Crime, Histoire & Sociétés / Crime, History & Societies Vol. 1, n°2 | 1997 Varia Recent Writing on Stalin's Gulag : An Overview John Keep Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/chs/1014 DOI: 10.4000/chs.1014 ISSN: 1663-4837 Publisher Librairie Droz Printed version Date of publication: 1 June 1997 Number of pages: 91-112 ISSN: 1422-0857 Electronic reference John Keep, « Recent Writing on Stalin's Gulag : An Overview », Crime, Histoire & Sociétés / Crime, History & Societies [Online], Vol. 1, n°2 | 1997, Online since 03 April 2009, connection on 19 April 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/chs/1014 ; DOI : 10.4000/chs.1014 © Droz Recent Writing on Stalin's Gulag: An Overview John Keep I. ver twenty years have elapsed sinc e publication in the West of Alexander OSolzhenitsyn's epic « literary­historical investigation » into the Soviet peni­ tentiary system under Stalin, when the term « Gulag Archipelago » entered into ou r common vocabulary. The work's appearance made public opinion more aware of the repressive nature of the Soviet regime, but among professional « sovietologists » its impact was less overwhelming. It did not immediately generate a wave of interest in this grim topic. Paradoxically, its vast scope and artistic qualities may even have had a deterrent effect: ha d no t everything been said so persuasively that it should better be avoide d b y lesse r mortals , especiall y i f the y ha d neve r bee n forced , a s Solzhenitsyn had, to experience the system «from inside »? In the United States in particular students o f the Stali n era were polarized bet­ ween adherent s o f th e traditiona l vie w an d so­calle d revisionist s ». The forme r stressed the dictator's responsibility for the Great Terro r an d othe r repressive mea­ sures take n agains t Sovie t citizens innocent o f an y fault ; the y sough t t o explai n these phenomena in ideological and institutional term s and did not hide their abhor­ rence of such a massive perversion of judicial norms. They drew their evidence lar­ gely fro m first­han d account s b y survivors , supplemented by th e limite d officia l data that were then available : reports of Party meetings, newspapers, economic and demographic statistics. Their challengers claimed that personal narratives were tain­ ted by subjectivity and s o unreliable; tha t the Terror was best seen as a social pro­ cess which owed more to input from below than to decisions by the central leader­ ship, which had no t i n practice exercise d such a close control ove r events as was generally supposed; that its scope was less than catastrophic ; and that it was wrong to use politically loaded terms like « totalitarianism » or to speculate on Stalin's per­ sonal motives ; to do so was to give comfort to the « cold warriors ». Their critics responded with charges o f naiveté and though t th e worst offender s apologists for Stalinism. During the early 1980s, as the debate proceeded, the prota­ gonists moderated an d refine d thei r argument s ; progress was made in interpretin g statistical material, but no consensus was reached. The truth, it seemed, lay buried in Soviet archives, and a t the time these seemed likely to remain fo r ever inaccessible to independent researchers . In 1987­1988, with the advent of glasnost' unde r Gorbachev, a new era began to dawn. Dissident or critical writer s in the USSR broached historica l topic s that ha d hitherto been strictly taboo, such as the Nazi­Soviet pact or the costs of forced indus­ trialization. KGB functionaries responde d to the threat by destroying incriminatin g Crime, Histoire & Sociétés / Crime, History & Societies 1997, n° 2, vol. 1, pp. 91 -112 92 JOHN KEEP records, as they had done during the Khrushchev era, but they also launched a public relations driv e in a n effor t t o repai r th e securit y services' tarnishe d image . A.N. Yakovlev, the leading advocate of reform i n Gorbachev's inner circle, stood for a n honest disclosure of past and present abuses. He chaired a Politburo commission to investigate crimes committed « between the 1930 s and the early 1950s » (a delibera­ tely anodyne appellation!) an d t o rehabilitate th e victims. Documents were publi­ shed on several well­known cases fabricated by the NKVD on Stalin's orders to des­ troy group s o f allege d «oppositionist s ». Hundreds o f thousand s o f forme r Gula g inmates, or in most cases their descendants, received from the judicial authoritie s a notification that the verdicts against the accused had been annulled since no offenc e had bee n committed. In August 199 0 Gorbachev signed a decree restoring the civil rights o f all those who had suffered withou t cause under Stalin. Some fortunate sur ­ vivors, in Moscow and elsewhere, were granted privilege d access to food supplies and healt h care. In general, however , compensation was on a derisory scale and n o proceedings were taken against the perpetrators o f these crimes. Meanwhile progressive press organ s lik e the weeklie s Argumenty i fakty an d Ogonek feature d readers ' letters , memoir s an d othe r materia l o n th e Stalinis t «repressions» ( a vague but convenient term). In several localitie s civic organiza­ tions sprang up. Especially significant were branches o f the « Memorial» society. Its members sought to honour the dea d by erecting monuments a t th e sites of forme r prison camps, holding documentary exhibitions , and generall y collectin g as much relevant information a s possible. Excavations undertaken in several places, notably Kuropaty i n Belarus , uncovere d mas s grave s containin g thousand s o f huma n remains. These activities have continued sinc e the Soviet Union's collapse in 1991, despite advers e conditions . Fund s ar e scarce r tha n ever , du e t o th e economi c malaise, and official s ofte n less supportive than they should be. On the other hand archive access has been liberalized1. Public interes t ha s likewis e waned. Mos t citizen s ar e preoccupie d wit h thei r immediate needs. Many are nostalgic for a Soviet past that seemed to offer greate r political stability and better material conditions . They are not in a mood to assume their moral responsibility by trying to come to terms with a past that now lies far dis­ tant. The few living Gulag survivors are in their eighties or nineties. Although prac­ tically every family in the land suffered t o some degree from Stalin's terror, memo­ ries o f it have been subsumed into those of World War II, whic h have consistently received fa r more media attention. People would like to forget al l thes e associated horrors. As Sonia Margolina notes, «there is no social need for a differentiated ana ­ lysis of history. Men and women living between deprivation and th e mafia have no tomorrow to believe in. And whoever takes no thought for the morrow needs no yes­ terday »2. The uncertaintie s o f th e political situatio n i n Yeltsin's Russia evoke fears tha t some futur e governmen t migh t tighte n censorshi p an d reimpos e restriction s o n access t o th e archives . I n thi s even t documentary publication s woul d onc e agai n 1 Very few researchers, however, have gained entry to the security services' archive (AFSBRF). The Russian Federation State Archive (GARF), the former TsGAOR, and the former Central Party Archive, now RTsKhIDNI, contain some material, such as reports by the security authorities to the political leadership. Documents from APRF (the President's Archive) are being gradually de-classi- fied and transferred to the public domain; some of them have been published. 1 Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 15 January 1997, p. 43. RECENT WRITING ON STALIN'S GULAG: AN OVERVIEW 93 have to focus o n harmless patrioti c theme s and th e people's historical conscious ­ ness, whic h over the pas t decad e has bee n slowl y facin g u p to reality, would b e forcibly re­mythologized . This ugly prospect makes it urgent to evaluate what ha s been achieved hitherto, by the labours o f historians in the former Soviet Union an d the West , sometime s i n mutuall y beneficia l co­operation . Ho w d o thei r fres h insights enlarge our understanding o f Stalin's Gulag? (Fo r reasons of space we shall confine ourselve s to this topic, although i t is clearly only part of a larger question, the Stalinist regime's pseudo­judicial policy in general ­ i.e . state terrorism.) II. Let u s firs t construc t a typolog y o f th e recen t literature 3. I n th e Russia n Federation ­ book s and article s appearing in Ukraine an d othe r ex­Soviet republics cannot be treated her e ­ som e works are apparently th e fruit o f a partnership bet ­ ween securit y officials an d «independent » scholars ­ a practice that, given Soviet antecedents, shoul d com e a s n o surprise . Th e first volum e o f a histor y o f th e « organs o f state security » during World War II (1995) bears the FSB's imprimatur , whereas V.