the rhetoric of revolution in babel''s konarmija

Russiatz Literature XV (I 984) 279-298 North-Holland

THE RHETORIC OF REVOLUTION IN BABEL"S KONARMIJA

GARETH WILLIAMS

The Konarmija stories are told against the back- ground of the Polish-Soviet war of 1919-2O.l The military engagements described took place in the period from 3 June 1920 ("Konkin"), when the 1st Cavalry Army broke through the Polish lines at Belaja cerkov', to 31 August 1920 ("Zamost'e"), when the Konarmija were caught in the "ZamoQd ring".' However, "Konkin" and 'Zamost'e" are not the first and last stories respect- ively. Babel' seems to have had no interest in de- scribing the campaign of the 1st Cavalry Army as a se- quence of historical events. Although the stories form a cycle which was carefully arranged by BabelI it is impossible to ascertain from the stories the main events and the main tactical and strategical consider- ations of the campaign, either from the Polish or from the Soviet side. While there are many scenes of violence, there are few descriptions of battle.

Ever since the book first appeared critics have assumed that the author put the centre of gravity of the cycle as a whole in the figure of Ljutov, the narrator of most of the stories.'+ It has been argued that the need to reveal gradually various aspects of Ljutov's character and philosophy dictated important aspects of the structure of individual stories5 and of the cycle as a whole. R.Gr@ngaard, for example, says that Ljutov in Konarmija is "both the centripetal and centrifugal force of the composition".6

Since Ljutov is a bespectacled Jewish intellectual, a war correspondent writing for "Krasnyj kavalerist", the newspaper published by the political section of the 1st Cavalry Army, he bears an external resemblance to Babel' and many critics have assumed that Babel' and Ljutov are virtually one and the same person. From this point of view, the events of the Polish-Soviet

0 304-3479/84/$3.00 @ 1984 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North-Holhd)

280 Gareth WiZZiams

war are violent stimuli which are important because of the reaction they cause in Babel'/Ljutov but are not important thematic elements in themselves. Polonskij, for example, says that the picture which Babel' gives does not resemble historical reality and that the book is about the author himself, who is the main hero.7

The picture which emerges of Babel' 's artistic stance is close to that of a lyric poet.' His main concern is not with surrounding reality but with his reactions as a poet to reality, which he wants to ex- press in a form, the self-sufficient unity of which will create a buoyant vessel on the ocean of time. The sea-worthiness of this vessel is all-important; if it is well built, it will eventually reach its aim, the reader. The reader is essentially a distant concept, and perhaps not altogether necessary; Babel' might say to his reader, as Lermontov did: "It is not to you, it is to my heart that I am speaking". BabelI's intense concern with economy, precision, balance and polish of style, with creating a surface in which no joins can be seen, reinforces such an impression.

There are elements in Konarmija, particularly the story "Pan Apolek", which seem to indicate that Babel' was trying either to redeem the ugliness of reality by turning it into a beautiful work of art9 or to find beauty in the very essence of ugliness, bestiality and cruelty.1° The presence of these elements, combined with the various ways in which the author or Ljutov can be seen as of central importance, has tended to lead to a lack of interest in or a lack of attention to the revolution as a theme in Konarmija and as one of the determining factors in Babel' 's attitude towards the events described. It is the purpose of this article to correct this situation.

The revolution enters the Konarmija stories as ma- terial from the first words of the first story: "The commander of the sixth division (nac'div Zest') reported that Novograd-Volynsk had been taken at dawn today".'l Here we have an indication both of the abolition of the old Tsarist ranks and of the new passion for busi- ness-like abbreviations. The second story, "Kostel v Novograde", also contains an abbreviation of this type, voenkom, "military commander", in its first sentence. Such words abound in the Konarmija stories: glavkom (118), pitpunkt (139), nac'podiv (142), poZitotde2 (149) etc. These abbreviations may add a certain amount of colour to the speech and writings of the Cossacks (urevkom for example in the letter of Chlebnikov to Savickij) , and thus represent an element of character- ization of the Cossacks, but they are met most fre-

The Rhetoric of Revolution in "Konarmija" 281

quently in the speech and thoughts of the narrator, Ljutov. These neologisms are not singled out for special attention by devices of contrast, in the manner of Pil'njak, nor are they explained, as though they were exotic. They are used completely neutrally, as though they had always been a part of the author's vocabulary. The way these names are used is a symptom of the fact that the narrator has accepted the new realities created by the revolution. The manner of their use also indicates an assumption that the reader has been affected in the same way.

A law of eccentricity operates in the prose of Ba- bel'. Words, phrases and syntax typical of the revolutionary period are frequently used in a slightly un- suitable context or in a deformed manner. In the story IIIzmena", for example, the cavalryman Balmasev describes the doctor Javejn as an animal (zver' - 135) because the doctor told Balmasev and his wounded comrades to take off their equipment and their clothes and have a bath. Balmasev regards Javejn as an enemy of the revolution because he makes the perfectly rea- sonable request that the three soldiers, on entering the hospital, should have a bath, and he uses the vit- uperation typical of revolutionary propaganda when he calls Javejn an animal. In the context the strength of the condemnation is ludicrous, as is the conclusion of his exhortation to the other wounded to maintain their revolutionary vigilance: "But my words bounced off the heroic infantry like sheep droppings off the regimen- tal drum" (136-37). The word "heroic" is used by Bal- masev as a stock epithet, he intends no irony by it, but in the context of the contented life of the draughts-playing patients in the hospital and the sim- ile which is used it appears to be incongruous and one seems to see the ironic smile of Babel'.

The same Nikita BalmaBev tells the story "Sol'". Here again the influence of revolutionary propaganda on Balmasev's vocabulary can be seen both in appropri- ate and inappropriate settings. Balmasev describes how a Cavalry Army "meritorious" (zasZuHennyj) train stops at the "inveterate" (zakorene Zyj) railway station of Fastov, which is crowded with petty traders (94). A woman gets on carrying a babe in arms and is treated courteously by the Cossacks. In the morning Balmasev, suspicious because the child has not cried, tears off the swaddling clothes and sees a huge lump of salt. The woman is obviously a speculator, one of the many who traded in salt, butter and other commodities in short supply, but Balmasev reproaches her mainly because she deceived the Cossacks and escaped rape. He pushes her off the train, but she is unharmed:

Gareth Williams

And seeing this woman unharmed, and inexpressible (neskazannuju) Russia around her, and the peasant fields without an ear of corn, and the girls we had raped, and my comrades, who go a lot to the front but not many come back, I wanted to jump down and kill myself or kill her. (97)

The mixed vocabulary and mixed motives of Balmagev are incongruous and funny, yet the reader approves when Balmasev shoots the woman, an action which is suggested to him by the other Cossacks and which therefore has communal approval. Balmasev signs his letter: "In the name of all the fighting men of the second company" (97) and one feels that Babel' could well be among those "fighting men".

One of the ways in which Balmasev gains the reader's approval is through his vocabulary and his rhetoric. The words from revolutionary propaganda which he employs may not be used 2 propos, but the very awk- wardness of the way in which they are used seems a proof of the sincerity of Balmasev's belief that these words have an efficacious meaning. Contrary to Horace's dictum," Babel' 's "skilful setting" does not "make a well-known word new"; on the contrary, the worn-out nature of the word is particularly noticeable in a fresh setting. Nevertheless, the contrast between the word and its setting is an indication of the hold which this word has on Balmasev's imagination, it shows that for him the word has meaning, even if he has not yet assimilated it fully.

In the revolutionary period much use was made of words which indicated that the revolution was bringing an enormous change, on an unprecedented world-wide scale. In Lenin's first speech at the Second Congress of the Third Communist International (one of Lenin's speeches at this Congress is read out by Ljutov to the Cossacks in "Moj pervyj gus"') he says: "War has brought an unheard-of (nesZychanno:j exacerbation of the contradictions of capitalism". In his speech to the First All-Russia Congress of Soviets 3-24 June 1917 Lenin uses two such words side by side: "The So- viets are an unheard-of, unprecedentedly strong (ne- slychannoe, nevidannoe v mire po size) representative institution" (XxX11, 275). In his "Literary Notes", 28 December 1921 Furmanov remarked: "If you read Le- nin's speeches you won't find one without the word ne.sZychannyj" . He notes that other orators, under the influence of Lenin, are using the word more and more frequently.14 In "cesniki" Vorosilov uses the word nebyvaZyj (139), which is also typical of the revol-

The Rhetoric of RevoZution in "Konarmija" 283

utionary era. Balmasev introduces his own variant on these words. Instead of nevidannyj and neslychannyj he uses the word neskazannyj to describe Russia, and a conventional poetic epithet seems to acquire a genuine- ly revolutionary sound,15 while much of the pathos of the expression derives from the eccentric way in which it is used,

The rhetoric which Balmasev directs against the woman when he first discovers that the "child" is salt is a fine example of revolutionary rhetoric. He tells the woman that he will forgive her:

But turn to the Cossacks, woman, who elevated you as a working mother in the republic. Turn to these two maidens, who are crying at the moment because of what they suffered during the night. Turn to our wives in the wheat-laden Kuban', who are filled with a woman's strength but have no husbands, and those husbands being just as lonely are forced to rape girls who pass in their life <...> Turn to Russia, crushed by-pain (96).

The style of Balma&ev's outburst reflects that of his favourite, perhaps only reading, the newspaper "Krasnyj kavalerist", which he mentions in "Izmena". The word "to crush", or "strangle" (zadavit') is frequently met on its pages. Its leading article, "uLli- tes', tovariZ6i", Saturday 7 August 1920, signed by "Artem Kubanec", says that baron Vrangel,' "wants to strangle (zadavit ') us with his dirty hands".. The anaphora of turn... turn... is also typica. of "Krasnyj kavalerist", whose main leader-writer, I.Vardin, the naC;poarm of the 1st Cavalry Army, writes in a style reminiscent of that of Lenin. The word repeated by Balmagev is the key word. Balmasev will forgive her, but the Cossacks, the wives, suffering Russia, to whom she should turn, will not. The repetition of the key word, "turn!" is like the blows of a hammer, as Cejt- lin says of Lenin's use of anaphora.16 In the leading article of "Krasnyj kavalerist", 12 August 1920, "Po- Eemu my idem 'za-granicu'?" Vardin asks: "Of what frontier are we speaking ? Of the frontier which was drawn by Tsars, kings, generals, ministers. Of the frontier created by ravishers and oppressors of the people. Of the frontier which the emperors of Austria and Russia drew between peoples". Balmasev's rhetoric is obviously influenced by his reading, but the eccentric element of it is that he is asking for the woman to apologize, amongst other things, for not having al- lowed the Cossacks to rape her. Balmasev uses a rhetoric designed to be directed against rape and violence

284 Gareth Williams

while he accepts rape and violence as a necessary part of the Cossacks' present position.

Balmasev's speech is extremely colourful. Sklovskij once said: "Clever Babel' knows how to justify the beauty of his productions with irony introduced in time".17 The incongruities of Balmasev's speech do create ironic effects, but that irony does not call into question Balmasev's belief in the cause of the revolution, on the contrary, it underlines the genuine nature of Balmasev's belief. The rhetoric of the revolution has entered Balmasev and is now an essential element in the way he looks at life.

The story which follows "Sol"', "Vecer", seems to have nothing in common with it except its setting, a train. Galin, one of the contributors to the newspaper "Krasnyj kavalerist", talks to a laundress, Irina, about the deaths of Russian Tsars. He loves her. She goes to bed with the cook, Vasilij, and while they make love the wall-eyed Galin talks to Ljutov about the need to give political education to the freedom- loving Cossacks. One theme of the story is Galin's ability to conquer his own feelings and submerge them in the common cause. Babel' also indicates the paradox that someone who fights for universal happiness cannot even achieve his own personal happiness, while the cook Vasilij, who despises humanity, achieves personal happiness, The link with "Sol"' does not emerge direct- ly from either of these themes. The link is that both Galin and Balmasev are acting in a revolutionary manner under the influence of revolutionary theories. Their personal qualities and their educational back- grounds have resulted in their reaching different stages of development in their understanding of those theories, but they both, in their own way, are contrib- uting actively to the revolution. Balmasev commits an act which is little more than banditry; nevertheless the totality of many such acts does help to create a revolution. His action is the physical expression of his urge to create a revolution. Galin, by sublimating his love for Irina in his work for "Krasnyj kavalerist", which, says Babel', is "a dynamite fuse put underneath the army" (98), also contributes to the revolution, but in a way which will direct anarchic demonstrations of class hatred into an organized destruction of class- based society. Galin's last words in the story are: "The Cavalry Army is a social focus created by the Central Committee of our party. The arc of the revolution has thrown into the front-line freedom-loving Cossacks steeped in many prejudices but the Central Committee in a flexible manoeuvre will comb them through with an iron comb" (100).


The class hatred of the Cossacks is most vividly shown in "zizneopisanie Pavlicenki, Matveja RodionyEa". PavliEenko works as a cowman for a landowner called Nikitinskij, who seduces Pavlicenko's wife. After the revolution Pavlicenko returns and kills Nikitinskij very slowly, by trampling on him. This horrible death is given in an almost vaudeville manner by Babel'. Pav- licenko's wife, now completely mad, is striding about the room with a drawn sabre, wearing a velvet crown decorated with feathers. Pavlicenko reads out to Niki- tinskij what he calls "a letter from Lenin": "In the name of the people and in order to found a future happy life I order Pavlicenko, Matvej Rodionyc, to de- prive various people of their lives as he sees fit" (79). Pavlicenko, who cannot read, is pretending to read Lenin's order from what is in fact a blank sheet of paper. The scene is grotesque, and becomes more grotesque in retrospect after the hour-long trampling to death of Nikitinskij. The "letter from Lenin" seems a savage joke. There is, however, a connection between Lenin and Pavlicenko's torture of his former landowner. It is only after the revolution that Pavlicenko takes his revenge, despite the fact that the original wrong took place long before the revolution. The connection is made more clearly in a story by E.SEadenko, "Nat- div 6",l' which tells the story of Apanasenko, the real-life original of PavliCenko, commander of the sixth division, to which Babel' was assigned. In this story, when Apanasenko takes his revenge on the landowner he says to him: "If we don't catch you, you'll catch us tomorrow... And this is class war... I'll tell you straight, people". lg

I'm killing you in the name of the The revolution made Pavlicenko realize the

extent of the insult done to him and the way he should avenge it, but whereas Scadenko tries to justify what was in effect murder Babel', with his usual eccentricity, accentuates the savage elemental violence in Pav- licenko's action and thus brings out the fact that revolutions are made not by good people but by people made savage and embittered by want and repression, Such people are the weapons of revolution, and they are taught in which direction to fire by the leaders, such as Lenin, who lack their burning class hatred and have more distant aims.

Ever since the well-known letter of Budennyj to "Pravda" in 1928 Babel' has been depicted as someone who was horrified and repelled by the violence of the revolution. Budennyj asked Gor'kij to agree with him that:

To describe this heroic class struggle which is un-

286 Gareth CJii'liams

precedented in all human history one must first of all understand the essence of this struggle and the nature of the classes, that is, one must be a dialectical and Marxist artist, even if one is not completely conscious of one's aims. But Babel' is neither the one nor the other. 20

Groznova notes the "militant non-receptivityzlof the artist to the complexities of the revolution". This is not my view. The actions of such men as PavliEenko and PriSEepa (in "PrisEepa") are not just blind acts of violence, as Struve maintains.22 They are acts con- ditioned by the class-consciousness of Pavlicenko and PriSEepa and as such are completely in accordance with Marxist thinking on the development of the individual consciousness. Babel' shows that a revolution cannot take place without people such as Pavlieenko and Pri- scepa. Babel' accepts such a revolution and can look beyond it. Pavlizenko begins his "biography" with a call to his countrymen, comrades and dear brothers to "take cognizance in the name of humanity of the biography of the Red general Ma'cvej PavliEenko" (76). The tone is mocking and throw-away, but why does this Red general tell his story if it is not to inspire others in the struggle against the Poles, which is being waged "in the name of Humanity"? This is the context in which he makes his confession, as part of a revolutionary movement which is gradually becoming more and more organized, as Pavlicenko realizes with some re- gret for his favourite year, 1918 (78).

The two stories which are most frequently quoted to illustrate Ljutov's (and therefore Babel' 's) inability to accept the violence which must accompany a revolution are "Moj pervyj gus"' and "Gedali".

In "Moj pervyj gus'" Ljutov is billeted in a homestead which belongs to an old woman. The Cossack cav- alrymen who are also billeted in the homestead only accept him as an equal after he has killed a goose and ordered the old woman to cook it. Ljutov and the five Cossacks sleep together in the hay-loft afterwards. Ljutov has gained acceptance by the Cossacks, but he seems to feel remorse: "My heart, bloodied by murder, creaked and leaked" (56). The words "creaked and leaked" refer back to the way the goose's head was described as he crunched it under his heel. The moral seems obvious. Ljutov, in order to gain acceptance by the Cossacks, has committed a crime. He feels repentance for committing the crime. If he feels repentance for killing a goose, how can he not feel repentance for killing a man? In a revolution, men must be killed.


If Ljutov cannot kill, how can he make a revolution? The formal logic of these propositions seems irrefut- able. There is, however, another thematic line in "Moj pervyj gus"' which makes such logic irrelevant.

When Ljutov reports his arrival to the divisional commander, Savickij, Savickij asks him whether he can read. Ljutov replies that he is a graduate in juris- prudence. Savickij makes mocking comments on Ljutov's puny stature and glasses and mentions that here people get their throats cut because they wear glasses. The quartermaster who takes Ljutov to the homestead repeats this fact. After the Cossacks have shown their dislike for him Ljutov settles down in the yard some way from the Cossacks and reads Lenin's speech at the Second Congress of the Third Communist International in "Pravda". The Cossacks try to annoy him and he has difficulty in concentrating on what Lenin is saying. He gets up and kills the goose. Shortly afterwards the Cossacks admit him into their circle (they are sitting in a circle around a fire). So far, all the movement of the story, both physical and psychological, has been going in the direction from Ljutov to the Cossacks. The Cossacks have resisted this motion. Now they accept Ljutov and the motion flows from the Cossacks to Ljutov. They offer him pork to eat, thus implicitly recognizing that his Jewishness is no barrier between them, they offer him a spoon, they ask him what is in the newspaper. It was obvious from Savickij's first question to Ljutov that most of the Cossacks could not read. Not only could they not read, they felt hostility towards all intellectuals - people with glasses. Now they listen as Ljutov reads them Lenin's speech. As Ljutov reads to them he rejoices and follows the path of "the secret arc of Lenin's straight line" (56). The final words spoken are by Surovkov, the eldest of the Cossacks: "'Truth tickles every nose' said Surov- kov when I had finished, 'but how do you pull it out of the pile of rubbish ? But he hits it without fail, like a chicken pecking corn"' (56).

Surovkov has moved from hostility to all intellectuals to acceptance of one particular intellectual, Ljutov, and recognition that what Lenin says in this speech is the truth. Ljutov has achieved what he was urged to do in every issue of "Krasnyj kavalerist". He has read a newspaper to people who cannot read and he has explained to them in simple terms the essence of the Bolshevik point of view. He has achieved this by doing what was condemned in almost every issue of "Krasnyj kavalerist", by robbing the civilian population. His killing of the goose may be a crime against

288 Gareth WiZLiams

the instincts of a man with a traditional Jewish back- ground but it is also a crime against the revolution, that would be severely punished if it was discovered.

oz2e

Through this crime he has gained acceptance by the Cos- sacks, whose instincts lead them to commit such crimes. By gaining influence over the Cossacks and introducing them to a Bolshevik way of thinking he is aiding a process which should lead to their becoming conscious (cso- znateZ'nye) Bolsheviks who will not commit such crimes.

The speech which Ljutov quotes begins: "We are short of everything" (56). Ljutov is simplifying the speech a little. Lenin made six speeches at this congress, which took place from 19 July - 7 August 1920. Ljutov is quoting from the fourth speech. In response to a remark by Krispin that it would be difficult to create a revolution in Germany because the standard of living of workers was higher than it was in Russia, Lenin admitted that the standard of living of Russian workers had fallen since the revolution, but he empha- sized that this was purely a temporary phenomenon. Sacrifices had to be made in the present to achieve victory in the future. A paragraph later Lenin talks of the possibility that terror may have to be used against the German capitalists. Again this will be purely a temporary measure (XLI, 250-51). We are not certain how much Ljutov read to the Cossacks or in what ways he simplified it. But the basic position Le- nin adopts, which presumably was conveyed by Ljutov, is that if there are difficulties, they must be overcome. This is his straight line. They must be overcome even if one has to do things which run counter to one's principles (lowering the standard of living of workers, terrorizing the civilian population) in order that the greater good of an eventual workers' state may prevail. This is the arc which Ljutov follows, rejoicing. Lju- tov's position in accepting the commission of a crime against the people he is supposed to be saving from tyranny is that the end does justify the means. He is thinking dialectically, and the Aristotelian logic of the propositions mentioned earlier is not relevant to the processes which he envisages.

Gedali, in the story of that name, is a Jew who has been blinded by the Poles. His story immediately pre- cedes "Moj pervyj gus"'.

Gedali cannot understand why he suffers both at the hands of the Poles and at the hands of the Red Army. His reasoning runs like this: "Good deeds are done by good men. The revolution is a good deed of good men. But good men do not kill. Therefore the revolution is done by evil people" (51). Gedali (the word in Hebrew


means "wisdom")24 is combining here two syllogisms: 1) Good deeds are done by good men; the revolution is a good deed; the revolution is done by good men; 2) It is evil to kill; people kill in revolutions; revolutions are evil.

The main response which Ljutov makes to Gedali seems fatuous: "The sun does not enter closed eyes but we will slash open closed eyes" (51). Slashing eyes does not help them to see. Moreover, Gedali's eyes were closed by the Poles, as he points out. Ljutov's remark sounds like a foolish piece of bravado, in the worst of taste. If Ljutov's remark is looked at a little more closely, however, we see how different it is in structure from the remarks of Gedali, although it seems to mimic the structure and rhythms of Gedali's arguments. It is not as fatuous as it seems. The word "closed" would be more exactly translated "which have closed themselves" CzakryvZiesja) . To the will of eyes which have closed themselves Ljutov opposes the will of people who want to open those eyes to the sun, that is, to the revolution. This is not Aristotelian logic. This is the dialectic of the class struggle. The second half of his sentence is neither a conclusion from the first nor a rebuttal of the first. It is a dialectical opposition.

Gedali's argument pretends to establish absolute truth through the process of reasoning according to formal classical logic. Lenin always criticized those who used the methods of formal logic. He maintained that everything was relative and in a state of con- stant flux: "There is no such thing as an abstract truth. Truth is always concrete" he says in "Two Tac- tics of the Social Democrats in a Democratic Revol- ution" (XI, 75). Gedali complains that a Red Army soldier took his gramophone and then metamorphoses that soldier into an apotheosis of the revolution: "'I like music, sir' I answer to the revolution. 'You don't know what you like, Gedali, I will shoot at you, then you will know what you like, and I cannot help shooting, because I am the revolution'" (51). The Red Army soldier's response is repeated approvingly by Ljutov. This response indicates that the use of force is in- evitable during the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat. This is a concrete fact which cannot be removed by any amount of theorizing (compare the arqu- ment of Lenin's article "The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautskij") and in this way "Gedali" links up with "Moj pervyj gus'". The last sentence of the story refers to Gedali as the founder of an Inter- national which could not be achieved in real life (ne-

290 Gareth Williams

sbyto&zyj). His logic, dealing as it does with ab- stractions, cannot have real results. Lenin, in his real speech at a real International, used logic of a different kind.

Throughout the Konarmija stories Babel' shows that he thinks of the campaign as being a part of the dialectical process of history, not as something complete in itself. That is why battles, victories or defeats are not portrayed as having any special significance. In the story "Posle boja" fighting is taking place with the troops of Budennyj trapped in the "Zamosc ring". Ljutov describes how they attack at Cesniki. They are opposed by Cossacks who went over to the Poles at the start of the campaign, led by a mancalled Jakovlev. A gold tooth shines in his mouth and his beard lies on his chest "like an icon on a dead man" (142). Babel' takes us off balance with these details. They seem to be eccentrically selected and to reveal once more his interest in the bizarre and the exotic. But the isolated details of renegade, gold, long beard and icon come together to create a picture of the forces of counter-revolution. Babel', through Ljutov, describes how the Cossack captain "kept his ground this time, and we fled", and refers to the "temporary" victory of the renegade Cossacks (142). This victory was to last all Babel' 's lifetime, since from the 31 August 1920 the Konarmija was forced to retreat. In the perspective seen by Babel', however, it is still "temporary".

Babel' introduces us to the way he sees the historical events described in the first story, "Perechod Ee- rez ZbruE". The first line has already been quoted. The story continues: "H.Q. moved out of Krapivno and our baggage-train stretched out, making a noisy rear- guard, along the highway which goes from Brest to War- saw and which was built on peasants' bones by Nicho- las I" (27). It is often commented that these lines read like a military despatch and are neutral in tone.25 Military despatches are usually concerned with important military facts and with objectives. The only military fact of any significance here is reported in the first line by the commander of the sixth division, that Novoqrad-Volynsk was taken at dawn. A more valid comparison could be made between these opening lines of the cycle and the opening lines of the stories which soldiers tell of their experiences in the newspaper "Krasnyj kavalerist", usually in the section "Zametki bojca". Here, for comparison, are the opening lines of some of these anecdotes: "On the 18 July our battery was located above P- village and was shelling


the enemy, who had taken up positions on the left bank of the river Slut"' (8 August 1920, 3); "We stationed ourselves for a rest in M- village; sent out pi,ckets and patrols in all directions" (8 August, 3); "Once we stopped in S- village in a peasant's orchard. We had a chat and ate some cherries" (11 August, 4); "We moved out of T- village and went to 0- village, where we had been ordered to make a break-through" (12 August, 3); "On the 4 July our valiant 6th cavalry division was ordered to take the town of R at all costs" (13 August, 3).

These Red Army soldiers are, of course, telling their stories to their own comrades, who don't need wordy explanations about the historical context of the war, the conditions in which it is being fought, the strength of the opposing forces, and so on. Hence the typical beginning in medias res, the simple factual language and the inclusion of the audience in the common aim of victory over the Poles. The words "we" and " our" are dominant. In the first page of "Perechod Ee- rez Zbruc" "we" is used four times and "our" is used twice. The question of the type of reader that Babel' assumes is an extremely complex one, which cannot be dealt with here. It is obvious that he varies his approach to his reader with great skill. Here he creates the implication of a Red Army reader, poorly educated in everything but the art of war, sympathetic to the revolution and receptive to propaganda ("built on peasants' bones by Nicholas I"). Such a reader would have been extremely puzzled by what he reads in the first paragraph of this story.

N.Davies first indicated the geographical and historical inaccuracies in this opening paragraph. Novo- grad-Volynsk fell on the 27 June 1920, yet the Zbruc was not crossed until mid-July. The river which would have to be crossed to reach Novograd-Volynsk is the SluE'. The Zbruc at its nearest point to Novograd-Vo- lynsk is some 150 kilometres away. Novograd-Volynsk is hundreds of kilometres from Brest. The 1st Cavalry Ar- my did not get as fax north as Brest-Litovsk. Brest- Litovsk was occupied by the Soviet XVIth Army 1 August 1920 * Davies can find no explanation for these inaccuracies.26 Sicher's explanation of the mention of the river Zbruc is that "the Zbrucz is a symbolic boundary which relates the crossing to the Exodus from Egypt, with all the overtones of redemption in the Passover story".27 He interprets the symbolic nature of the crossing as being linked with the fact that crossing the Zbruc is a "crossing into Poland".** The Zbruc is used as a symbolic boundary by Babel', but it did not represent crossing into Poland. The Zbruc only became

292 Gareth Williams

a part of the official frontier of Poland with Soviet Ukraine after the Treaty of Riga, March 1921.

The significance of the crossing of the ZbruE was indicated in the leading article of "Krasnyj kavalerist", 12 August 1920, "PoEemu my idem 'za-granicu'?", which has already been quoted. In that article Vardin says that they are crossing the frontier which the emperors of Austria and Russia drew between peoples. He is referring to the partitions of Poland. After the first partition of 1772-73 the Zbruc became a part of the Eastern boundary of Austria. In this opening paragraph, which seems so straightforward, Babel' is draw- ing into one knot the aspirations of the Soviet armies - to create an international revolution. Here we have mingled together the partition of Poland by emperors, the death of serfs at the will of Nicholas I, Bolshe- vik troops crossing into the territory of the Austro- Hungarian empire and the road from Brest to Warsaw, gateway to the rest of imperialist and capitalist Europe. This seemingly dry, factual statement of the journey of a baggage-train is a lyrical exposition of aspirations, not of facts. Like the "vatic Bojan" of the SZovo o polku Igoreve Babel' "ranges in thought [like the nightingale] over the tree"." The author's imitation of the style of Bojan shows the extent of this "ranging": "Steeds neigh beyond the Sula; glory rings in Kiev; trumpets blare in Novgorod[-SeverskI; banners are raised in Putivl"'.30 BabelI's introduc- tory passage ranges like Bojan in spirit, but baffles and deceives the reader by its tone.

The inaccuracies are, of course, deliberate. There can be no question that Babel', a war correspondent, might have made mistakes. The inaccuracies, which are few, can be shown to share a common aim. Another il- lustration of Babel' ' s use of historical inaccuracy is "gskadronnyj Trunov". Davies has noted that Trunov is buried in Sokal', which was not taken until 26 August, when the American pilot Cedric Fauntleroy had trans- ferred to the Polish VI Army.31 Trunov was not, in fact, buried at Sokal', nor was he killed in a duel with an aeroplane. K.A.Trunov, commander of the 34th cavalry regiment, was killed in a cavalry engagement in which he had already killed seven Poles. He was shot from a revolver at close range. He was buried in Dubno 5 August 1920. Babel' knew these details, since he wrote one of the obituaries of Trunov which appeared in "Krasnyj kavalerist".32 Why then does he have Trunov buried in Sokal' and make him die after a battle with a.n aircraft from the squadron commanded by Fauntleroy?


On the same page of "Krasnyj kavalerist" as BabelI's obituary of Trunov is a description of the shooting down of two enemy aircraft by soldiers in the Konarmi- ja. The aircraft were a potent threat to cavalry, can- celling out the advantage of the cavalry's speed of manoeuvre. In his plans for the Konarmija stories Ba- bel' noted: "The Konarmija is retreating. In the face of whom? In the face of twenty aeroplanes (...) First meeting with Western European technology".33 The duel of Trunov with the aeroplanes may recall ancient par- allels of heroes duelling with monsters, it undoubted- ly is a duel of epic proportions, but the most important feature of it is that it is a duel between a Bol- shevik and Western technology flown by Americans. That is why Babel' needed to mention Fauntleroy. It is more difiucult to understand why Babel' should choose So- kal'. Perhaps it was because "Gothic Sokal"' (112,117) seemed to him particularly characteristic of Western European culture..According to Brokgauz-fifron a Cister- cian monastery (referred to by Babel' as sobor) and an ancient castle were situated in Sokal'. Trunov was not buried in the monastery, as the great men of old would have been buried, but in a public park. Alternatively, Sokal' might have been chosen because it stands on the Bug, which flows through Brest into the heart of Poland and which the Konarmija had to cross twice before they could change the direction of their attack from L'vov to Warsaw.

Babel' uses the introduction typical of soldiers' stories again in "Berestecko", in a different manner but with the same purpose as in "Perechod Perez Zbruc". He begins: "We were on a march from Chotin to Beres- tecko" (91,). The implied reader, a cavalryman, would know perfectly well that the village of Chotin was not far from Berestecko. The actual reader would never have heard of the small village of Chotin. On hearing the name Chotin he would think that the "march" (perechod) involved was from the town of Chotin, on the Dnjestr, close to where the Zbruc joins the Dnjestr. At that time Chotin was in Rumania, which seemed to be on the verge of intervention in the Soviet Union. There has been a peasant uprising in Chotin in January 1919, the first large-scale revolt of the Bessarabian peasantry.34 The impression of a long march is con- tinued in the second sentence: "The soldiers dozed in their high saddles" (91). Of course, there can be no question of the march actually being from Chotin to Berestecko, hundreds of kilometres away. But Babel' places the suggestion of the possibility of such a march in the head of the reader, and he links Chotin,

294 Gareth Williams

the site of two famous battles of the Poles against the Turks, in 1621 and 1673, and BeresteEko, where Bogdan Chmel'nickij was defeated by the Poles in 1651. As the Cossacks advance they see corpses left by modern warfare lying on thousand-year old burial mounds and they pass watch-towers set up by Bogdan Chmel'nickij. An old man crawls out from behind a grave-stone and sings them songs of the past glory of the Cossacks. Once again Babel' is ranging like Bojan in time and space. In an ancient castle Ljutov finds a fragment of a letter written in French in 1820 which mentions Na- poleon, a letter about the birth of a child.

The implication seems to be that men have always fought and will always fight, the human cycle of birth and death constantly repeats itself, and the lessons of life are never learned. There seems to be here a Tolstoyan fatalism before the facts of human experi- ence. However, the structure and the movement of the story suggest a different conclusion. The closing words of the story belong to the voenkomdiv Vinogra- dov: "You are in power. Everything that is here is yours. There are no masters. I proceed to the election of the revolutionary committee" (93). Babel' mentions ironically that these words are addressed to "bewil- dered pet.ty traders and plundered Sews" (93) e In the central incident of the story a Cossack casually slits the throat of an old Jew, allegedly for spying. The inhabitants were right to close and bolt their shut- ters when the Red troops entered the hamlet. They have no power, and to say that they are in power is a mock- ery. The Cossacks are in power. But they are only in power at the moment. The speech which Vinogradov made to the meeting of petty traders and Jews was about the Second Congress of the Cornintern, at which Lenin made his speech on the necessity of temporary inconven- iences and political terror in the name of a future new society. Throughout the story there are indica- tions that life is changing. The blind old man sings of the former glory of the Cossacks, the way of life of people in Berestecko has faded, the hamlet "stinks as it awaits a new era" (92) I the Raciborskij family, the former owners of Berestecko, have no heirs. The reign of terror brought by the Cossacks will be a temporary phenomenon. It is the path which must be fol- lowed before the new way of life is established.

While there are lyrical elements in the Konarmija stories, these stories, taken as a whole, do not have the atmosphere of "emotions recollected in tranquil- lity". The stories vary immensely in their approach to the reader, but they all assume on the part of the


reader that unquestioning sympathy which the soldiers of the Konarmija assumed when they related their experiences in the pages of "Krasnyj kavalerist". One has the impression that the struggle is still going on and that the events described have not settled into a pattern in the author's consciousness, or in the reader's. All Red Army soldiers, no matter what their faults, have the sympathy of the author, and all Po- lish soldiers have his unbending hatred. As in the soldiers' own stories, the Polish troops in the pages of Konarmija are always referred to as pane or s'ljach- tar they have no faces. In the story which was added to the cycle by Babel' in 1932, "Argamak", one can clearly see the difference which the intervening years have made. Now Babel' does not assume that his readers know what he is talking about. He gives, in a consecu- tive manner, details which amount to a potted history of his life in the cavalry up to the time when the story takes place. He comes to conclusions on and makes considered judgments about the character of the soldiers he mentions, his relationships with them and reasons for the success of the revolution. He describes the difficulties of cavalry life as though they were now over, and he is looking back on them: "We used to have to cover from sixty to eighty kilometres a day" (153). The Poles are no longer pane or s'ljachta. They are mentioned three times simply as pozjaki. "Poce- luj", which was first published in 1937 and which is not included in the cycle, also deals with the m,aterial of this period as something which has long since settled down and can be evaluated.

Ljutov has not finally assimilated the revolutionary reality with which he is in contact in the Konar- mija stories, and one does not feel that the author, who is masked by Ljutov's presence, has any knowledge more recent than that of Ljutov. Ljutov conveys the collisions of contrasting aspects of reality, and the themes of Konarmija are drawn in part from the con- trasts themselves.35 Nevertheless one is aware, despite the consuming interest of Ljutov in all aspects of the reality which he faces, that he realizes that what he sees is fitting into or will fit into the pattern predicted by the leaders of the revolution, prin- cipally by Lenin. Either Babel' or Ljutov exclaims in the second story, "Kostel v Novograde": "The poor are advancing in hordes on your ancient towns, 0 Poland, a song telling all slaves to unite rings over them, and woe to you, RzeczpospoZita, woe to you, prince Radzivill, and to you, prince Sapega, who have risen for an hour!" (30). Radzivill and Sapega are both mem-

296 Gareth Williams

bers of Pilsudski's government, and both have names famous in Polish history. It seems that history is re- peating itself. But the emphasis of this apostrophe is on the fact that their rising is a temporary phenomenon which will be submerged in the tide of freed slaves. Babel', coursing to and fro in history, is not simply intrigued by the exotic aspect of it. He can see a pattern in it and he tries to make this pattern emerge from the stories of Konarmija.

The heroes of Babel' have been profoundly influenced by the revolution. We meet them at one moment in their history and we cannot see the changes which are taking place in them in the same way as we could if we were to look back on them after a period of years. Butthere is no doubt that they are changing. We can be in no doubt that the terms which they use when they speak and the concepts which govern their thoughts are vast- ly different from what they were before the revolution. The rhetoric of revolution is not just rhetoric for them.

Babel' uses the new terms born in the revolutionary period and the rhetoric typical of that period to characterize his heroes. He may at times permit himself a smile at the way in which his heroes use that rhetoric, but he is not totally distanced from it himself, he has a strong belief in the concepts which led to the creation of that rhetoric and his belief is a deeply embedded feature of the structure of the stories.

University College of Swansea

NOTES

1. I am using the chronology of the war established by N-Davies in White Eagle, Red Star: The Polish-Soviet War, 1919-20 (London 1972).

2. Polish names mentioned by Babel' are given transliterated from the Russian, with this one exception.

3. See D.A.Furmanov, Sobranie soc'inenij IV (Moskva 1960-61), 340. 4. See A.Voronskij, "I-Babel"', Literaturnye portrety I (Moskva

1928), 159-90. This article was first published in Krasnaja ROV' P5 (1924), 276-300.

5. J-Andrew, "Structure and Style in the Short Story: Babel's 'My First Goose"', Modern Language Review 70 (19751, 366-79;

The Rhetoric of RevoLution in "Konarmija" 297

M.Falchikov, "Conflict and Contrast in Isaak Babel's Konarmi- jaw, Modern Language Review 72 (1977), 125-33; N.i.Nilsson, "Isaak Babel's 'Perechod Perez ZbruE I", Scando-Slavica 23 (1977), 63-71.

6. R.Gr$ngaard, An Investigation of Composition and Theme in Isaak Babel's Literary cycle 'Konarmija' (Aarhus 1979)) 34.

7. V.Polonskij, "Kritizeskie zametki. 0 Babele", 0 sovremennoj literature, second edition (Moskva/Leningrad 1929, reprint The Hague 1967), 45-73 (49-50).

8. A comparison of Babel' to a lyric poet is made by J.E.Falen, Isaac Babel, Russian Master of the Short Story (Knoxville, Tennessee 19741, 116.

9. This view is particularly common in Soviet criticism. It can be used both to condemn his attitude towards the revolution and to excuse it as "romantic" or "idealist". One of the first to put forward this view was V.Percov, "Kakaja byla pogoda v epochu graidanskoj vojny?", Novyj LEF b7 (1927), 36-45. The fullest and most reasoned presentation of this point of view is given in L.Plotkin, "TvorEestvo Babelja", Oktjabr' b3 (1933), 174-84.

10. P.Garden gives a thoughtful interpretation of this aspect of Konarmija in hex book The Art of Isaac Babel (Ithaca, N.Y./ London 19721, 133-51.

11. I.Babel', Izbrannoe (Moskva 19661, 27. All future references to this edition will be made in the text, by page number only. Translations are my own.

12. "Dixeris egregie notum si callida verbum/ reddiderit iunctura novum", Ars Poetica, 47.

13. V.I.Lenin, Polnoe sobranie sozinenij, fifth edition, XL1 (Mos- kva 1971-751, 224. All future references to this edition will be made by volume and page number in the text.The translations are mine.

14. Furmanov, op.cit. IV, 271. Lenin is not always precise in his use of neslychannyj. In "Vse na bor'bu s Denikinym" he refers to "the unheard-of yoke <...> of the capitalists" (XXXIX,44).

15. See also Afon'ka Bida's promise to his horse to hew down the "neskazannuju gljachtu" (104).

16. A.G.Cejtlin, Stil' Lenina-publicista (Moskva 1969), 153. Cejt- lin makes the point that Lenin tends to repeat the word which is central to his argument, the key word. Ljutov and Babel', in their own use of anaphora, tend to repeat a word which is slightly off centre.

17. V.sklovskij, "I.Babel'.(Kritireskij remans)", LEF f2(1924), 154. 18. E.zEadenko was the third member, with Budennyj and Vorogilov,

of the Revolutionary Military Council of the 1st Cavalry Army. He became a member of the Revvoensovet of the 2nd Cavalry Army in July 1920. "NaEdiv 6" is in Pervaja konnaja v izobragenii ee bojcov i komandirov (Moskva/Leningrad 1930), 104-113.

19. %adenko, op.cit. 110. 20. S.Budennyj, "Otkrytoe pis'mo Maksimu Gor'komu", Pravda, 26

October 1928, 4. See also S.Budcnnyj, "Babizm Babelja iz

298 Gareth Wii!Ziams

'Krasnoj novi"', Oktjabr' b3 (1924), 196-97. 2 1. Russkij sovetskij rasskaz, edited by V.A.Kovalev (Leningrad

1970), 150. The section on Babel' is by N.A.Groznova. 22. G.Struve, 25 Years of Soviet Russian Literature (1918-1943)

(London 1944), 25. 23. The normal sentence for such crimes was from 6 months to 1

year of hard labour. This was usually suspendedif the soldier had a good record. See the section "Revoljucionnyj sud" in Krasnyj kavalerist, 7 August 1920, 8 August 1920, 19 August 1920 and 21 August 1920. In cases where sums of money were taken the sentence might be as much as 10 years hard labour (Krasnyj kavalerist 24 August 1920, 4).

24. D.Mendelson, Metaphor in Babel's Short Stories (Ann Arbor 1982), 38.

25. See for example T.Stableford, The Literary Appreciation of Russian writers (Cambridge 1981), 108.

26. N-Davies, "Izaak BabelI's 'Konarmiya' Stories and the Polish- Soviet War",. Modern Language Review 67 (19721, 845-57 (849).

27. E.Sicher, "The Road to a Red Cavalry: Myth and Mythology in the Works of Isaak Babel' of the 192Os", Slavonic and East European Review 60 (19821, 528-46 (538). See also J.J.van Baak, "The Function of Nature and Space in 'Konarmiya' by I.E.Babel"', Dutch Contributions to the Eighth International Congress of Slavists, Zagreb, Ljubljana, September 3-9, 1978, ed. by J.M.Meijer (Amsterdam 1979), 37-55 (54).

28. Sicher, op.cit. 545. 29. Tne Song of Igor's Campaign, translated by Vladimir Nabokov

(New York 19601, 30. 30. Ibid, 32. 31. N.Davies, "Izaak Babel' 's 'Konarmiya' Stories and the Polish-

Soviet War", op.cit., 852. 32. "Pobol'Be takich Trunovych!", signed by "Voennyj korrespon-

dent 6 Kavdivizii K.Ljutov", Krasnyj kavalerist 13 August 1920, 3. It was thought that the only extant piece of journal ism written by Babel' for Krasnyj kavalerist was "Ee den"', published in Litesaturnoe nasledstvo 74 (Moskva 19651, 488.

33. A.N.Piroikova, "I.Babel'. Novye materialy", Literaturnoe nasledstvo 74 (Moskva 1965), 467-512 (492).

34. See N.V.Bereznjakov, Bor'ba trudjas'Zichsja Bessarabii protiv interventov v 1917-20 gg., edited by I.M.Razgon (Kiginev 1957) , 194-20s.

35. See J.van der Eng, "La description poetique chez Babel", Dutch Contributions to the Fifth International Congress of Slavicists, Sofia 1963 (The Hague 19631, 79-92 (85).

the rhetoric of revolution in babel''s konarmija

Documents