Writers, Literature and Censorship in Poland. 1948–1958

Front matter

CROSS-ROADS. POLISH STUDIES IN CULTURE, LITERARY THEORY, AND HISTORY 21

Kamila Budrowska

Writers, Literature and Censorship in Poland. 1948—1958

Contents

2, The state'of the archives: „a NO A niiina 23 Part 1: Towards a synthesis oesie Aa 33 L “Censorship theory eertain a a T CAR 33 Arguments in relation to literature sesiunii 44 Arguments relating to censor! Work seen 45

2 Content-related censorship o....eeeeseseesesesseeseeseesesseeseesteseeseesneeesneees 46

3 Author-related censorship 75 Accounting for the author 79 Authors viewed positively oe owo wywo o A 81 Authors viewed negatively sisstin 86 Blacklisting, or the non-existent author 1... 91

Part 2; Case StUdIES wad a AGO 137 Contents

Short stories

Bramy raju (The Gates of Paradise)

The missing ‘opening night’ scene sisisi 150 ‘Cuts’ made on political and moral grounds |... 159 Stanisław Lem as a writer for young readers? 0.0... ees eeseeeeeeee 166 Asivonatic (The Astronauts) sworn O 189

Wiersze zebrane (Collected poems), 1949 Wiersze zebrane (Collected poems), 1952

Wiersze zebrane (Collected poems), 1955

Młodym do lotu. Wybór wierszy (Poems for Youth. Selected poems), 1952, r RO AW Ed aid IAA 215

Jan Brzechwa, Irena Jurgielewiczowa and others. Childrens and youth literature «aaa do az da zi

The Case of Jan Brzechwa

Childrens literature and youth literature 00... cesses esses eeeeeeseeees 241 A POSITIVE programie i r O W A R A RÓ 244

Contents 7

1 A model response. Tsarist censorship and censorship in the People’s Republic of Poland aisescssiiiinadanriieniniii aa az an 253 2 Aesopic language and porcelain puppies. Authors strategies for Aealing with censorship: aan A R ELE 266 Jerzy Andrzejewski wa A Od Stanisław LEM. sez dada ao Kazaa akcie Władysław Broniewski Part 4; Contexts cian 287 Context I Literary studies: s żaka sandra te nc dd 287 Wiedza Powszechna 1947-1950... oaza anna ananaa 294 Ossolineum 1948-1951 ans AAAA 295 Książka i Wiedza, 1948-1950 o...escesssssessessessesseneesseseeseesneseesuesueseesueaneeseeees 298 Państwowe Zakłady Wydawnictw Szkolnych 1948 oo... 301 Wydawnictwa różne na T 1948-1956 CONCIGSIONG aa hb GOAE A 329 Afterword. Ten years later aaa ko oases 335 Bibliography CO OTOZ 341

Preface!

The workings of key institutions remained a closely guarded secret in totalitarian systems. The concept of ‘official secrets’ was taken to absurd lengths, with the Soviet Union even classifying the telephone book of ordinary citizens’ numbers as such. As far as any reasonably intelligent and interested person living under such conditions was concerned however, the situation was, broadly speaking, transparent enough. The average participant in literary and cultural life, even during the most repressive period of Stalinism, was well-informed both as to what could and could not be written about at a given point in time and as to who was ultimately responsible for deciding whether or not questionable materials could be published. Responsibility, of course, did lie with the security service. Since the impact of censorship was visible to all in the form and quality of works that were published, even hidden procedures ultimately proved easily decipherable. It is for this reason that insightful descriptions of the workings of censorship appeared even before the archives were officially opened.

However, it was only after 1989 that researchers could seek to supplement the widely-available interpretations with source materials illustrating the detailed work undertaken by censorship officials while also demonstrating how their approach shifted over time. Research on censorship in the communist People’s Republic of Poland (PRL) has become an established field. Among the existing literature, there are not only purely conceptual outlines of the nature and functions of the censorship authorities but also extensive studies based on archival sources. Kamila Budrowska, the author of this book, thus did not have to start from scratch. Nevertheless, her study offers an outstanding contribution to the field.

Firstly, she has examined all the available sources relevant to the subject of her book - literally thousands of pages of materials. Secondly, she has used the empirical data and the existing literature to develop a conceptual framework that is sufficiently neutral in methodological terms to enable its use in diverse future research projects. What is particularly useful for specialists is that Budrowska has highlighted gaps, both in the archival sources and in the existing literature. She offers multiple pointers as to what is required of future research and what is likely to prove impossible for future research.

1 This preface to the English translation of this study is taken from Prof. dr. hab. Zdzisław Łapińskis review written in 2009 before the publication of the Polish version.

10 Preface

As a result, this work is essential reading for anyone interested in the culture of communist Poland. Furthermore, this is a work that particularly sounds methodologically, meaning that it should be of interest to anyone working on various forms of political restriction and repression of literature during other periods. The chapter comparing communist-era and tsarist censorship is particularly significant in this respect. This book also provides readers with insight into the everyday life and work of censors, thus offering, indirectly, an illustration of the standard of living in post-war Poland. The image of the world of censorship that emerges from this study underlines the ‘banality of evil that was fundamental to the communist system. The majority of people serving in the Polish censorship office (GUKPPiW) were not demonic individuals but ordinary people, often intelligent and endowed with a sense of humour. While they sometimes did work in authors’ favour, censorship officials were nevertheless fundamental to the overall existence of the repressive regime.

Authors’ attempts to outsmart censors were destined to fail because the main method of communicating forbidden content was ‘Aesopic language. This was generally something that more insightful readers picked up on - with this group necessarily also including censors, who were, after all, trained to receive such messages. It is for this reason that GUKPPiW officials were surprisingly often fully aware of the strategies that authors had adopted’ (p. 284). Thus, if texts that employed allusions did indeed make it through the censors’ filter, then this fact is to be interpreted first and foremost as an indicator of the Party’s prevailing cultural policy.

It thus comes as no surprise that during the Stalinist period, almost no author sought to adopt the strategy of using Aesopic language, because doing so could easily have landed the author in trouble with the security service. That authors did face the threat of being reported is evident in this telling note from July 1950, cited in the book: Tt would be worthwhile to not only deny approval to publish the yearbook, but also to inform the security service and the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of this matter’ (p. 306).

Following the breakthrough in October 1956, when a government led by Władysław Gomułka took control, such severe sanctions were no longer applied and writers again started playing little games with the censorship office. However, the outcomes of such efforts were, at best, ambivalent. As Budrowska notes, each author always employed some form of self-censorship’ (p. 285).

Despite the wealth of available sources, which in themselves are undeniably quite monotonous, this book in no way leaves readers weary. It gives a general impression of the institutional mechanisms that were in place during the period from 1948 to 1958 alongside detailed descriptions of individual cases

Preface 11 that confirm the broader sociological truths that Budrowska seeks to outline, while also giving an indication of the human agency that sometimes modified the course that these processes took.

Alongside such structural and human factors, what Budrowska also shows is the significance of historical factors. Literary censorship during the Stalinist era was in total effect , as it affected both literary works themselves (their subject matter, ideology and poetics) and their reception. After October 1956, the authorities attached less significance to controlling poetics. However, their attitude towards subject matter and ideology, as well asto the potential scale of reception of questionable or controversial works, did fluctuate. Generally, though, these shifts tended towards permitting authors greater freedom of expression.

Budrowska is aware of the transformations to which censorship was subject as a result of political changes taking place not only in the decade that she studies, but also in the periods on either side of it. Thanks to the fact that she examines issues that were crucial to life in Poland beyond the period from 1948 to 1958, her book presents a panoramic image of an institution that was certainly dynamic but ultimately maintained a strong core identity throughout its existence.

At one point in her book, Budrowska cites what she considers to be a prevailing opinion in existing research while also adding her own comment that it is necessary to add a more nuanced perspective. This is something that, I believe, gives an impression of the overall significance of her study. Writers, Literature and Censorship in Poland. 1948-1958 is a work that does not seek to turn the fairly substantial body of existing knowledge in this field on its head. However, it does cast this knowledge in a more nuanced light. There are many examples where she offers a corrective to previous findings. I will highlight just two examples here. The first is ‘that there is no evidence that censors altered canonical Polish texts between 1948 and 1950 (of course, this does not rule out such cases occurring later)’ (p. 310). The second relates to texts towards which censors were 'indifferent’ or had no interest in. The category of texts that were ‘equivocal from a censorship perspective, she argues, ‘did not exist in the context of books aimed at adults. It was thus something that was exclusive to children’s and youth literature’ (p. 250). Asa result, she finds, ‘works thus classified could remain on the market but they could not be given new editions nor could they be recommended for school libraries’ (p. 247). What this means in the broader context is that “[t]he prevailing view that censorship treated childrens literature as strictly as works aimed at adults between 1948 and 1958 can thus be questioned’ (p. 251).

Her book thus offers various correctives to claims that prevail not only in broader discourse but also in specialist literature on communist-era censorship. The most impressive contribution offered by Budrowskas study, however, is that

12 Preface she has turned to previously unused sources to support the central thesis of the work. Her key argument is that 'taking all literary works published in Poland between 1944 and 1989 as a whole, they could be defined as editio purificata’ (p. 333). Literature produced during the communist era emerged at a time when the shadow of the notorious censorship office loomed large over each work at every stage from its conception to its reception. This is an argument that can be supported wholeheartedly and is proven in the study.

In conclusion, I would like to add that the term ‘definitive work is often misplaced in the context of contributions to literary studies. However, having read Kamila Budrowskas work, I have no hesitation in applying the term in this case, despite the author’s own reluctance. Writers, Literature and Censorship in Poland. 1948-1958 is indeed a definitive work in its field.

Zdzisław Łapiński