A. Tairov (stunned by the committee's resolution removing The Bogatyrs announced that he was ill—a heart attack. Art workers went to see him at home and expressed their sympathy. According to A. Koonen, many people visited, as one does the recently deceased):

“I made a major mistake. I take all responsibility, despite the fact that the Committee on Arts Affairs, which passed the performance, approved it. My mistake consists in the fact that I as an artist should have foreseen all the consequences.

“It's insulting that my mistake is being taken as a sortie, which is how they are writing about it.

“The mistake occurred because I put great trust in Demian Bedny who is an old Communist. How could I have imagined that D. Bedny's text constituted a harmful tendency, how could I be a commissar for D. Bedny? This mistake was not made in An Optimistic Tragedy [Optimisticheskaia tragedia]

An Optimistic Tragedy (1933) by Vs. Vishnevsky presents a heroic account of the Civil War and was one of the most canonical Soviet dramas.

or in Homeland [Rodina], where the authors are less authoritative and I subjected their plays to the criticism of authoritative officials.

“I will go to the TsK VKP(b), where, I hope, they will understand me. There I will raise the issue of how new shows need to be shown not only to the committee but to the TsK as well.

“This is essential for a guarantee.

“What really frightens me is whether they will let me keep working. What infuriates me is the desire to set me up as a renegade from the people. This is so dreadful I can't even think about it calmly.”

Tsenin , Honored Artist of the Kamernyi Theater:

“Until the monarchy in our theater ends, all questions will be decided single-handedly by Tairov, who does not take into account the theater's leading personnel, and the theater will be plagued by political debacles.”

Gersht , director at the Chamber Theater:

“The resolution is fundamentally correct. We are supposed to stage Eugene Onegin [Evgenii Onegin]. I predict that there will be the same story with that as there has been with The Bogatyrs.”

Demian Bedny . Demian Bedny is utterly shaken by the resolution of the Committee on Arts Affairs. For three days he did not go out at all, received no one, and only yesterday called in SSP Secretary Stavsky for a confidential talk. From all that follows it is clear that Demian Bedny, while reluctant to appeal personally to the TsK VKP(b) secretaries, wishes to use Stavsky to convey his explanations and justifications. Stavsky, finding Demian Bedny in a state of utter distraction, brought along a stenographer to give the report on this talk a documentary nature.

The general sense of Demian Bedny's explanations on the subject of The Bogatyrs, as set down in the transcript, is approximately the following. The farcical tone of the piece and the treatment of The Bogatyrs are explained by the character of the music. Thus, for instance, the “bogatyrs” sing arias from popular operettas. The farcical display of Old Russia's acceptance of Christianity and its incorrect interpretation is explained by the habit of antireligious propaganda that lingers on in Demian Bedny's practice. On the other hand, he was let down by works in his possession on historical issues that are far from Marxist in orientation.

Admitting that he made a huge mistake, Demian Bedny explains it by his failure to understand the material and by his own stupidity. However, in the conversation he frequently returned to the role of the oversight organs and indicated that at the very beginning of his work on The Bogatyrs, a year and a half ago, the original text did not satisfy him, it seemed frivolous and stupid, but Tairov and Litovsky encouraged him, convincing him that the text was turning out brilliantly for a stage piece.

Shortly before the performance, a fairly well-worked text was submitted to the Committee on Arts Affairs, where Kerzhentsev, Boiarsky, and Orlovsky looked at it, but from there the piece was returned only with a note from Kerzhentsev saying that it was boring and rather crude. Therefore further correction of the text followed along the line of cuts and excision of single sentences.

Demian Bedny also cites the fact that he set forth his concept of The Bogatyrs in an article he submitted to Pravda, where no comments of any kind were made about the essence of his concept, and consequently he considered the text of The Bogatyrs to be absolutely approved.

In making all these references, Demian Bedny stressed, “I have an artist's mind, not a leader's.”

Demian indicated that he was having an attack of diabetes. He talked about how he didn't want to die branded as an enemy of the Party and would like, if he couldn't go back to literature as a creative person, then at least to be used as a book specialist, at the Chamber of Books [national bibliographic center], for instance.

Furthermore, asking to speak off the record, Demian said that his library was his enemy. He had been told this, but he hadn't understood it. He declared he was going to burn his library. Then he emphasized that what he feared most was that, notwithstanding all his past career, he would be condemned as an enemy of the Party acting to encourage the enemies of communism. He declared that he was afraid that if such an opinion took hold about him he would be deported from Moscow.

Demian Bedny remained in this extremely demoralized state even after his meeting with Stavsky, which evidently did not do any good to cheer him up.

Stanislavsky, People's Artist of the USSR:

“The Bolsheviks are brilliant. Everything the Kamernyi Theater does isn't art. It's Formalism. It's pragmatic theater, it's Koonen's theater.”

Leonidov, People's Artist of the USSR:

“When I read the committee's resolution, I lay down in bed and threw my feet up in the air I was so delighted. They really gave Litovsky, Tairov, and Demian Bedny a good bashing. It's worse than MKhAT-2.”

Yanshin, Hon[ored] Artist of MKhAT:

“The play is a very bad one. I'm very pleased with the resolution. You can't hold on that long by worthless means. Now all the worthlessness of Tairov's system has been fully exposed. The sooner they shut down the theater the better. If they've shut down MKhAT-2, then this one should have been closed a long time ago.”

Khmelev, Hon[ored] Artist of MKhAT:

“A perfectly correct decision. The leadership sees where the real art is and where it's profanation. After this decision we should expect the elimination of the Kamernyi Theater. There's nothing more for that theater to do.”

Kedrov, Hon[ored] Artist of MKhAT:

“If they shut down the Kamernyi Theater, there'll be one less bad theater.”

Stanitsyn, Hon[ored] Artist of MKhAT:

“This is a theater where they act badly, sing badly, and dance badly. It needs to be closed.”

Markov, head of the MKhAT lit[erary] section:

“This is vile speculation in the names of Borodin and Palekh. A repulsively awful performance. The resolution is wholly justified.”

Izrailevsky, head of the MKhAT musical section, Hon[ored] Artist:

“All the shows at the Kamernyi Theater are strictly Formalism. Nowhere else could its workers apply their talents. All its life the theater has not given any satisfaction.”

Samosud, art[istic] director of the Bolshoi Theater:

“The resolution is absolutely correct. The Kamernyi Theater isn't a theater. Tairov is a deceiver. The idea of The Bogatyrs production is fallacious. Demian Bedny offered me this play back at the Mikhailovsky Theater, but I rejected it.”

Meyerhold, People's Artist of the Republic:

“At last they've given Tairov the bashing he deserved. I keep a list of Tairov's banned plays, and The Bogatyrs will be the pearl on this list. Demian did get what he deserved. But the most important thing is that the committee, and Boiarsky personally, is to blame for it all. He is persecuting me. As long as there is that kind of leadership on the committee, art will not develop.”

Natalia Sats, Hon[ored] Art[ist] of the Rep[ublic], artistic director of the Central Children's Theater:

“Tairov made a mistake. He used Borodin's unfinished music. He should not have depended on Demian Bedny because he's a bad playwright. Inviting the Palekh artists to participate plays on the form without a chance of justifying it with content. The theater can't tell the viewer anything.”

Sadovsky, People's Artist of the RSFSR, artist of the Maly Theater:

“A sensible resolution. They were right to slap Tairov and Demian Bedny on the wrists. You shouldn't distort the history of the great Russian people.”

Trenev, playwright, author of Liubov' larovaia:

“I was very cheered by the resolution. I take pride in it, as a Russian.

You shouldn't spit in our face. I myself couldn't go to the performance, so I sent my wife and daughter. They couldn't sit through it, they left in disgust. That's how sickening an impression it makes.”

P. Romanov, writer, prose writer:

“They did right slamming them. Demian takes advantage of his award, his connections, and his crude ways. This time it flopped. That's for one, and secondly, it's very good that they stood up for Russian folklore and the Russian bogatyrs. We need to find Russian heroes, too.”

Gorodetsky, poet:

“I can't sympathize with repressions of any kind, but I like the fact that they are striking against the mockery of folklore and not at themes from it. One should not treat the people's history like that, and I like it even more that they struck at Tairov: he's a scoundrel.”

Vsev[olod] Vishnevsky, playwright:

“It serves Demian right, he can quit the hack work. This is history's lesson: ‘Don't lay a finger on our people.’ History will still stand us in good stead, and very soon. An opera is being prepared, Minin [and] Pozharsky—salvation from the interventionists.” (This opinion of the decision did not keep Vishnevsky from going to see Tairov to express his sympathy.)

I. Trauberg, director, author of the screenplay Counterplan [Vstrech-nyi]:

“The Soviet state is becoming more and more national and even nationalistic. Because of this, utterly unexpected things find a defense among the Party leadership. It's getting harder and harder to work, especially when so many leading people—including members of Glavrepertkom and the Committee on Arts Affairs—can't decide correctly on the meaning of a play, which they have to withdraw after it's been approved.”

S. Klychkov, writer:

“But actually, it could be, anything could be. After all the great Russian people number a hundred million, and of course they have a right to an art greater than what you find on boxes of powder and kiosks à la russe. Someday they may dare call me a Russian writer. Russian art cannot be thrown under the tail of a Mansi saga.

“To whom did they give the Russian epic to desecrate? Tairov the Kike and Bedny the Puny. What else beside satire could you expect from Bedny, who's mainly a pamphleteer? Some smart refined person is picking them up by the ass, though, and shaking all the extra stink out of them …

“I hope that it will be easier for writers to write the truth, but critics are going to have to admit their mistakes.”

Iu. Olesha, writer:

“The play is not the main thing here. Demian got too fussy and Demian got a slap in the kisser. Today him, tomorrow someone else. There's nothing in particular to rejoice about. Demian is paying for his past sins.”

Kozlovsky, artist of GABT:

“There's no doubt the play was read before in the government, so why didn't they ban it before the production? Tairov is a great talent, and this resolution isn't going to kill him.”

Kaverin, director at TRAM:

“The resolution is correct, everyone realizes that, and if many are refraining from harsh criticism of Tairov, it's only because, really, every theater has its own ‘little bogatyrs.’”

Eisenstein, Honored Figure of the Arts and film director:

“I didn't see the show, but I'm extremely pleased if only because they gave Demian a good drubbing. That's just what he needs, he's got a swelled head. It's also good that they laid into that toady Litovsky, who came a cropper with his laudatory article. In this whole affair what interests me is one question, Where were they before, when they allowed this counterrevolutionary play on the stage?”

Leonid Sobolev, author of Major Overhaul [Kapital'nyi remont]:

“I was just at Tairov's. People have been visiting him ever since morning. Right as I arrived at Tairov's, Vs. Vishnevsky was leaving. Alisa is terribly upset and dispirited, she says everyone's coming to see him now as if it were a funeral. I feel sorry for Tairov, even though I think the resolution is correct. After all, when a book is published that distorts history, reality, and so on, we don't release it to the reader, but the multitudinous viewer is being educated in the theater, too. It's strange—where was Kerzhentsev before? If the play was rehearsed and was already running as a completed performance for the viewer, that means the Committee on Arts Affairs approved the show and approved it highly. Even the press praised both the play and the production. They say that Molotov and Voroshilov saw The Bogatyrs. Clearly they uncovered distortions in the play.”

Isidor Kleiner, theoretician and theat[er] critic:

“The story of the production of The Bogatyrs is instructive and useful for dramaturgy and for the theatrical art. True, Tairov had written approval of the production from Glavrepertkom. All was ‘in order.’ So that Litovsky is no less responsible than he is. Today there was an emergency meeting with Angarov in connection with this story. There was a new ‘battle of Kerzhenets.’

“Well, but Demian probably isn't going to be rich anymore. They've calculated he managed to get 250 rubles per performance. And there were seven or eight paid performances.”

Svobodin, artist in the Operetta Theater:

“The committee's decision is correct. Tairov's theater is hanging by a thread. It would have been shut down long ago if it weren't for Litvinov, who was protecting it.”

Dzerzhinsky, composer, composer of Quiet Flows The Don:

“I've been planning to write an opera entitled ‘Pugachev.’ After this resolution of the committee, I don't know what I should do. I'd like to talk with one of the leading comrades. Now you have to approach any historical theme with maximum caution.”

Orbeli, academician, director of the Hermitage (after a meeting of the Arts Committee):

“What conclusions? The resolution is marvelous. Although Demian Bedny should be getting more of a beating than Tairov. You can't finish off Tairov. Meyerhold infuriated me. It was the speech of a hooligan. It was tomfoolery.”

Lenin, Honored Artist of the Maly Theater:

“The production has been canceled. Good for them. Under Tsar Nicholas there was one censor who could decide issues single-handedly, but our censors were intimidated by Demian Bedny and let the show through.”

D. N. Morozov, playwright:

“Tairov wanted to earn himself political capital on D. Bedny's play and ‘broke his fast.’ Actually, could you really expect high-quality artistic output from D. Bedny? Signing a poster is a long way from genuine dramaturgy. But the fact that the play was canceled, Kerzhentsev is to blame for this at the least. The play was canceled, of course, at the ‘boss's’ instruction. And rightly so. It's time to speak out about culture.”

Litovsky, chairman of Glavrepertkom:

“I'm not going to speak at a non-Party meeting. At a meeting of Party members I will say that not only Litovsky but the committee as well is to blame: Kerzhentsev, Boiarsky, as well as Gorodinsky, who approved the production.”

M. Bulgakov, author of Days of the Turbins:

“This is a rare instance when Demian, despite his character, is not going to be gloating. This time he himself has fallen victim—he's not going to be chortling over anyone else. Let him feel it for himself.”