Who was the author of the story The Thaw? All the masterpieces of world literature in brief

Ilya Grigorievich Erenburg

Thaw

Tale (1953-1955)

The club in a large industrial city is sold out. The hall is packed, people are standing in the aisles. An extraordinary event: a novel by a young local writer has been published. Participants reading conference the debutant is praised: everyday work is reflected accurately and vividly. The heroes of the book are truly heroes of our time.

But one can argue about their “personal life,” says one of the leading engineers of the plant, Dmitry Koroteev. Not a penny is typical here: a serious and honest agronomist could not fall in love with a frivolous and flirtatious woman, with whom he has no common spiritual interests, and, in addition, the wife of his comrade! The love described in the novel seems to have been mechanically transferred from the pages of bourgeois literature!

Koroteev's speech causes a heated debate. More than others, his closest friends, although they do not express it out loud, are discouraged: the young engineer Grisha Savchenko and the teacher Lena Zhuravleva (her husband is the director of the plant, sitting on the presidium of the conference and openly pleased with the harshness of Koroteev’s criticism).

The dispute about the book continues at Sonya Pukhova’s birthday party, where Savchenko comes straight from the club. " clever man, but performed according to a stencil! - Grisha gets excited. — It turns out that the personal has no place in literature. And the book touched a nerve in everyone: too often we still say one thing, but in our personal lives we act differently. Readers are yearning for books like these!” “You’re right,” nods one of the guests, the artist Saburov. “It’s time to remember what art is!” “But in my opinion, Koroteev is right,” Sonya objects. “Soviet man has learned to control nature, but he must learn to control his feelings...”

Lena Zhuravleva has no one with whom to exchange opinions about what she heard at the conference: she has long lost interest in her husband, it seems, from the day when, at the height of the “doctors’ case,” she heard from him: “You can’t trust them too much, that’s indisputable.” The disdainful and merciless “im” shocked Lena. And when, after the fire at the factory, where Zhuravlev showed himself to be a fine fellow, Koroteev spoke of him with praise, she wanted to shout: “You know nothing about him. This is a soulless person!

That’s also why Koroteev’s performance at the club upset her: he seemed so whole to her, extremely honest, both in public, and in a face-to-face conversation, and alone with his own conscience...

The choice between truth and lies, the ability to distinguish one from the other—this is what all the heroes of the story, without exception, call upon during the “thaw.” The thaw is not only in the social climate (Koroteev’s stepfather returns after seventeen years in prison; relations with the West and the possibility of meeting foreigners are openly discussed at the feast; at the meeting there are always daredevils ready to contradict the authorities and the opinion of the majority). This is also the thaw of everything “personal”, which for so long was customary to hide from people, not to let out the door of your home. Koroteev is a front-line soldier, there was a lot of bitterness in his life, but this choice is given to him painfully. At the party bureau, he did not find the courage to stand up for the leading engineer Sokolovsky, for whom Zhuravlev disliked. And although after the ill-fated party bureau Koroteev changed his decision and directly stated this to the head of the department of the city committee of the CPSU, his conscience was not calmed: “I have no right to judge Zhuravlev, I am the same as him. I say one thing, but live differently. Probably, today we need other, new people - romantics like Savchenko. Where can I get them from? Gorky once said that our Soviet humanism is needed. And Gorky is long gone, and the word “humanism” has disappeared from circulation, but the task remains. And decide it today.”

The reason for the conflict between Zhuravlev and Sokolovsky is that the director is disrupting the housing construction plan. Storm, for the first time spring days flying into the city, destroying several dilapidated barracks, causes a retaliatory storm - in Moscow. Zhuravlev is on an urgent call to Moscow for a new assignment (with a demotion, of course). For the collapse of his career, he does not blame the storm, and especially not himself, but Lena who left him: leaving his wife is immoral! In the old days, for this... And Sokolovsky is also to blame for what happened (he was almost certainly the one who hastened to report the storm to the capital): “It’s a pity, after all, that I didn’t kill him...”

There was a storm and it blew away. Who will remember her? Who will remember the director Ivan Vasilyevich Zhuravlev? Who remembers last winter, when loud drops were falling from the icicles, and spring was just around the corner?..

Difficult and long was - like the path through the snowy winter to the thaw - the path to happiness of Sokolovsky and the “pest doctor” Vera Grigorievna, Savchenko and Sonya Pukhova, the drama theater actress Tanechka and Sonya’s artist brother Volodya. Volodya goes through his temptation of lies and cowardice: at the discussion art exhibition he attacks his childhood friend Saburov - “for formalism.” Repenting of his baseness, asking Saburov for forgiveness, Volodya admits to himself the main thing that he did not realize for too long: he has no talent. In art, as in life, the main thing is talent, and not big words about ideological ideas and popular demands.

Be people need Now Lena, who has found herself again with Koroteev, is striving. Sonya Pukhova also experiences this feeling - she admits to herself her love for Savchenko. In love, which overcomes the trials of both time and space: she and Grisha barely had time to get used to the same separation (after college, Sonya was assigned to a plant in Penza) - and then Grisha had a long way to go, to Paris, for an internship, in a group of young specialists.

Spring. Thaw. It is felt everywhere, it is felt by everyone: both those who did not believe in it, and those who were waiting for it - like Sokolovsky, traveling to Moscow, to meet his daughter Mashenka, Mary, a ballerina from Brussels, completely unknown to him and dearest to him, whom he dreamed of seeing all his life.

M. K. Pozdnyaev

The club in a large industrial city is sold out. The hall is packed, people are standing in the aisles. An extraordinary event: a novel by a young local writer has been published. Participants in the reading conference praise the debutant: everyday work is reflected accurately and vividly. The heroes of the book are truly heroes of our time.

Koroteev's speech causes a heated debate. More discouraged than others - although they do not express this out loud - are his closest friends: the young engineer Grisha Savchenko and the teacher Lena Zhuravleva (her husband is the director of the plant, sitting on the presidium of the conference and openly pleased with the harshness of Koroteev's criticism).

The dispute about the book continues at Sonya Pukhova’s birthday party, where Savchenko comes straight from the club. “A smart man, but he performed according to a stencil! - Grisha gets excited. - It turns out that the personal has no place in literature. And the book touched a nerve in everyone: too often we say one thing, but in our personal lives we act differently. Readers are yearning for books like these!” “You’re right,” nods one of the guests, the artist Saburov. “It’s time to remember what art is!” “But in my opinion, Koroteev is right,” Sonya objects. “Soviet man has learned to control nature, but he must learn to control his feelings...”

That’s also why Koroteev’s performance at the club upset her: he seemed so whole to her, extremely honest, both in public, and in a face-to-face conversation, and alone with his own conscience...

The choice between truth and lies, the ability to distinguish one from the other - this is what all the heroes of the story of the “thaw” call for, without exception. The thaw is not only in the social climate (Koroteev’s stepfather returns after seventeen years in prison; relations with the West and the possibility of meeting foreigners are openly discussed at the feast; at the meeting there are always daredevils ready to contradict the authorities and the opinion of the majority). This is also the thaw of everything “personal”, which for so long was customary to hide from people, not to let out the door of your home. Koroteev is a front-line soldier, there was a lot of bitterness in his life, but this choice is given to him painfully. At the party bureau, he did not find the courage to stand up for the leading engineer Sokolovsky, for whom Zhuravlev disliked. And although after the ill-fated party bureau, Koroteev changed his decision and directly stated this to the head of the department of the city committee of the CPSU, his conscience was not calmed: “I have no right to judge Zhuravlev, I am the same as him. I say one thing, but live differently. Probably, today we need other, new people - romantics like Savchenko. Where can I get them from? Gorky once said that our Soviet humanism is needed. And Gorky is long gone, and the word “humanism” has disappeared from circulation - but the task remains. And it will be decided today.”

The reason for the conflict between Zhuravlev and Sokolovsky is that the director is disrupting the housing construction plan. A storm that hit the city in the first spring days, destroying several dilapidated barracks, causes a response storm - in Moscow. Zhuravlev is on an urgent call to Moscow for a new assignment (with a demotion, of course). For the collapse of his career, he does not blame the storm, and especially not himself - Lena who left him: his wife leaving is immoral! In the old days, for this... And Sokolovsky is also to blame for what happened (he was almost certainly the one who hastened to report the storm to the capital): “It’s a pity, after all, that I didn’t kill him...”

Difficult and long was - like the path through the snowy winter to the thaw - the path to happiness of Sokolovsky and the “pest doctor” Vera Grigorievna, Savchenko and Sonya Pukhova, the drama theater actress Tanechka and Sonya’s artist brother Volodya. Volodya goes through his temptation with lies and cowardice: during a discussion of an art exhibition, he attacks his childhood friend Saburov - “for formalism.” Repenting of his baseness, asking Saburov for forgiveness, Volodya admits to himself the main thing that he did not realize for too long: he has no talent. In art, as in life, the main thing is talent, and not loud words about ideology and popular demands.

Now Lena, who has found herself again with Koroteev, strives to be needed by people. Sonya Pukhova also experiences this feeling - she admits to herself her love for Savchenko. In love, conquering the trials of both time and space: she and Grisha barely had time to get used to the same separation (after college, Sonya was assigned to a plant in Penza) - and then Grisha had a long way to go, to Paris, for an internship, in a group of young specialists.

The battle of nations scatters the company across the face of the earth. Some are drafted into the army - like, for example, Aisha, who loses an arm at the front;

others in the grandiose mystery get a completely unheard of role - like Ercole Bambucci, head of the economic department at the Vatican, bringing income to the Holy See from the sale of miraculous icons and incense; still others mourn a dying civilization - like Alexey Spiridonovich, rereading “Crime and Punishment” for the tenth time and falling onto the sidewalk in Paris at the exit from the Place de l’Opéra metro station with a cry: “Tie me up! Judge me! I killed a man!” Only Jurenito remains unperturbed:

what must happen happens. “It was not people who adapted to war, but war that adapted to people. It will end only when it destroys what it began in the name of: culture and the state.” Neither the Vatican, which blesses new models of machine guns, nor the intelligentsia, which fools the public, nor the members of the “International Society of Friends and Worshipers of Peace”, who study the bayonets and poisonous gases of the warring parties in order to establish whether there is anything contrary to the generally accepted rules, can stop the war. humane slaughter of people."

In the incredible adventures of the Teacher and his seven disciples, only the reader can detect absurdities and exaggerations; Only an outside observer might think that there are too many “suddenly” and “buts” in this story. What is a clever invention in an adventure novel is a fact of the biography of the average person in the fateful hours of history. Having avoided execution on charges of espionage alternately in France and on the German front, having visited The Hague at the Congress of Social Democrats and on the high seas on a fragile boat, after the sinking of a ship by an enemy mine, having rested in Senegal, Aisha’s homeland, and taking part in a revolutionary rally in Petrograd, in the Ciniselli circus (where else to hold such rallies if not in the circus?), our heroes undergo a new series of adventures on wide open spaces Russia - it seems that it is here that the prophecies of the Teacher are finally embodied, the utopias of each of his companions take on flesh.

alas: here too there is no protection from fate, and in the revolutionary crucible all the same vulgarity, stupidity and savagery from which they fled for seven years, the disappearance of which they so desired, in their own way, are forged. Ehrenburg is confused: are these grandsons of Pugach, these bearded men, who believe that for everyone’s happiness it is necessary, firstly, to slaughter the Jews, secondly, the princes and the bar (“they haven’t been slaughtered enough yet”), and it doesn’t hurt to slaughter the communists either, and most importantly - burn cities, because all evil comes from them - are these really the true apostles of the organization of humanity?

“Dear boy,” Julio Jurenito answers his beloved student with a smile, “have you just now realized that I am a scoundrel, a traitor, a provocateur, a renegade, and so on and so forth? No revolution is revolutionary if it craves order. As for the men, they themselves don’t know what they want: either to burn cities, or to grow peacefully as oak trees on their hill. But, tied with a strong hand, they end up flying into the oven, giving strength to the locomotive they hate..."

Everything again - after a menacing storm - is “tied together with a strong hand.” Ercole Bambucci, as a descendant of the ancient Romans, was taken under the protection of the Department for the Protection of Antique Monuments. Monsieur Delay is going crazy. Aisha heads the black section of the Comintern. Alexey Spiridonovich, depressed, rereads Dostoevsky. Mr. Kuhl serves on the anti-prostitution commission. Ehrenburg helps grandfather Durov train guinea pigs. The big boss at the Economic Council, Schmidt, issues passports to the honest company for departure to Europe - so that everyone can get back to square one.

To return is to peer into the future in ignorance and bewilderment, not knowing or understanding what new times promise each of them. To vegetate and groan in the absence of the Teacher, who, in fulfillment of the last of the prophecies, was killed because of a pair of boots on March 12, 1921 at 8:20 in the afternoon in the city of Konotop.

Thaw - Tale (19531955)

The club in a large industrial city is sold out. The hall is packed, people are standing in the aisles. An extraordinary event: a novel by a young local writer has been published. Participants in the reading conference praise the debutant: everyday work is reflected accurately and vividly. The heroes of the book are truly heroes of our time.

The dispute about the book continues at Sonya Pukhova’s birthday party, where Savchenko comes straight from the club. “He’s a smart man, but he performed according to a stencil! - Grisha gets excited. - It turns out that the personal has no place in literature. And the book touched a nerve in everyone: too often we still say one thing, but in our personal lives we act differently. Readers are yearning for books like these!” “You’re right,” nods one of the guests, the artist Saburov. “It’s time to remember what art is!” “But in my opinion, Koroteev is right,” Sonya objects. “Soviet man has learned to control nature, but he must learn to control his feelings...”

That’s also why Koroteev’s performance at the club upset her: he seemed so whole to her, extremely honest, both in public, and in a face-to-face conversation, and alone with her own conscience...

The choice between truth and lies, the ability to distinguish one from the other - this is what all the heroes of the story of the “thaw” call for, without exception. The thaw is not only in the social climate (Koroteev’s stepfather returns after seventeen years in prison; relations with the West and the possibility of meeting foreigners are openly discussed at the feast; at the meeting there are always daredevils ready to contradict the authorities and the opinion of the majority). This is also the thaw of everything “personal”, which for so long was customary to hide from people, not to let out the door of your home. Koroteev is a front-line soldier, there was a lot of bitterness in his life, but this choice is given to him painfully. At the party bureau, he did not find the courage to stand up for the leading engineer Sokolovsky, for whom Zhuravlev disliked. And although after the ill-fated party bureau Koroteev changed his decision and directly stated this to the head of the department of the city committee of the CPSU, his conscience was not calmed: “I have no right to judge Zhuravlev, I am the same as him. I say one thing, but live differently. Probably, today we need other, new people - romantics like Savchenko. Where can I get them from? Gorky once said that we need our Soviet humanism. And Gorky is long gone, and the word “humanism” has disappeared from circulation - but the task remains. And it will be decided today.”

Difficult and long was - like the path through the snowy winter to the thaw - the path to happiness of Sokolovsky and the “doctor of the pest” Vera Grigorievna, Savchenko and Sonya Pukhova, the drama theater actress Tanechka and Sonya’s brother the artist Volodya. Volodya goes through his temptation of lies and cowardice: during a discussion of an art exhibition, he attacks his childhood friend Saburov - “for formalism.” Repenting of his baseness, asking Saburov for forgiveness, Volodya admits to himself the main thing that he did not realize for too long: he has no talent. In art, as in life, the main thing is talent, and not loud words about ideology and popular demands.

Spring. Thaw. It is felt everywhere, everyone feels it: both those who did not believe in it, and those who were waiting for it - like Sokolovsky, traveling to Moscow, to meet his daughter Mashenka, Mary, a ballerina from Brussels, completely unknown to him and dearest to him, whom he dreamed of seeing all his life.

Ilya Grigorievich Erenburg 1891-1967

Julio Jurenito - Novel (1921)
Thaw - Tale (1953-1955)

By Ehrenburg’s own admission, it was the thought of April 1953 that gave birth to this story, and that April, who remembers it, was special. In his memoirs, Ehrenburg wrote about him allegorically: “He warmed up the old people, played mischief, cried with the first rains and laughed when the sun showed again.” The intelligent contemporaries of the author of these words understood him well - after all, on April 4, 1953, the newspapers announced a message from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, in which, unexpectedly for the country and the world, it was announced: all those arrested in the doctors’ case were innocent. For many it was a shock, but for those who did not believe in “killer doctors” it was a holiday. “I was probably thinking about this April,” Ehrenburg continued, “when in the fall I decided to write a short story and immediately wrote the title “Thaw” on a piece of paper.” (To my beloved Russians poet XIX century for Ehrenburg was Tyutchev. It is characteristic that Tyutchev called political changes in Russia during the change of power from Nicholas I to Alexander II with the word “thaw”. I don’t know whether I.G. knew about this, but if he knew, he would undoubtedly be happy.)

Let's continue the quote about the thaw:

“This word must have led many astray; some critics said or wrote that I like rottenness and dampness. IN explanatory dictionary Ushakov says: “Thaw is warm weather during winter or at the onset of spring, causing the melting of snow and ice.” I was not thinking about thaws in the middle of winter, but about the first April thaw, after which there is a slight frost, and bad weather, and bright sun, - about the beginning of that spring that was supposed to come."

Using the same language of weather forecasters, it must be admitted that Russia no longer knew Stalin’s cruel “winters” and perhaps never will…

“I wanted to show,” let’s quote Ehrenburg’s memoirs again, “how huge historical events reflected in the lives of people in a small town, convey my feeling of thawing, my hopes. It seems to me that in the story I conveyed the spiritual climate memorable year. The plot, the characters, unlike usual, came as illustrations lyrical theme…» .

In 1953, the country was still shackled by fear. What was going on in the supreme power, what was the balance of power in the inevitable battle for power - no one except the direct participants in this battle knew (for example, until recently it was unknown that the initiator of all the first anti-Stalin documents was Beria, who tried to strengthen his position in this way) . Khrushchev, who opened the memorial service at Stalin's funeral, and Malenkov, Beria, Molotov, who spoke after him - these are the four who had real chances to the first place in the leadership of the country. But as a result of a conspiracy initiated by Khrushchev, Beria was arrested on June 26 (which was announced on July 10; it was this message that gave rise to hopes for changes for the better, as was already the case when Yagoda and then Yezhov were liquidated). There are three contenders left. Of course, no one knew how the process of “correcting errors” would now proceed, but hopes increased. Ehrenburg knew little more than others, but he remembered 1937 and did not believe the Stalinist trials of that time. This was a tangible advantage over those who took them at face value. That is why it was Ehrenburg who was the first in the country to begin writing “The Thaw” (he felt exactly what he could tell the readers about). Knowing how inexorably and cruelly the state machine deals with dissidents, Ehrenburg was very careful and said many things rather in hints. Of course, many readers understood these hints, but many, accustomed to expecting unconditional political clarity from Ehrenburg, were confused after reading the story.

“The Thaw” was published in No. 5 of “Znamya” for 1954; she became something of a worldwide sensation.

“The Thaw was invariably criticized in the press,” Ehrenburg recalled, “and at the Second Congress of Writers at the end of 1954, it served as an example of how not to show reality. IN " Literary newspaper“They quoted letters from readers who reviled the story. I, however, received many thousands of letters in defense of the Thaw."

The official “literary critics” could not help but remember Ehrenburg’s war and post-war journalism and, even while scolding the “Thaw,” they emphasized a respectful attitude towards his journalistic work. As for the official “art critics,” they could not stand Ehrenburg’s artistic sympathies and, on the contrary, loved everything that he could not stand. Therefore, it is not surprising that when July 6, 1954. The Department of Science and Culture of the CPSU Central Committee sent a note to N. S. Khrushchev and P. N. Pospelov “On the state of the Soviet visual arts", it was precisely it that contained sharp attacks on the Thaw, where the theme of modern Soviet art was one of the main ones:

“The unhealthy aesthetic sentiments towards Soviet art are especially naked,” the note said, “expressed in I. Ehrenburg’s story “The Thaw.” It shows two Soviet artists Saburov and Pukhov, who supposedly personify current state our art. Saburov lives in a slum from hand to mouth, painting only intimate landscapes and portraits of his wife. According to Ehrenburg, the antipodes of Saburov are encouraged in the Soviet Union - hack workers chasing “shock” topics. The artist Vladimir Pukhov is exactly like that. Ehrenburg put into his mouth slanderous thoughts about Soviet reality and art: “Now everyone is shouting about art, and no one loves it - such is the era” and also: “Raphael would not be accepted into the Union of Artists now.” I. Ehrenburg’s commitment to French “fashionable” painting is well known. He speaks in defense of this art in the story “The Thaw.”

The very title of Ehrenburg’s story became for the free world a capacious designation of the processes that timidly began in the USSR after the death of Stalin. But the authorities categorically rejected the word “thaw” to denote post-Stalin changes in the country, and all opportunists unanimously agreed with it. B. Slutsky recalled about Ehrenburg that he “had a serious complaint when, at a government reception, Yevtushenko began to challenge the legitimacy of the term “thaw,” arguing that in the political courtyard there was not a thaw, but a real spring.” This was in 1963, and I remember very well how I read Yevtushenko’s speech in the press and how disgusting it looked in the general chorus of attacks. In the fall of 1967, Slutsky wrote about Ehrenburg:

Don't confuse thaw with spring

and, carried away by novelty,

I didn’t notice the antiquity in it.

No! Thaw is not confused with spring

and was not at all afraid of the scarecrow,

It is characteristic that while in power, Khrushchev was indignant at the use of the word “thaw” in relation to modern politics (he accepted the title of Ehrenburg’s story with hostility, although, most likely, he had not read the story itself). But in his oral memoirs the assessments changed ( final chapter, Where we're talking about about his relationship with the intelligentsia, was told by him in September 1971 just before his death, when he had already been retired for seven years and lived in Petrov-Dalny at the state dacha, sadly reflecting on his fate, the treachery of his environment and the mistakes he had made). This is what he told the tape recorder:

“Ehrenburg used the word ‘thaw’. He believed that after Stalin's death a thaw began in people's lives. I did not meet this characterization of that time entirely positively. There have certainly been relaxations. To put it in police language, we have loosened control and people have begun to speak out more freely. But two feelings fought within us. On the one hand, such relaxations reflected our new internal state, we strived for this. On the other hand, there were people among us who did not want a thaw at all and reproached: if Stalin had been alive, he would not have allowed anything like this. Voices against the thaw were heard very clearly. And Ehrenburg in his works very accurately knew how to notice the trends of the day and characterize the passing of time. I believe that the word he used reflected reality, although we then criticized the concept of “thaw”

Candidates for Politburo membership
Komsomol
Is it true
Lenin Guard
Opposition in the CPSU(b)
Great Terror
Anti-Party Group
Peaceful coexistence
General line of the party

Khrushchev's thaw- an unofficial designation for the period in the history of the USSR after the death of I.V. Stalin (mid-1950s - mid-1960s). It was characterized in the internal political life of the USSR by the liberalization of the regime, the weakening of totalitarian power, the emergence of some freedom of speech, the relative democratization of political and public life, openness to the Western world, more freedom creative activity. The name is associated with the tenure of the First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee N. Khrushchev (-).

The word "thaw" is associated with story of the same name Ilya Ehrenburg.

Story

The starting point of the “Khrushchev Thaw” was the death of Stalin in 1953. The “thaw” also includes a short period when Georgy Malenkov was in charge of the country’s leadership and major criminal cases were closed (“Leningrad Case”, “Doctors’ Case”), and an amnesty was given to those convicted of minor crimes. During these years, prisoner uprisings broke out in the Gulag system: Norilsk Uprising, Vorkuta Uprising, Kengir Uprising, etc.

De-Stalinization

With Khrushchev strengthening in power, the “thaw” began to be associated with the condemnation of Stalin’s personality cult. At the same time, in 1953-55, Stalin still continued to be officially revered in the USSR as a great leader; at that time, in portraits they were often depicted together with Lenin. At the 20th Congress of the CPSU in 1956, N. S. Khrushchev made a report “On the cult of personality and its consequences,” in which Stalin’s cult of personality and Stalin’s repressions were criticized, and foreign policy The USSR proclaimed a course towards “peaceful coexistence” with the capitalist world. Khrushchev also began a rapprochement with Yugoslavia, with which relations had been severed under Stalin.

In general, the new course was supported at the top of the party and corresponded to the interests of the nomenklatura, since previously even the most prominent party figures who fell into disgrace had to fear for their lives. Many surviving political prisoners in the USSR and countries socialist camp were released and rehabilitated. Since 1953, commissions for verification of cases and rehabilitation have been formed. The majority of peoples deported in the 1930s and 1940s were allowed to return to their homeland.

Tens of thousands of German and Japanese prisoners of war were sent home. In some countries, relatively liberal leaders came to power, such as Imre Nagy in Hungary. An agreement was reached on the state neutrality of Austria and the withdrawal of all occupation forces from it. In the city, Khrushchev met in Geneva with US President Dwight Eisenhower and the heads of government of Great Britain and France.

At the same time, de-Stalinization had an extremely negative impact on relations with Maoist China. The CCP condemned de-Stalinization as revisionism.

In 1957, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR prohibited the naming of cities and factories after party leaders during their lifetime.

Limits and contradictions of the Thaw

The thaw period did not last long. Already with the suppression of the Hungarian uprising of 1956, clear boundaries of the policy of openness emerged. The party leadership was frightened by the fact that liberalization of the regime in Hungary led to open anti-communist protests and violence; accordingly, liberalization of the regime in the USSR could lead to the same consequences. On December 19, 1956, the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee approved the text of the Letter of the CPSU Central Committee “On strengthening the political work of party organizations among the masses and suppressing the attacks of anti-Soviet, hostile elements.” It said: “The Central Committee of the Communist Party Soviet Union considers it necessary to appeal to all party organizations... in order to attract the attention of the party and mobilize communists to strengthen political work among the masses, to resolutely fight to suppress the attacks of anti-Soviet elements who are Lately, due to some aggravation of the international situation, intensified their hostile activities against the Communist Party and Soviet state" It went on to talk about the recent “intensification of the activities of anti-Soviet and hostile elements.” First of all, this is a “counter-revolutionary conspiracy against the Hungarian people”, conceived under the guise of “false slogans of freedom and democracy” using “the discontent of a significant part of the population caused by serious mistakes made by the former state and party leadership of Hungary.” It was also stated: “Recently, among individual literary and artistic workers, slipping from party positions, politically immature and philistine-minded, attempts have appeared to question the correctness of the party line in development Soviet literature and art, move away from principles socialist realism in the position of unidealized art, demands are put forward to “liberate” literature and art from the party leadership, to ensure “freedom of creativity,” understood in a bourgeois-anarchist, individualistic spirit.” The letter contained instructions to communists working in state security agencies to “vigilantly guard the interests of our socialist state, be vigilant to the machinations of hostile elements and, in accordance with the laws Soviet power, promptly stop criminal actions." A direct consequence of this letter was a significant increase in 1957 in the number of people convicted of “counter-revolutionary crimes” (2,948 people, which is 4 times more than in 1956). Students were expelled from institutes for making critical statements.

Thaw in art

Thaw in architecture

Template:Section stub

Increasing pressure on religious associations

In 1956, the anti-religious struggle began to intensify. The secret resolution of the CPSU Central Committee “On the note of the department of propaganda and agitation of the CPSU Central Committee for the union republics “On the shortcomings of scientific-atheistic propaganda”” dated October 4, 1958 obliged party, Komsomol and public organizations launch a propaganda offensive against “religious relics”; government agencies it was ordered to carry out administrative measures aimed at tightening the conditions for the existence of religious communities. On October 16, 1958, the Council of Ministers of the USSR adopted the Resolutions “On monasteries in the USSR” and “On increasing taxes on the income of diocesan enterprises and monasteries.”

On April 21, 1960, the new chairman of the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church, Kuroyedov, appointed in February of the same year, in his report at the All-Union Meeting of Commissioners of the Council, characterized the work of its previous leadership as follows: “The main mistake of the Council for the Affairs Orthodox Church was that he inconsistently followed the line of the party and the state in relation to the church and often slipped into positions of serving church organizations. Taking a defensive position in relation to the church, the council pursued a line not to combat violations of the legislation on cults by the clergy, but to protect church interests.”

Secret instructions on the application of legislation on cults in March 1961 addressed Special attention that ministers of religion do not have the right to interfere in the administrative, financial and economic activities of religious communities. The instructions for the first time identified “sects whose creed and nature of activities are anti-state and fanatical in nature: Jehovah’s Witnesses, Pentecostals, Adventist reformists” that were not subject to registration.

IN mass consciousness a statement attributed to Khrushchev from the period in which he promises to show last priest on TV in 1980.

The end of the thaw

The end of the “thaw” is considered to be the removal of Khrushchev and the accession of Leonid Brezhnev to leadership in the year. However, the tightening of the internal political regime and ideological control began during the reign of Khrushchev after the end of Cuban missile crisis. De-Stalinization was stopped, and in connection with the celebration of the 20th anniversary of the victory in the Great Patriotic War the process of exalting the role of victory began Soviet people in war. They tried to avoid Stalin’s personality as much as possible; he was never rehabilitated. There was a neutral article about him in the TSB. In 1979, several articles were published on the occasion of Stalin's 100th birthday, but no special celebrations were held.

Massive political repression, however, were not renewed, and Khrushchev, deprived of power, retired and even remained a member of the party. Shortly before this, Khrushchev himself criticized the concept of “thaw” and even called Ehrenburg, who invented it, a “swindler.”

A number of researchers believe that the Thaw finally ended in 1968 after the suppression of the Prague Spring. With the end of the Thaw, criticism of Soviet reality began to spread only through unofficial channels, such as Samizdat.

Mass riots in the USSR

On June 10-11, 1957, an emergency occurred in the city of Podolsk, Moscow region. The actions of a group of citizens who spread rumors that police officers killed the detained driver. The size of the “group of drunken citizens” is 3 thousand people. 9 instigators were brought to justice.
January 15, 1961, city of Krasnodar. Reasons: the actions of a group of drunken citizens who spread rumors about the beating of a serviceman when he was detained by a patrol for violating the wearing of his uniform. Number of participants - 1300 people. Applied firearms, one person was killed. 24 people were brought to criminal responsibility. See Anti-Soviet rebellion in Krasnodar (1961).
June 21, 1961 in the city of Biysk Altai Territory 500 people took part in the riots. They stood up for a drunk who the police wanted to arrest at the central market. The drunken citizen resisted the public order officers during his arrest. There was a fight involving weapons. One person was killed, one was injured, 15 were prosecuted.
June 30, 1961 in the city of Murom Vladimir region over 1.5 thousand workers of the local plant named after Ordzhonikidze almost destroyed the construction of a medical sobering-up station, in which one of the workers of the enterprise, who was taken there by the police, died. Law enforcement officers used weapons, two workers were injured, and 12 men were brought to justice.
On July 23, 1961, 1,200 people took to the streets of the city of Aleksandrov, Vladimir Region, and moved to the city police department to rescue their two detained comrades. The police used weapons, as a result of which four were killed, 11 were wounded, and 20 people were put in the dock.
September 15-16, 1961, street riots in the North Ossetian city of Beslan. The number of rioters was 700 people. The riot arose due to an attempt by the police to detain five people who were drunk in public place. Armed resistance was provided to the law enforcement officers. One was killed. Seven were put on trial.
July 1-3, 1962, Novocherkassk, Rostov region, 4 thousand workers of the electric locomotive plant, dissatisfied with the actions of the administration in explaining the reasons for increasing retail prices for meat and milk, went out to protest. The protesting workers were dispersed with the help of troops. 23 people were killed, 70 were wounded. 132 instigators were brought to criminal responsibility, seven of whom were later shot (See Novocherkassk execution)
June 16-18, 1963, the city of Krivoy Rog, Dnepropetrovsk region. About 600 people took part in the performance. The reason was resistance to police officers by a drunken serviceman during his arrest and the actions of a group of people. Four killed, 15 wounded, 41 brought to justice.
On November 7, 1963, in the city of Sumgait, more than 800 people came to the defense of demonstrators who marched with photographs of Stalin. The police and vigilantes tried to take away the unauthorized portraits. Weapons were used. One demonstrator was injured, six sat in the dock (See Mass riots in Sumgayit (1963)).
On April 16, 1964, in Bronnitsy near Moscow, about 300 people destroyed a bullpen, where a city resident died from beatings. The police provoked popular outrage with their unauthorized actions. No weapons were used, there were no killed or wounded. 8 people were brought to criminal responsibility.

Notes

Footnotes

Links

Rudolf Pihoya. Slowly melting ice (March 1953 - late 1957)
A. Shubin Dissidents, informals and freedom in the USSR
And I gave my heart to search and test with wisdom everything that is done under heaven...