1. Article in defense of Usievich.

Usievich was an editor of Literary Critic, essentially the only major journal of literary theory in the thirties and one where G. Lukács and his associates were prominent contributors.

Usievich and P. Vasiliev himself have shown great impatience and personal interest in the publication of this article in L[iterary] G[azette].

Usievich has made several calls to Sen[ior] Secretary Tseitlin and his dep[uty] Berkovich in the editorial office on this subject, however Tseitlin and Bolotnikov are still holding the article back, trying to come to an agreement on it with Yudin and demanding, at Yudin's insistence evidently, that Rozental make several corrections.

In connection with the publication of this article, P. Vasiliev himself came to the offices of Lit[erary] Gazette to inquire as to when the article would be released and discussed this with Tseitlin.

2. Pasternak on Gorky's article.

Boris Pasternak, when he met Pavel Vasiliev at the Herzen House, shook his hand and said demonstratively loudly: “How do you do, enemy of the fatherland,” and laughing, he walked on. Later he said the following on the subject of Gorky's article:

“You get the feeling that Gorky harbors a bitterness toward everyone. He doesn't understand, or pretends not to understand, the significance each word of his has, the resonance that any given speech of his has. Gorky's nuances turn into the rumbling of a truck.

“As for Pavel Vasiliev, Gorky's article is no reflection on him. He will also be published and also accepted among the public.

“With regard to Aleksandr Prokofiev, Gorky was too harsh (‘A poet, I guess’), and moreover the 'I guess' was in quotes. This is all too petty for Gorky.”

Moving on to the matter of acceptance into the union and Shaginyan's letter, in which she declines the title of union member, Pasternak said:

“It turns out that heroic gestures are now in fashion. I didn't make myself Soviet in time. I should have stayed the way I was two years ago. At the time I was seething and raging, I was capable of all kinds of gestures. Then I started to think that this was the wrong position, that I was a rotten intellectual, that everything around me was reforming itself and that I should, too. And I sincerely did, and so now it turns out that I could have gotten along without it. I missed the mark again. I say all this laughing, but seriously, there is a certain truth in it. One conversation with someone who stands at the apex—I'm not going to name him—has convinced me that now, as I said, the fashion is for another type of writer. When I spoke with this person in the usual Soviet tone, he suddenly told me that one shouldn't speak in that way, that this was time-serving. I get the feeling that many at the top would like it better now if I was the way I was before I reformed myself.”