Ždanovščina Lietuvoje: Lietuvos rašytojai tarp "revoliucinių pertvarkymų" ir "tautų žydėjimo"

LTReikšminiai žodžiai: Rašytojai; Sovietizacija; Ideologija; Politinė pertvarka; Writers; Sovietisation; Ideology; Political changes.

EN[...] The main thesis of this article consists of two parts: 1) despite the system’s attempts to be attractive in 1946–1948 the “moment of truth” appeared during the campaign of the Zhdanov Doctrine: one can only try to adapt oneself to party orders, to the “revolution being created from the above”; however, how to fit the frame set for creative activities and the discovery how “to depict this new life in Lithuania” cannot be independent and that consultations with the party leaders are mandatory; 2) the relationship between cultural workers and the government meant not only full subordination of the former to the party (ensuring the motivation for the privileged writers’ status) the acquired feeling of insecurity, but also the creators’ engagement in the active demonstration of support for the party goals, discovering other authors’ mistakes, the escalation of the enemy’s image, i.e. the necessity to adopt the Stalinist way of expressing oneself that was becoming acceptable to some of the writers. During the early Soviet period from 1944 to the famous 1956 Khrushchev speech that denounced the Stalin cult all main institutional means were in place in the writers’ establishment aimed to determine what purpose the writers had to serve in society and to mark the boundaries necessary to implement the communist indoctrination. This legitimation policy of the “new order” was mostly embodied by the generation that left the underground and became prominent in the war and post-war time whose attitudes in the Soviet literary sphere can be defined as the position of obligatory “illustrators of the revolutionary changes”.The Zhdanov Doctrine that started in 1946–1947 with the speech of the Central Committee Secretary of the LCP(B), Kazys Preikšas, showed that writers would be watched carefully while on those who did not conform sanctions could be imposed. During Stalin years intellectuals had to be Stalinist, not only to demonstrate loyalty to the Soviet power but also take the proactive “right position”, watch one another. The authorities required ideal Stalinist behaviour; however, writers themselves had to be involved into promoting such culture. Although some writers found it difficult to adapt to this model, some of them especially those who became known recently (due to careerism, new possibilities, personal survival) found it rather easy to understand and accept this behaviour. It is notable that the main result of the Stalinist period in the Lithuanian literary life (with the Zhdanov Doctrine as an illustrative expression) was kind of a deadlock where the writers’ and literature due to the regulations imposed by local controllers and the atmosphere of fear had to ensure excessive self-control even on the level of the Soviet Union whether all was correct and complied with the canons. [From the publication]

• Didysis apakimas : lietuvių rašytojų kairėjimas 4-ajame XX a. dešimtmetyje / Mindaugas Tamošaitis. Vilnius : Gimtasis žodis, 2010. 223 p.
• Kaukazo tautų knygos Antano Vienuolio-Žukausko memorialinėje bibliotekoje / Inga Liepaitė. Knygotyra. 2016, t. 66, p. 247-280.
• Kruvinos žemės : Europa tarp Hitlerio ir Stalino / Timothy Snyder ; iš anglų kalbos vertė Vitalijus Šarkovas. Vilnius : Tyto alba, 2011. 566 p.
• Прибалтика и Кремль, 1940-1953 / Елена Зубкова. Москва : Российская политическая энциклопедия (РОССПЭН) ; 2008. 349 p.