The New Order

Abstract

Most commentators regard the abolition of RAPP as sudden and unexpected. Gleb Struve sees it simply as a ‘bolt from the blue’.² Max Hayward, while considering the decision explicable ‘in terms of Stalin’s temperament’ notes that ‘having used RAPP as an instrument to bludgeon non-Party intellectuals into conformity, he now abruptly got rid of them’.³ This is confirmed by Soviet reminiscences. Isaac Babel stated that ‘For a fortnight, Stalin called in Averbakh and the like and gave them severe reprimands. He then realised he could do nothing with such people’.⁴ We also have the report of Kaganovich to the next Party Congress. ‘When the question of literature came up’ — he did not explain how it arose — ‘various solutions were considered by the Politburo’. These included a radical reform of RAPP or a long declaration ‘on the tasks of communists in literature’.⁵ But Stalin had seen that half-measures would be ineffective. He opted instead for an ‘organisational’ solution: ‘That is how the idea of abolishing RAPP and setting up a single Writer’s Union was born’.⁶ Despite the hagiography, designed to demonstrate Stalin’s genius in every sphere, this account has the mark of authenticity. It was characteristic of Stalin to treat problems of any sort as amenable to administrative solutions. The ability to reduce all matters to bureaucratic management had been perhaps his most salient feature as a politician.

Stalin dove and shattered in one blow this mighty organisation.

Max Eastman, 1934¹