He took out huge loading of collecting of parts of the dismembered whole, played a role of that "dead water" which in fairy tales splice the chopped-up hero's body before, than to sprinkle it with water of life. It is especially appropriate to remember this its historical cultural role in a monosubject of the samizdat which is violently splashed out on pages of the current periodical press and times already crossing the unsteady side separating relevant from tactical" [15, with. 7].

To a samizdat - it what it was then to the public despite rich background, analogs in social movement, literature and journalism were not. In the Soviet conditions it executed huge social and cultural function which society tries to learn today.

Here it should be noted a problem which, being beyond this research, is of separate interest to study. It is communication between a literary samizdat and the movement for human rights which is not quite legally often called in the West the dissent assuming dialogue which the official power categorically did not allow, undertaking only repressive measures. In 1961 the group of writers led by V. Osipov was sentenced to long imprisonment for the organization and carrying out readings not passed

censorship, self-published literature at Mayakovsky Square in Moscow [23]. The "disobedience campaigns" in literature directly connected with a samizdat were held also by A. Ginzburg, Yu. Galanskov and V. Bukovsky sentenced 1967 - 1968 to various imprisonment terms for literary and self-published activity and A. Sinyavsky and Yu. Daniel's public protection [24]. In a samizdat (tamizdat) also the most high-profile case of the end of the 60th - A. Solzhenitsyn's exception of the Union of the Soviet writers (1969) and the subsequent award of the Nobel Prize (1970) to it is connected with the publication of works.

In the late sixties had strengthening of a samizdat and its blossoming not only political, but also important creative value. The samizdat created the free market, without any compulsory distribution; success of self-published works depended only on demand on them of readers that created tougher selection in terms of creativity. The real alternative to Gosizdat in whom works by members of the Writers' Union were published according to the administrative order arose so and was created.

Rise of a samizdat can be also in general measured by growth of amount of the materials known in the West. According to the estimates given by the researcher Feldbryugge, emergence of different types of the documents containing the oppositional ideas began with modest 47 articles in 1965, twice the bigger quantity in 1966 and which again doubled in 1968 when it reached 220 copies. The total remained at the same level till 1974, and then sharply jumped up to 362 copies. The total number of the extended samizdat within the first decade (1965 - 1974) was about 2000 copies [25].

Till 70th the samizdat represented leaflets, brochures, books, i.e. acyclic editions. Attempts of the edition of magazines were, but they had generally single character: are recorded, along with the characterized "Syntax" (1960), by one number of "Boomerang" (1960), Phoenix (1961), "Cocktail" (1961), "Lamp" (1963), "Seasons" (1962), "Workshop" (1964), Chu (1965), "Sphinxes" (1965) and three numbers "Sirens" (1962) [26]. Only at the end of 60 - the beginning of the 70th the release trend was outlined in a samizdat proceeding and periodicals which becomes one of the steadiest trends of further development.

A series of the self-published magazines issued in the mid-sixties in higher education institutions of Leningrad became a harbinger of this trend. It is the Almanakh magazine appearing in 1965 - 1966 at Pedagogical Institute (an edition V. Sazhin); two issues of the almanac "Stezya" (1965) and the almanac "RyugeSh" which united authors "Small Garden"; the almanac of faculty of philology I LIE "Links" (1966). Editors and participants of editions were subjected to tough repressions [16, page 13].

In the second half of the 60th one more, very peculiar type of a samizdat - the editions devoted to rock music a musical samizdat arises. Among the first registered rock editions brought to life by emergence of student's bit groups the Kharkiv amateur magazine "Bit - reasonably is called

Echo" (1967). The magazine was subjected to repressions and existed not for long. It represented 5 - 6 pages of the typewritten text illustrated with photos. The famous rocker S. Korotkov headed the magazine, the city's first rock festival which formed the basis of contents of the magazine became an occasion of creation. Other materials - foreign information, assessment of the left plates - are borrowed from the Polish sources. Creators of the magazine became the famous musicians, DJs, observers of youth music. It existed not for long (spring - the summer of 1967, two numbers with a circulation of 3-8 copies), several its copies were confiscated, and the edition stopped the existence [27].

Many researchers note obvious: studying not subacceptable literature is connected with great difficulties. If the normal place of the prose writer or poet in literary life is noted by diverse attributes of public existence, not subacceptable writer lived in other world [28]. He knew that it is dangerous to store a nelegalshchina, for the same reasons did not keep a diary or missed in them the most important, hoping for memory, seldom kept the archive, destroyed important documents and their copies. All this creates big, sometimes insuperable difficulties in search and judgment of materials which in total could apply for more or less full picture of undercover literature - a samizdat.

Process of its creation was often described, and there is no need again in detail on it to stop. The main requirements are for this purpose rather simple - the typewriter, thin paper and carbon paper, and, of course, the author aspiring freely without supervision of censorship to express the thoughts and the person interested to risk and issue them in writing. After this initial stage the author prints several copies, as a rule, no more than 5 - 15 copies on tissue paper.

The last copies cannot often almost be sorted. The reprint is usually carried out through one interval and covers all page, practically without leaving the place for fields, with a small gap in the lower part, and often on both sides of the page. Typists often volunteered to print free of charge, or paid with it ready work. Copies were distributed first of all that who brought a copy, and were transferred to others, those who could make own forces copies. As process quickly got out of the control of the author by transfer on a chain, it is impossible to learn how much it is made copies; them there can be several hundreds, either even thousands or even more. Photo methods for copying were sometimes used, thus, this process accelerated, allowing to avoid inaccuracies and mistakes. Other methods, for example, a gektografiya or a mimeo-grafiya (sometimes by domestic cars) were seldom used in the Soviet Union.

The samizdat actually in different ways - typewriting, mimeographs, copiers, photocopies, the magnetic record was implemented, and extended even more unexpectedly and whimsically. The eyewitness remembers that he, having become interested in the novel by Solzhenitsyn "In a circle the first", through acquaintances received the photocopy: two

extremely big volumes; on each page about four photos of typewritten pages of such size that they were convenient to be read were pasted. In this case they badly illustrating photos were printed it was impossible to make out.

In other cases the quality of underground editions was very high. The self-published release of poems of Khodasevich which was not printed in Russia since the beginning of the 20th was issued qualitatively, had a beautiful cover and was highly appreciated by fans of poetry. There were professional typists earning a living, a samizdat reprint. The joke about the grandmother which ordered was widely known to reprint on the machine "War and peace" for the grandson as he refuses to read something if it is not a samizdat.

Distribution of a samizdat was business difficult and fraught with serious consequences. The majority of self-published documents is signed by authors, contain its address though some are published under pseudonyms. Sometimes, for example, in a case with novels or collections of the essay, poems, or periodicals, materials are connected, but often spread separately , so

Mary Hernandez
Other scientific works: