TONCHO ZHECHEV

THE SEPTEMBER 1923 UPRISING AND BULGARIAN CULTURE

The Antifascist People's September 1923 Uprising has been examined from many aspects: as one of the most vivid events in Europe, the first armed resistance against advancing fascism at that time and an expression of the pro- found postwar European revolutionary crisis; as a testimony of the invincible course of the ideas of the Great October Socialist Revolution and the conta- gious example of the Russian workers and peasants after the disastrous con- sequences of the war; and as one of the most outstanding events in modern Bulgarian history, which determined the climate of the class struggle and gave the initial impetus for further clashes in our national life. It is also significant as a turning point in the bolshevization of the Bulgarian Communist Party in the process of mastering the difficult lessons of Leninism in the conditions prevailing in the Balkans, with their specific history and distribution of the class forces; and as a lesson for the whole international workers' and commu- nist movement, an important episode of the strategy of the Comintern. From the famous address of the leaders of the uprising, Vassil Kolarov and Georgi Dimitrov, to the Bulgarian workers and peasants, written already in , until this day-a tremendous literature has been created which evalu- ates and re-evaluates the significance of the tragic events for both contempor- aries and the coming generations. Modern criticism, history, and theory of modern Bulgarian culture-of lit- eral, pictorial art, music, the theater, and journalism march in step with this general trend. The September Uprising has already been traditionally examined as a turning point in our country's cultural history, starting with the develop- mental works of Georgi Bakalov, Todor Pavlov, Dimitur Naidenov, Liubomir Pipkov, and Nikola Mavrodinov-passing through the new investigations, such as "Panorama of Bulgarian Literature" by Pantelei Zarev, "Along New Roads" by Venelin Krustev, the theater studies .of Liubomir Tenev, and the solid works of Dimitúr Xosev. on the history of the Uprising-and coming down to the investigations of the younger and youngest ones. The September develop- ments of 1923 had a great impact on Bulgarian culture, as had been their sig- nificance for the political and social history of Bulgaria. The people's drama which took place in the first half of the had a dual impact on Bulgarian culture. As a truly major historical event, the Up- rising could not fail to give rise to a whole series of remarkable phenomena in Bulgarian literature, pictorial art, music, theater, cinema, journalism, historio- 225

graphy, folklore, philosophy, and criticism, which directly reflected the devel- opments or indirectly treated their consequences in the life of the people. Af- ter a time, the concept of "September poets" was launched, which included the trio around theNov put (New Path) magazine, Furnadzhiev, Raztsvetnikov, and Karaliichev; but this concept soon had to be widened. The concept of "Septembrist literature" was launched, which included not only the immedi- ate lyrical reaction to the developments but also the constantly increasing critical and historical works and prose. We can now speak of a Septembrist culture with full justification. This culture embraces the developments in Bul- garian pictorial art, theater, cinema, press, and music, directly or indirectly reflecting the Uprising. An invisible but strong thread runs through the ef- forts of several generations of Bulgarian workers in the field of art who, with differing success, put talent and effort into depicting and reinterpreting the developments and their consequences in the whole life of the nation: from Geo Milev to Emilian Stanev, from Anton Strashimirov to Georgi Karaslavov, from Orlin Vassilev to Emil Koralov, from Iossif Herbst to Stefan Prodev, from Liubomir Pipkov to Konstantin Iliev, from Ivan Milev, Ilia Beshkov, Boris Angelushev, Alexander Zhendov, Pencho Georgiev, Stoian Venev, Ilia Petrov, Stoian Sotirov, and Shmirgela to Svetlin Russev and Ilan Kirkov, and from Boian Danovski and Zahari Zhendov to the youngest cinematographers and theater workers. Georgi Bakalov was right when in the beginning of the 1930s he wrote: "One of the proofs of their (the developments, author's note) colossal signifi- cance as a powerful impetus onward, was the impact they produced on litera- ture." They were not only reflected in literature, but they also imposed upon it their 1tt1T1r1Ttaso decisively that they became the starting point of an entire ly new literature, both in ideology and feeling. The developments were exper- ineced as a sign of a coming historical drama, as an act of testing the people's forces, which helps accumulate the necessary experience. In history, the devel- opments marked the highest point which the movements of the working people had reached, a point which illuminated the future victory. One's attitude to ward the events became a touch-stone for every writer. The works in Bulgarian culture which directly reflect the Uprising still help create a monument to it not made by man's hand, a monument to its martyrs and heroes. They have also created a whole trend in Bulgarian culture. But today we must not limit our view to the creative efforts which directly reflect the developments. The time has come to turn our attention to the equally important question about the impact of the civic drama which took place in the country on the general cultural life of the Bulgarian people, on the very spirit of cultural development. Presently we are interested not only in the literature and art which reflect the developments but also in the reflec- tion of the developments on the spirit of Bulgarian culture in general. It is still clearer for us today than it was for Bakalov that many of the secrets of the new Bulgarian history are deeply rooted in these developments, that they