How fought against “chukovshchina“?
B 1920 - x years fantastic creativity of K. Chukovsky is endured by the blossoming. In 1924 in the letter to I. Repin Korney Ivanovich writes: “My children`s books unexpectedly began to have huge success... “Moydodyr“, “Crocodile“, “Mukhina a wedding“, “Tarakanishche“ - the bestsellers in Russia. They are put in cinema...“ .
However by the end of decade over Chukovsky`s fairy tales clouds began to be condensed. Acceptable cavils were earlier. The fairy tale about Tsokotukhu which at first carried the name “Mukhina Wedding“ became the first target. At once already “petty-bourgeois“ word “wedding“ was not pleasant. Also condemned heroic individualism of Komarik, carped at drawings, having declared that on the picture Mucha costs too close to Komarik and smiles too coquettishly, and it can do “to cause in children erotic thoughts“ , saw in Komarika and Mucha of the disguised prince and the princess.
“Why at a komarik a hussar uniform? Children, having seen a komarik in a hussar uniform, will immediately begin to miss about a monarchist system. Why the boy in “Moydodyr“ ran to Tavrichesky Garden? In the Taurian garden there was a State Duma. Why the hero of “Crocodile“ is called Vanya Vasilchikov? Whether he is the relative of any prince Vasilchikov who, apparently, at Alexander II held some important post. And whether not there is in general a Crocodile disguised Denikin?“. Should be told
, in 1920 - x - the head. 1930 - x years the future of the fairy tale as genre, was in the Soviet state under continuous threat. Princes and princesses were considered as a harmful reminder on the monarchy, and miracles and nonsenses supposedly imparted to the child the wrong idea of reality. In pedagogics such direction as pedology supported by Trotsky dominated and from paedologists Korney Ivanovich has been through a lot on full too. That with what inadequate gravity certain adherents “science and reason“ got a grasp of fairy tales, well illustrate the following claims to “the Fly - Tsokotukhe“.
A. Kolpakov, from the letter in “The literary newspaper“, 1960:
“Instead of imparting hatred to this mean and disgusting insect, Chukovsky presents to children of the Soviet country the poetic nonsense, admiring a fly - this muck.... So this praise of a harmful insect which is completely destroyed in People`s Republic of China begins (??!! - S. K.) “. Also Caps explained
to “stupid“ readers that the mosquito cannot marry in any way a fly as it belongs to other look. Chukovsky right there answered it that the plot of a wedding of a mosquito and fly can be met also in folklore, and gave lines from the Ukrainian ballad: “Oh, shcho there for noise having made, a mosquito that having married to Myci!“ .
Is the letter was published already in late times, and in the same newspaper and derided it.
However three decades ago not to laughter was to Chukovsky. Especially, when the widow Lenina - N. Krupskaya who is active on a field of children`s education was up in arms against his “Crocodile“. In the Pravda newspaper for February 1, 1928 it wrote: “What all this nonsense designates? To what political it makes sense? Some obviously has. But it is so carefully disguised what to guess it enough with some difficulty. The hero granting freedom to the people to redeem to Lyal, is such bourgeois dab which completely will not pass for the child“ .
Also Krupskaya was not pleasant that in the fairy tale kiss a leg at the tsar Gippopotam, and in end she accused Chukovsky also of hatred to... To Nekrasov, in particular having seen the parody to this poet in lines of “Crocodile“.
Should be told, old regime signs of “Crocodile“ confused the Soviet publishers for a long time.
K. Chukovsky, diary, 28. 11. 1923.:
“Yesterday in search of money I came into Sevzapkino. There accepted me with open embraces, but suggested “to change“ several “Crocodile“ - for the scenario - to make Vanya Vasilchikov the Komsomol member, to turn the policeman into the militiaman. It for some reason jarred on me, and I declared that Vanya is the hero from the bourgeois house. It failed all business - and I was left without money “. with
However, under pressure it was necessary to replace a line “in German spoke“ on “in Turkish spoke“. Probably, censorship considered that to offend Turks considerably politkorrektny, than Germans.
However, despite it, “Crocodile“ continued to be published - up to Krupskaya`s article. Chukovsky was protected as could.
K. Chukovsky, from the letter to A. Lunacharsky, 1928:
“… cannot destroy original works of art from - for two - three obsolete words. To me suggest to replace these words with others - but for whom it will become easier because that the Crocodile will swallow militiamen of (and dogs) in Leningrad“ .
Korney Ivanovich found the defender in M. Gorky`s face (by the way, it is merciless them criticized in pre-revolutionary years). Gorky writes the letter to “Truth“ where he claims that Lenin called Chukovsky`s book about Nekrasov “good sensible work“, and in the lines specified by Krupskaya the storyteller parodied not Nekrasov, but Lermontov at all.
Gorky`s protection worked, but only for a while. At the end of 1920 - x years attacks to Chukovsky renewed with a new force. There was even such branding term as “chukovshchina“. In newspapers and wrote: “... the main danger in our children`s literature is the chukovshchina, i.e. an anthropomorphism, political apathy and leaving from questions of today“.
In reply the writer tried to point that his fairy tales bear in themselves educational value. He wrote: whether
“I avoid a tendency in the children`s books. At all! For example, a tendency of “Moydodyr“ - a passionate appeal small to purity, to washing. I think what in the country where still so recently about everyone brushing teeth spoke, “gy, gy to see that the kike!“ this tendency costs all others.
the Same tendency and at “Fedorin Gor“ … The tendency my “Limpopo“ is a respect for medicine and doctors - too not superfluous in the country lacking culture.
the Tendency of “Crocodile“ And “Tarakanishcha“ is even too emphasized. Other books - just fairy tales, but devil take it, really the Soviet country cannot accomodate the unique storyteller!“ .
Of what only did not accuse Chukovsky`s fairy tale! So the collection, the English songs translated to them “Kotausi and Mausi“ called “a bright example of negligence, a baby talk and triviality“, and also convicted that these verses “fix the abnormalities of language which are found at children their speeches interfere with development“.
Wrote that in rhymes about coward portnyazhka the writer offends all tailors, in a rhyme about “the crooked little man“ - all disabled people, and in “Moydodyr“ - the chimney sweep`s profession ( “And to dirty chimney sweeps - shame and shame!“ ). Considered that its fairy tales develop superstition and fears (“Barmalya“, “Moydodyr“, “A miracle - a tree“), kulak accumulation (“A fly - a tsokotukha“), the wrong ideas of fauna (“Crocodile“ and “Tarakanishche“).
Well and the most brilliant phrase on idiocy about Chukovsky`s fairy tales belongs to Lilina from the State publishing house: “Adventures of a white mouse“ very doubtful tale. There are no laws of a mimicry in it, and it is more than enough of an anthropomorphism“ .
Pressure upon Chukovsky at the beginning of 1930 - x years was so big that he gave up and even wrote the “penitential“ letter where renounced the former mistakes and promised to write the correct things like “Cheerful Kolkhoziya“.
K. Chukovsky, from the diary, 1968:
“... my former supporters started back from me. And I felt like the villain.... I did not receive benefit from this desertion any.
… And here I was comprehended by punishment: Murochka got sick fatally.
In the head of me crowded wonderful plots of new fairy tales, but these fanatics convinced me that my fairy tales really are necessary to nobody - and I did not write any line“.
I though soon the relation of the power to fairy tales will change, it will not save Chukovsky from the next attacks and creative mistakes. About all this read in the following article.