Copyright by Mark Alan Smith 2019 The Dissertation Committee for Mark Alan Smith Certifies that this is the approved version of the following Dissertation: To Burn, To Howl, To Live Within the Truth: Underground Cultural Production in the U.S., U.S.S.R. and Czechoslovakia in the Post World War II Context and its Reception by Capitalist and Communist Power Structures. Committee: Thomas J. Garza, Supervisor Elizabeth Richmond-Garza Neil R. Nehring David D. Kornhaber To Burn, To Howl, To Live Within the Truth: Underground Cultural Production in the U.S., U.S.S.R. and Czechoslovakia in the Post World War II Context and its Reception by Capitalist and Communist Power Structures. by Mark Alan Smith. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May, 2019 Dedication I would like to dedicate this work to Jesse Kelly-Landes, without whom it simply would not exist. I cannot thank you enough for your continued love and support. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my dissertation supervisor, Dr. Thomas J. Garza for all of his assistance, academically and otherwise. Additionally, I would like to thank the members of my dissertation committee, Dr. Elizabeth Richmond-Garza, Dr. Neil R. Nehring, and Dr. David D. Kornhaber for their invaluable assistance in this endeavor. Lastly, I would like to acknowledge the vital support of Dr. Veronika Tuckerová and Dr. Vladislav Beronja in contributing to the defense of my prospectus. v Abstract To Burn, To Howl, To Live Within the Truth: Underground Cultural Production in the U.S., U.S.S.R. and Czechoslovakia in the Post World War II Context and its Reception by Capitalist and Communist Power Structures. Mark Alan Smith, PhD. The University of Texas at Austin, 2019 Supervisor: Thomas J. Garza This dissertation considers the synchronicities of underground cultural production following World War II in the U.S., U.S.S.R., and Czechoslovakia. All three of these chronotopic locations served as the backdrop for underground literary and musical cultural movements that challenged the dominant power structures of their respective countries. The cultural production of the Beat Generation in the US, the “New Wave” of Russian literature in the U.S.S.R., and the members of literary and musical underground movements in Czechoslovakia, attempted to open a dialogue with existent power structures in an effort to express the human experience in a manner that fell outside of the purview of hegemonic societal and governmental forces. In analyzing the work of Vasily Aksyonov, Allen Ginsburg and Egon Bondy, amongst other members of their respective movements I will demonstrate the viability of underground cultural production as a means of speaking truth to inherent power structures, as well as its ability to function as a galvanizing force that enables individuals who normally vi fall outside of the purview of dominant discourse to coalesce in a meaningful way. I also consider the responses of entrenched capitalist and communist power structures including cooptation, commoditization, manipulation, normalization and repression as means of removing agency from dissenting voices. In applying the Bakhtinian theories of the chronotope, the dialogic, and the grotesque in tandem with the Habermasian theories of the public sphere and lifeworld, a picture begins to emerge that informs the formation and relevance of underground cultural movements. Moving into the 21st century I contend that vibrant and relevant forms of underground cultural production must continue to endure in order to challenge entrenched power structures, as well as to explore alternative avenues of expression that can benefit the progression of humanity. The relevance of underground culture in the modern context is demonstrated by its continuing viability the US, UK, and Russia, amongst many other countries. Moving forward I will apply the same theoretical parameters to modern variants of cultural production, as well as examine the impact of the Internet, in order to establish the role of underground cultural production and its reception by dominant power structures. vii Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction; the Emergence of Underground Cultural Production in the Post World War II Context ............................................................................. .1 Chapter 2: All Things Bakhtin: A Chronotopic Discussion of Moscow, New York, San Francisco, and Prague and Western Popular Culture Theory Takes a Peek Behind the Iron Curtain; Dialogism. Polyphony and Habermas’ Public Sphere and Lifeworld ............................................................................................................ .30 Chapter 3: Vasily Aksyonov,The Burn, and the “New Wave” of Russian Literature; the Stilyagi Movement and Underground Culture in the Soviet Union .................................................................................................................. .79 Chapter 4: “Howl” and the Beat Generation; Movement and Mobility as Kerouac and Aksyonov Hit the Road ............................................................................. .122 Chapter 5: The Philosophy and Writings of Ladislav Klíma and Egon Bondy, Prague Spring and the Birth of the Czechoslovak Underground ..................... .157 Chapter 6: Politicization, Cooptation, Commodification, and Repression of Underground Cultural Production in the Capitalist and Communist Systems .. .190 Chapter 7: Conclusions, Forecasts, and Moving Forward ............................. .225 Bibliography .................................................................................................... .266 viii Chapter 1: Introduction; the Emergence of Underground Cultural Production in the Post World War II Context Youth, underground and subcultural movements have played a large role in shaping the overall discourse of the 20th century. Following the ravages of the Second World War these movements, which traditionally sat outside of the purview of mainstream hegemonic forces, began to emerge globally across all political, geographic, cultural and social spectrums. The output of these underground groups resulted in new perspectives on engaging and managing the realities of emerging possibilities inherent in the new world. Underground cultural movements arose in cities as far-flung as San Francisco, Moscow, New York and Prague as well as all points in between. For many who experienced World War II first hand, or for those who came of age during its aftermath a dramatic political, social and cultural shift had occurred; the roles of traditional society, in both the capitalist and communist variants, no longer offered solace or opportunity for all citizens. It is common convention that these subcultural movements began in earnest in the 1960s. And while it is true that these movements reached critical mass in the 1960s, and particularly in the watershed year of 1968, it is important to note that the seeds for these underground cultural groups were planted in the 1950s. The decade saw the full emergence of the Beat Generation in the U.S., the новая волна (New Wave) movement of Russian literature in the U.S.S.R. and the Půlnoc edice (Midnight Edition) movement in Czechoslovakia. As Inger Thorup Lauridsen and Per Dalgard posit 1 It has recently become more and more clear that beneath the cold McCartyhite surface of postwar America something was happening […] Something was growing and taking shape in the domains of subculture. The subculture was turning into the powerful counterculture of the sixties. The Beat Generation as the artistic reflection of American urban youth […] took form and burst noisily onto the cultural scene with a vigor that made the academic walls of the literary establishment tremble. (Lauridsen, Dalgard, 14) Lauridsen and Dalgard go on to state “In the Soviet Union it all started in the fifties too. Stalin’s death in 1953 and Khrushchev’s denunciation of his authoritarian regime at the Party Congress in 1956 changed the climate completely. The period which followed became known as the Thaw” (Lauridsen, Dalgard, 14). For those in the Soviet Union the death of Stalin served as a shift that resulted in the emerging new realities that became possible following Khrushchev’s Secret Speech. This monumental speech was made to the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1956 (McCauley, 42). In it Khrushchev denounced Stalin and his policies, ushering in the historical time period known as the Thaw. The need to experience life on one’s own terms, irrespective of societal norms became a defining characteristic of youth and underground movements that spread across the globe following the Second World War. To reiterate, this underground cultural phenomenon cut across political, social and geographic boundaries; literary, musical, cultural and societal traditions that reflected the values of the hegemonic forces of the world were in a state of flux and were no longer treated as the sole means of expression by those 2 connected with these underground movements. Again Lauridsen and Dalgard convey: In many ways the New Wave resembled the Beat Generation, both having emerged as the voice of a generation that had experienced the horrors of the war and the cold war generating an awareness of the possibility of mutual nuclear destruction. It was in both countries a generation which was sick and tired of being