1. Vasilii, Ivanov, “O literaturnykh gruppirovkakh i techeniiakh 20-kh godov,” Znamia, 1958, no. 6, p. 190.Google Scholar

2. A. A., Lebedev, “K vykhodu sobraniia sochinenii Lunacharskogo,” Novyi mir, 1965, no. 2, p. 262.Google Scholar

3. Lebedev, A. A., Esteticheskie vzgliady A. V. Lunacharskogo (Moscow, 1962), p. 143.Google Scholar

4. E. Ermakov, “Revoliutsionnyi talant, ” Izvestiia, May 16, 1967.

5. Viacheslav, Polonsky, Ocherki literaturnogo dvizheniia revoliutsionnoi epokhi (Moscow, 1928), p. 183.Google Scholar

6. Lebedev, “K vykhodu sobraniia sochinenii Lunacharskogo, ” p. 262.

7. All biographies of Lunacharsky are Soviet publications. The major works of interest in book form include a brief treatment of his activities in Lebedev-Poliansky, P., A. V. Lumcharskii : K 50-letiiu so dnia roshdeniia (Moscow, 1926)Google Scholar; A., Khalatova, ed., Pamiati Anatoliia Vasil'evicha Lunacharskogo : Sbornik statei (Moscow, 1935)Google Scholar; A., Krivosheeva, Esteticheskie vsgliady A. V. Lunacharskogo (Moscow and Leningrad, 1939)Google Scholar; P., Bugaenko, A. V. Lunacharskii kak literaturnyi kritik (Saratov, 1960)Google Scholar; Bychkova, N. and Lebedev, A., Lunacharskii : Pervyi Narkom prosveshcheniia (Moscow, 1960)Google Scholar; A., Elkin, A. V. Lunacharskii : Esteticheskie vsgliady, obshchcstvenno-literaturnaia i kriticheskaia deiatel'nosf (Moscow, 1961)Google Scholar; Samoilova, N. A., Lunacharskii : Borets sa sovetskoe iskusstvo (Moscow, 1961)Google Scholar; Lebedev, A. A., Esteticheskie vsgliady A. V. Lunacharskogo (Moscow, 1962)Google Scholar, a serious critical study, perhaps the most liberal interpretation of this group; Lunacharskaia-Rozenel, N. A., Pamiat’ serdtsa (Moscow, 1962)Google Scholar, first edition of the memoirs of Lunacharsky's second wife, reissued in a larger edition under the same title in 1965; Rotkevich, la., A. V. Lunacharskii i ego rol’ v sosdatvii sovetskoi metodiki prepodavaniia literatury (Kuibyshev, 1962)Google Scholar; Kairov, I. A., A. V. Lunacharskii : Vydaiushchiisia deialel’ sotsialisticheskogo prosveshchcnii (Moscow, 1966)Google Scholar; A., Elkin, Lunacharskii (Moscow, 1967)Google Scholar, a book in the biography series “Zhizni zamechatel'nykh liudei, ” which, although it uses numerous quotations, has no footnotes or references. Despite this long list of books on Lunacharsky, none of them deals with his life in any depth or with completeness. Material on Lunacharsky can be found elsewhere, and information about his life is still kept in closed archives in the Soviet Union.

In addition to the volumes mentioned above, important autobiographical sources for Lunacharsky's activities and thoughts are available. A. V. Lunacharskii : Vospominaniia i vpechatleniia (Moscow, 1968) consists of fifty-two complete autobiographical sketches and excerpts from others, one from previously unpublished materials; although most of the selections were published before, many appeared in journals and newspapers that are now scarce. Siluety (Moscow, 1965) is a republication of Lunacharsky's important sketches of Bolshevik leaders, first published in his Velikii perevorot (Moscow, 1919) and Revoliutsionnye siluety (Moscow and Leningrad, 1923). His war memoirs, Evropa v pliaski smerti (Moscow, 1967), are also in print.

Bibliographies and bibliographical aids for archival materials on and by Lunacharsky indicate that most of his still unpublished materials are in the Central State Archive of Literature and Art (383 pieces), the Institute of Marxism-Leninism (the amount has not been disclosed), the Institute of World Literature of the Academy of Sciences USSR (94 pieces), and the Pushkinskii Dom in Leningrad (36 pieces). For guides to these sources, and to Lunacharsky's published and unpublished correspondence, see especially Panchenko, N, “Avtografy A. V. Lunacharskogo v Pushkinskom Dome,” Russkaia literatura, 1966, no. 2, pp. 212–16Google Scholar; Muratova, K. D., ed., Istoriia russkoi literatury kontsa XlX-nachala XX veka : Bibliograficheskii ukasatel (Moscow, 1963), pp. 289–91 (letters)Google Scholar; Tsentral'nyi gosudarstvennyi arkhiv literatury i iskusstva SSSR, Putevoditel', literatura (Moscow, 1963), pp. 276-79; Muratova, K. D., ed., A. V. Lunacharskii o literature i iskusstve : Bibliograficheskii ukasatel', 1902-1963 (Leningrad, 1964).Google Scholar

Of the increasing number of articles on Lunacharsky, several include rather large quantities of information based on scholars’ findings in materials previously inaccessible in Soviet archives. These materials are coming out, bit by bit, in articles on a wide range of topics. See, for example, N. A. Samoilova, “A. V. Lunacharskii o svobode tvorchestva i partiinosti literatury, ” in Novikov, V. V. et al., eds., Problemy sotsialisticheskogo reaUzma (Moscow, 1959), pp. 212–62 Google Scholar; N. A., Trifonov, “Lunacharskii v gorode Lenina,” Zvezda, 1965, no. 11, pp. 183–87Google Scholar; and A. V., Koltsov, “Neopublikovannye pis'ma A. V. Lunacharskogo,” Vestnik Akademii nauk SSSR, 1965, no. 10, pp. 79–85.Google Scholar

Lunacharsky's letters and reminiscences can be found in several places, as noted in the bibliographical guides cited. Among the sources cited are some of the following, included as examples from which about forty documents of this nature can be readily found. In the collections of Lunacharsky's works, see especially V mire muzyki : Stafi i rechi (Moscow, 1958), A. V. Lunacharskii o kino (Moscow, 1965), and Na Zapade (Moscow, 1927). See also the selections in Ezhegodnik Malogo teatra, 1955-1956, (Moscow, 1961), Leninskii sbornik (Moscow, 1945), Rolland's, Romain Sobranie sochinenii (Moscow, 1958)Google Scholar, and several volumes of Literaturnoe nasledstvo (Moscow, 1931—).

8. For a recent revelation from archival sources of Lunacharsky's personal intervention on behalf of Aleksei Remizov and S. K. Sologub, arrested by the Cheka in 1919, see Panchenko, “Avtografy A. V. Lunacharskogo v Pushkinskom Dome, ” p. 215.

9. For a brief discussion concerning the “legend” of Lunacharsky, see the excellent review by Sheila, Fitzpatrick, “A. V. Lunacharsky : Recent Soviet Interpretations and Republications,” Soviet Studies, 18, no. 3 (January 1967) : 270–71.Google Scholar In this article Miss Fitzpatrick, whose conclusions are quite the opposite of mine, asserts that Lunacharsky's liberalism had no basis in fact and therefore he is a poor subject for the advocates of liberal measures in the arts to choose as their champion.

10. For this point of view see, for example, Kornei, Chukovsky, Is vospominanii (Moscow, 1959), pp. 421–22, 430Google Scholar; Lunacharskaia-Rozenel, Natalia, Pamiaf serdtsa (Moscow, 1962), pp. 37–38 Google Scholar; and A., Iablochkina, 75 let v teatre (Moscow, 1958), p. 253.Google Scholar

11. For a discussion of this see Samoilova, “A. V. Lunacharskii o svobode tvorchestva i partiinosti literatury, ” p. 227. Samoilova takes a strongly negative view of his more liberal policies.

12. Chukovsky, Is vospominanii, p. 423.

13. A., Metchenko, Tvorchestvo Maiakovskogo, 1917-1924 gg. (Moscow, 1954), pp. 503 ff.Google Scholar

14. Sheila Fitzpatrick, in the article cited in note 9, reviews some of these publications in editions up to 1967. Of further bibliographical note are the following collections and guides : Valerian, Polonsky, A. V. Lunacharskii : Bibliograficheskii ocherk (Moscow, 1926)Google Scholar; R., Mandelshtam, Knigi A. V. Lunacharskogo (Moscow and Leningrad, 1926)Google Scholar; Kozmin, B. I., Pisateli sovremennoi epokhi, vol. 1 (Moscow, 1928)Google Scholar; Piksanov, N. K., Marksistskoe iskusstvovedenie (Moscow and Leningrad, 1929)Google Scholar; Zapiski ob uchenykh trudakh deistvitel'nykh chlenov Akademii nauk SSSR, izbrannykh 1 jevralia, 1930 goda (Leningrad, 1930); Gura, V. V., Russkie pisateli v Vologodskoi oblasti (Vologda, 1951)Google Scholar; N. A. Samoilova, “Bibliografiia knig i statei A. V. Lunacharskogo, izdannykh posle 1917 g., ” in Akademiia obshchestvennykh nauk pri TsK KPSS, Uchenye zapiski, 39 (1958) : 332-56; Lantsuzsky, V, “Bibliografiia knig i statei A. V. Lunacharskogo,” in Zapiski Karshinskogo pedagogicheskogo instituta, 5 (1961) : 75–85Google Scholar; Muratova, A. V. Lunacharskii o literature i iskusstve. See also the bibliographical listings and commentaries in the collection of Lunacharsky's works, Sobranie sochinenii v vos'mi tomakh : Literaturovedenie, kritika, estetika (Moscow, 1963-67).

15. Deich, in Lunacharsky, Sobranie sochinenii, 3 : 518.

16. “Ob otnoshenii literaturnomu naslediiu A. V. Lunacharskogo, ” Kommunist, 1962, no. 10, and E. Ermakov, in Izvestiia, May 16, 1967.

17. N. A. Glagolev, “A. V. Lunacharskii i nekotorye voprosy razvitiia russkoi literatury, ” in Akademiia obshchestvennykh nauk pri TsK KPSS, Uchenye zapiski, 35 (1958) : 53.

18. The reference here is to Lunacharsky's collection of essays, Iskusstvo i revoliutsiia (Moscow, 1924), p. 6.

19. Samoilova, “A. V. Lunacharskii o svobode tvorchestva i partiinosti literatury, ” pp. 228-29.

20. Lebedev, “K vykhodu sobraniia sochinenii Lunacharskogo, ” p. 263.

21. Ermakov, in Isvestiia, May 16, 1967.

22. Kommunist, 1962, no. 10, p. 33

23. Glagolev, “A. V. Lunacharskii i nekotorye voprosy …, ” p. 56.

24. Kommunist, 1962, no. 10, pp. 36-37. For this same view but in greater detail, see I., Ivanov, Formirovanie ideinogo edinstva v sovetskoi literature, 1917-1932 (Moscow, 1960), pp. 115 ff.Google Scholar

25. Samoilova, “A. V. Lunacharskii o svobode tvorchestva i partiinosti literatury, ” pp. 237-39. Bychkova and Lebedev, Lunacharskii, pp. 28-29.

26. Lebedev, Esteticheskie vzgliady, p. 185.

27. Glagolev, “A. V. Lunacharskii i nekotorye voprosy.…, ” p. 55.

28. Gei, N. and Piksunov, V., “U istokov marksistskoi literaturnoi kritiki,” Voprosy literatury, 1967, no. 8, pp. 145–47.Google Scholar (This point of view, of course, is exactly the same as Trotsky's, so forcefully brought forth in his 1923 publication of Literature and Revolution.)

29. Ibid., p. 151.

30. Dementiev, A. and Sats, I., “A. V. Lunacharskii i sovetskaia literatura,” Novyi mir, 1966, no. 12, p. 226.Google Scholar

31. Lebedev, Esteticheskie vsgliady, p. 132

32. Samoilova, “A. V. Lunacharskii o svobode tvorchestva i partiinosti literatury, ” p. 214. Shleev, V, “Iz istorii bor'by za partiinost' iskusstva,” in Voprosy isktisstva v svete bor'by ideologii : Sbormik statei (Moscow, 1966)Google Scholar, p. 28. Ermakov, in Ievestiia, May 16, 1967.

33. See, for example, the approaches of Elkin in his Lunacharskii, Ivanov in Formirovanie ideinogo edinstva, and Krivosheeva in Estetichcskie vsgliady.

34. Dementiev and Sats, “A. V. Lunacharskii i sovetskaia literatura, ” pp. 213-14.

35. See, for example, N. A., Trifonov, “Lunacharskii v gorode Lenina,” Zvezda, 1965, no. 11, pp. 183–87Google Scholar; A. L., Kublanov, “0 voennorabote A. V. Lunacharskogo,” Istoriia SSSR, 1965, no. 5, pp. 119–26Google Scholar; Bychkova, N. and Tsvetkova, A., “Anatolii Vasil'evich Lunacharskii,” Voprosy istorii KPSS 1965, no. 11, pp. 121–24Google Scholar; and Lebedev, Esteticheskie vsgliady, pp. 54 ff.

36. Malakhov, S, “A. V. Lunacharskii,” in Istoriia russkoi kritiki, 3 vols. (Moscow, 1958-64), 2 : 595–96.Google Scholar

37. “Rech’ na otkrytii VIII vystavki AKhRR, ” in VIII Vystavka AKhRR : Zhisri i byt narodov SSSR (Moscow, 1926), p. 2.

38. For an excellent treatment of this situation, see S. V., Utechin, “The Bolsheviks and Their Allies After 1917 : The Ideological Patterns,” Soviet Studies, 10, no. 2 (October 1958) : 113–25.Google Scholar

39. For a good summary of Lunacharsky's views on the NEP programs, see his “Novaia ekonomicheskaia politika i NKP” (1921), in A. V. Lunacharskii o narodnom obrazovanii (Moscow, 1958), p. 189. It was originally published in a collection of Lunacharsky's articles, Problemy narodnogo obrasovaniia (Moscow, 1925), pp. 198-204

40. Lunacharsky's support and praise of many writers who have been out of favor in official literary and art circles for decades is one of the most important things brought out in the memoirs of his wife, Natalia Lunacharskaia-Rozenel (see note 7).

41. “Puti sovremennoi literatury, ” in Lunacharsky, Sobranie sochinenii, 2 : 280; originally published in Zvezda, 1925, no. 1. The term poputchiki (fellow travelers), apparently coined by Trotsky, was applied during the period to. writers who were not Communists but refused to engage themselves politically either for or against the party.

42. Speech of Lunacharsky to the Executive Committee of the Congress of Soviets, in Narodnoe prosveshchenie v RSFSR k 1927/28 uchebnomu godu (Moscow, 1928), pp. 175-76.

43. “Formalizm v nauke ob iskusstve, ” in Pechaf i revoliutsiia, 1924, no. 5, p. 11. Lunacharsky did, however, criticize the formalists for a great many of their principles, assertions, and theories.

44. Bukharin in 1925 was quite adamant about rejecting groups that sought exclusive support of the party or claimed a monopoly on truth, style, and so forth. See especially his article, “Proletariat i voprosy khudozhestvennoi politiky, ” Krasnaia nov', 1925, no. 4, pp. 271-72. The journal's editor, Alexander Voronsky, held the same view and published the work of writers with a wide variety of viewpoints. See Robert A., Maguire, Red Virgin Soil : Soviet Literature in the 1920's (Princeton, 1968).Google Scholar

45. Narodnoe prosveshchenie v RSFSR, pp. 175-76.

46. Meshchanstvo i individualism : Sbornik statei (Moscow and Petrograd, 1923), p. 24. Originally published in 1909 under the same title, it was republished in 1923 with a foreword in which Lunacharsky stated that his ideas were still valid.

47. Besedy po marksistskomu mirosozertsaniiu (Leningrad, 1924), pp. 68-69.

48. Voprosy kul'tury pri diktature proletariata (Moscow and Leningrad, 1925), pp. 115-16.

49. Robert Maguire, in Red Virgin Soil (pp. 255 ff.), discusses the aesthetic position of Bukharin and Friche, who he claims supported the theory of “mechanism.” He says that Lunacharsky and others followed the theory of “dialectism.”

50. Anisimov, I., Belchikov, N. F., et al., “Predislovie,” in Lunacharsky, Sobranie sochinenii, 1 : xxvi.Google Scholar

51. “Vladimir Maiakovskii—novator, ” in Lunacharsky, Stat'i o literature (Moscow, 1957), p. 405; originally published in Literatura i iskusstvo, 1931, no. 5-6. For an interesting account of Lunacharsky's personal relations with Mayakovsky, see “Lunacharskii i Maiakovskii, ” in Lunacharskaia-Rozenel, Pamiat' serdtsa (1965), pp. 24-53.

52. For a full English translation of this resolution, see Brown, E. J., The Proletarian Episode in Soviet Literature, 1928-1932 (New York, 1953), p. 235–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

53. There has been considerable debate over the interpretation of this decree among Soviet and non-Soviet scholars. Ermolaev, Herman, in his “Soviet Literary Theories, 1917-1934 : The Genesis of Socialist Realism,” University of California Publications in Modern Philology, 69 (1963) : 46–54Google Scholar, maintains that this decree in fact indicated party decision to intervene in the arts; whereas the historian Carr, E. H., in his Socialism in One Country, 1924-1926, vol. 2 (London, 1959), p. 81 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, declared that in this and other resolutions of the period the party's stance was one of necessary neutrality. Samoilova, in her “A. V. Lunacharskii o svobode tvorchestva i partiinosti literatury, ” p. 227, claims that any interpretation which states or implies party noninterference is “incorrect” and “un-Marxist.” Dementiev and Sats, in their article on Lunacharsky in Novyi mir, 1966, no. 12, p. 220, assert that party noninterference is clearly stated and implied in the decree.

54. Lunacharsky, , “Po povodu rezoliutsii TsK o literaturnoi politike,” Novaia vecherniaia gazeta (Leningrad), July 11, 1925, p. 2.Google Scholar

55. “Proletkul't i sovetskaia kul'turnaia rabota, ” in Proletarskaia kul'tura, 1919, no. 7-8, p. 1.

56. For a copy of this reprimand, see Lenin, V. I., Sochineniia, 4th ed. (Moscow, 1941-62), 31 : 291–92.Google Scholar

57. The letter to Proletkult was printed in Pravda, Dec. 1, 1920. For a discussion of this affair, see V. V., Gorbunov, “Bor'ba V. I. Lenin s separaticheskami ustremleniiami proletkul'ta,” Voprosy istorii KPSS, 1958, no. 1, pp. 33–34.Google Scholar

58. “Osnovy teatral'noi politiki Sovetskoi vlasti, ” in Lunacharsky, Sobranie sochinenii, 3 : 268. This piece was originally published in 1926 in a pamphlet bearing the same title. Lunacharsky's reference to the Futurists concerns Lenin's harsh statements against them —statements which were also included in the letter to Proletkult.

59. Institut Marksizma-Leninizma pri TsK KPSS, Desiatyi s“ezi RKP (b), mart 1921 : Stenograficheskii otchet (Moscow, 1963), p. 154.

60. A Soviet scholar, V. Shleev, writing in the collection Voprosy iskusstva v svete bor'by ideologii (1966), pp. 30-31, suggests that Lenin was unhappy with Lunacharsky's ideas on the autonomy of art and that in 1921 he therefore appointed Krupskaia to head Glavpolitprosovet (a committee within the Commissariat of Education), part of whose function was to promote the “spirit of communism” in the arts.

61. “Zadachi partii na tret'em fronte” (1923), in A. V. Lunacharskii o narodnom obrasovanii (Moscow, 1958), p. 232; originally published in the collection Lenin o prosveshchenii (Moscow, 1924). See also Desiatyi s“esd RKP (b), p. 170.

62. N., Krylov, ed., Puti rasvitiia teatra (Moscow, 1927), pp. 19 ff.Google Scholar

63. “Osnovy teatral'noi politiki Sovetskoi vlasti, ” p. 268.

64. In this context the works most frequently cited are his “Lenin i literaturovedenie, ” in Literatumaia entsiklopediia (Moscow, 1929-39), vol. 6, and “Tezisy o zadachakh marksistskoi kritiki, ” Novyi mir, 1928, no. 6.

65. “Sotsiologicheskie i patologicheskie faktory v istorii iskusstva, ” Vestnik Kommunisticheskoi akademii, 1930, no. 37-38; “G. V. Plekhanov kak literaturnyi kritik, ” Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 8 (first written in 1929-30 but not released in full until its publication in 1967); Stefan, Zweig, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 10 (Leningrad, 1932).Google Scholar

66. “Svoboda knigi i revoliutsiia, ” in Pechaf i revoliutsiia, 1921, no. 1, p. 9.

67. Voprosy kul'tury pri diktature proletariata, p. 118.

68. For a description of the function and structure of Glavrepertkom, see especially the periodical Narodnoe obrasovanie, 1924, no. 4-5, p. 243. A complete text of the Central Executive Committee's definition of its role and function can be found in Sbomik zakonov i postanovlenii o trude rabotnikov iskusstva (Moscow, 1925), pp. 138-41.

69. For a description of Lunacharsky's personal authority within the Commissariat, see especially a statement by Lenin in Narodnoe prosveshchenie, 79 (November 20, 1921) : 5-6. See also the observations of a high-ranking member of the Commissariat during this period, Shulgin, V., in his Pamiatnye vstrechi (Moscow, 1958), pp. 74–75 Google Scholar, and the personal observations of Lenin's widow, Krupskaia, an original member of the Collegium of the Commissariat of Education, in Komsomolskaia pravda, Dec. 28, 1934, p. 2.

70. This letter, first published in 1960, is reproduced in Gak, A. M. and Glagolev, N. A., eds., Lunacharskii o kino : Stat'i, vyska2yvaniia, stsenarii, dokumenty (Moscow, 1965), p. 266–70.Google Scholar

71. Speech by [?] Makarian, in Puti razvitiia teatra, pp. 168-69.

72. “O teatral'noi tsenzury, ” in Teatr segodnia (Moscow, 1927), p. 54. 73. Lunacharskaia-Rozenel, Pamiat' serdtsa (1962), p. 37. 74. “Budennyi, ” in N., Aseev, Sbornik stikhov (Moscow, 1923).Google Scholar

75. “Kak nekhorosho vykhodit, ” in Sobranie sochinenii, 2 : 256, 254, 257.

76. “L. D. Trotskii o literature, ” in Pechat' i revoliutsiia, 1923, no. 7, p. 3. In this article Lunacharsky agreed on most points with Trotsky's views. 77. Cited from “LEF i NEP, ” in LEF, 2 (1923) : 76.

78. Quoted from an interview with Bunin in Graham's, Stephen The Dividing Line of Europe (New York, 1925), p. 194.Google Scholar