Bukovsky on the typewriter- he would erect a monument to it (137)
"First recall that all printing presses, duplicating machines, and photocopiers in the Soviet Union are state-owned and -controlled. That is, the KGB oversees their use. There are known cases of dissident groups establishing illegal underground presses, but these have been rare. Moreover, officially printed material in the Soviet Union is censored by the government agency Glavit. There is, in short, no conceivable, practical way for a Soviet citizens' group to mass-produce thousands or tens of thousands of copies of a newspaper, periodical or newsletter without state permission."
"The Chronicle's typists, however, never graduated to international celebrity rank. There are reliable reports of several women sentenced to labor camps for typing the Chronicle and of others interrogated. For the most part, the names of those who did produce the Chronicle-and most of them have been women-have disappeared in the anonymous mass that forms the private Soviet world." (H, 139)
"THe first problem a staffer faced in producing an issue was obtaining a typewrite. In the early 1960s, typewriters for private purchase were scarce in the Soviet Union, as were many consumer good. Even as production of Soviet models and foreign imports later increased, however, type-writers could leave a trail for the KGB to follow. Some times a purchaser of a new or used machine would be required to give a name and address. Moreover, it was believed among Soviet dissidents that the KGB routinely took samples of type imprints from each machine. Typed samizdat would be matched against these samples to incriminate the writer."
Ludmilla- find in THaw generation, inherited them to friends, give when emigree
"There is an unmistakable attachment of Chronicle workers to the typewriters. It is borne out by the fact that they can still recall in interviews precisely the manufacture of their typewrites, the price, and where the machines were purchased.' (H,140)
"THe constant noise of the machine carried through thin walls of Soviet apartments, possibly spurring a hostile or suspicious neighbor to inform the KGB. KBG-implanted listening devices in apartments could pick up continuous typewriter sounds. THe prudent choice, then was, to type the Chronicle in apartments not readily identified by the KGB as those of dissidents or their friends. Using such apartments meant, however, carrying a 20-pound typewriter hidden in a satchel from one's home to another address, pushing onto crowded buses or the subway, and then trudging blocks with heavy load to the final destination." (H, 140)
Galina Salova-worker:
"'I would lookt at people after they had put out an issue of the Chronicle,' she remembers. 'Their eyes were red. They obviously had had now sleep
-work at "fever pitch
-single spaced
6 or 12 carbon copies with original
"It was physically hard work. Typists would pound keys of old manual typewriters, trying to give clarity to carbon copies. THere was a premium on accuracy, for mistakes usually were not erased, but simply 'x-ed' out. So typing for the Chronicle meant tense, exhausting hours closeted in a safe apartment, feeling anxiety rise as fatigue set in and wondering if the KGB was preparing a search. " (H, 140-141)
Salova interview:
"It was difficult to find thin paper and carbons. You had to buy it at special stores. And people who worked there watched who bought the paper. A woman friend of mine found a professional typist to buy the paper, since she had reason to do so because of her work. How did we find the paper? Someone would call and tell me that there is carbon paper at such and such a store. I'd tell friend go buy what they could. You could only buy a limited amount-say 50 or 100 pieces.
...I was always worried when the Chronicle was being retyped.
For one thing there was the problem of getting a Chronicle copy for retyping..We would not talk out loud about it-apartments were monitored. We'd write notes to each other if we had to exchange information.
If we arranged to meet, say, in the subway to pass the Chronicle, the person might give me a book. Inside would be a copy of the Chronicle. " (H, 143)
hired prof typers sometimes
"A representative issue, done by a profession typist at 20 kopeks a page (100 kopecks to the ruble) would total about 20 rubles. Even that price was half the rate for professional work. But 20 rubles amounts to 10 to 15 percent of a monthly wage. Many of those reproducing the Chronicle have had no other money to live on aside from their pay. They could not always accept the extra financial burden of the Chronicle. The logical choice for some, then, was to sell it. Prices per copy varied. Figures of 2 to 5 rubles a Chronicle copy are mentioned. Some people sold other samizdat-reproduction of Solzhenitsyn's novels, for example--to help subsidize production of the Chronicle. Others accepted contributions from friends and sympathizers. Still others simply paid from their own pockets for reproduction of Chronicle issues, necessarily giving up something for themselves."
145: photo copying
"The Chronicle has national circulation in the Soviet Union since its inception. Once distributed only in Moscow, then in LEningrad and Kiev, the Chronicle now reaches most major cities. It is believed the Chronicle routinely has been distributed to these Soviet cities in large numbers: Leningrad, Vilnius, Riga, and perhaps Tallin in the Baltic states region; Kiev, Odessa, Kishinev, Kharkov, and Everan in the souther and southwestern regions; and Novosbirsk, Sverdlovsk, Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk, Volograd, Tomsk, and Tashkent in the Soviet Siberian and central Asian areas. The Chronicle has found its way elsewhere, to remote Siberian villages to political prisoners in exile, for example. But given the reproduction and distribution system, there is no reliable method to document where each issue of the Chronicle moves or how many copies. (H,148)
The total circulation of the Chronicle generally is estimated in the thousands, not many in a country of 270 million people. In successive reproductions by typerwriter of photocopying, a single Chronicle number might total between 1,000 and 10,000 individual copies. Each number might, in fact, vary in total copies, depending, for example on the extent of KGB harassment at the rime or availability of paper. Multiply by ten for the number of readers per issue and the total reading audience in the Soviet Union of a Chronicle issue might be 10,000 to 100,000. These are only approximations. The truth is no one really knows wither the readership or the circulation of the Chronicle." (H, 148)
"The Chronicle's audience has been magnified, however, by foreign radiobroadcasts. Especially in the earlier years, when the Chronicle was almost the sole source of uncensored and reliable news of political affairs in the Soviet Union, the foreign press corps routinely extracted from the Chronicle. In turn, Radio Liberty, Voice of America, BBC, Deutsche Welle, and other foreign radio broadcast the information back to the Soviet Union in Russian-language programs. Radio Liberty, the American-financed radio station transmitting in Russian and other languages of the Soviet Union, eventually broadcast whole issues of the Chronicle. The programs have been recorded in the Soviet Union for transcription and samizdat circulation. Thus, the entire state Glavit censorshop system has veen circumvented and Chronicle reports have reached millions of Soviet listeners." (H, 149)
Several conditional facts must be kept in mind in assessing the Chronicle's network. First, Soviet authorities reinstituted jamming of foreign radiobroadcasts in August 1968, coincident with the invasion of Czechoslavakia. The jamming was not halted until 1973, the year Brezhnev leadership searched for a conciliatory gesture to spur the Helinski agreement negotiations." (H, 149)
"An essential element in the Chronicle's network has been the foreign press corps in Moscow, first and foremost the American correspondents. Soviet dissidents interviewed about the Chronicle often mention individual reporters who took special interest in the struggle between Soviet authorities and dissidents. To mention some is to risk slighting other correspondents who were equally involved, but these names come up: George Krimsky and Roger Leddington of the Associated Press; Ray Anderson, Hendrick Smith and Robert Kaiser of the Washington Post; James Yuenger and Frank Starr of the Chicago Tribune; Robert Toth of the Los Angeles Times; and Jay Alexbank and Alfred Friend, Jr. of Newsweek.... (H,149)
"Soviet authorities recognized the importance of foreign correspondents in the Chronicle and other samizdat information network. Some of the best informed Western reporters were routinely harassed and some were expelled. David Bonovia and George Krimsky, for example, were ordered out of the Soviet Union in the mid-1970s. The KGB interrogated Robert Toth for three days before he was permitted to leave Moscow in 1978. THere was not doubt that their contacts among Soviet dissidents, and their reporting of what Soviet authorities considered highly objectionable information, led to their expulsion." (H, 150)
Showing posts with label Hopkins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hopkins. Show all posts
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Hopkins, Vol. 6 "The Network"
"To use the term 'editors' is necessary but imprecise shorthand for discussing those who produce the underground publication. PErsons once involved in final stages of Chronicle issues repeatedly have said in interviews that there really have been no Chronicle "editors" in the larger sense of person who plan and direct Chronicle coverage. "Compiler" seems the more accurate description of Chronicle editors' actual functions, for they usually have had little to say about what information reached them and most frequently have been responsible for assembling what information they did receive into readable, coherent form." (H,119)
"Outside of the small group in Moscow that has provided continuity for overall production responsibility, there has been a larger corps of correspondents, informants, messengers, writers, typists, couriers and distributors without the Chronicle would have remained the narrowly focused brief bulletin it was in 1968. Now a periodical of 100 pages and more per issue, the Chronicle probable ranks in the numbers of people producing it with a large newspaper." -second round
"What would be called the 'news flow' in an American periodical has developed in the Chronicle case with remarkable efficiency. It has improved over the years as the network spread, connecting not only the sources of news but readers and user of Chronicle information both inside the Soviet Union and abroad. The KGB seems to have been unable to halt the Chronicle news flow, and indeed may have decided that the most difficult task in attempts to silence the publication. For Chronicle information moves through successive hands to typed pages in a private world of special and close peripheral relationships. It may be remembered that in the first months of the infant Chronicle, Natalia Gorbanevskaya..."-how to get them info (H,120)
"This system has functioned for years with impressive reliability and accuracy, while also protecting the Chronicle. Even persons who lived in Moscow and knew active dissidents and who themselves were involved in the democratic movement usually did not know who compiled the Chronicle." (H, 120)
"To discuss the organization of the Chronicle is virtually a contradiction in terms. Those who have worked on the Chronicle describe an amorphous, undisciplined process in which participants pass slips of paper with handwritten notes brought from Siberia or carry a few sheets of type-written paper across Moscow to another apartment. Trust in one another and deep commitment to promoting the practice of civil rights nurtured voluntary and self-discipline work on the Chronicle. It has been a system devoid of directives and commands, as well editorial assignments." (H, 121
"News from labor camps also flowed naturally to the Chronicle, as wives and friends of dissidents returned from remote Siberian prisons to pass on information. The Soviet labor camps eventually became something of a seive for information." (H, 121)
Ginzburg interview:
"The basic thing is that there are lots of political prisoners. Each one is sentenced to a certain period of time, so no month passes when someone is not release. NAturally, e can carry a good deal of information from the camps. When you leave the camp you feel like a "stuffed duck," we'd say. For three months before you are scheduled for release,, people are giveing you information to pass on. After I got out, I'd remember things in my sleep and I'd wake up and write them down.
Then you would write down things in the camps and smuggle those out. It's hard, but not impossible. I managed to get a copy of the labor camp rules smuggled out. In 1969, we made a tape recording inside a camp and smuggled that out and Voice of America broadcast it. We thought about smuggling for 24 hours a day." (H 121-122)
Bukobsky interview
"The information comes by devious routes. Some is carried when a fellow is released from the camps. THere would be a contact somewhere along the line after he left. Or you could bribe prison guards so that when you met with relatives, you could pass written information or verbal information. Then the relatives might stop in Moscow and pass on what you said." (H, 122)
"Trials of dissidents are an obvious source of news for the Chronicle. Although ostensible public, the trials usually have been held in courtrooms packed with KGB crowds. But when friends of dissident could argue their way info the courts, they would make careful notes of procedures. It was risky business, for the notetaker was automatically identified to the KGB and he or she invited arrest of questioning. In later years, friend of dissidents smuggled small tape recorders into courtrooms. From these recordings came the unusual transcripts of trials published by the Chronicle." (H, 123)
123: by mid '70s full proceedings
"Time and again, as Soviet authorities attempted to stage political trials in the form of authentic proceedings, the Chronicle published embarrassing verbatim texts showing judges refusing to hear dissidents' evidence, or prosecutors and investigators distorting facts and of judges handing down sentences against all rational consideration of original charges." (H, 123-124)
127: estimate 20-40 people involved in final stages of an issue
early years just NG
129: flaws
"One can find similar imbalances in the early years of the Chronicle regarding religious affairs, pr the vast Soviet rural population, or workers' grievances, or women's rights. The Chronicle was the child of Moscow intellectuals concerned with rights of speech and press. Successive issues of the Chronicle attracted readers with like attitudes, ready to contribute like information. Grigorenko's special interest in the Crimean Tartars, Alexeyeva's contacts with the Ukranians, and Kovalev's connections with Lithuanians likewise accounted for some earlier editorial themes." (H, 129)
"THe surrogate Chronicles in London, New York, and Munich have become important in their own right as outlets for Soviet internal news. Their circumstances allowed editors leeway in shaping publications, although the Kline-Chalidze Chronicle of Human Rights in the USSR or Lyubarsky USSR News Brief found themselves limited, too, by the available channels of information from the Soviet Union. (H,130)
THe Chronicle of Current Events that is translated and printed by Amnesty International has become an unequaled source of photographs of Soviet human rights activists. Smuggled from the Soviet Union and reproduced beginning in the volume containing Chronicle nos. 28-31... (H,130)
News reports that have reached New York and Munich from Moscow have come through many channels. Recall that the Kline-Chalidze Chronicle was started in the spring of 1973, after it seemed that the Moscow Chronicle had been silenced. With that Moscow outlet closed information flowed to New York." (H,130)
Reddaway interview: "We were amazed at the volume of material forwarded to use; it was really enormous, so much so that it was never able to fit all the available material in one issue. THe sources are many: for instance, we have recieved a great deal from the so-called democratic circles, the humanists, as it were, of the Soviet movement for human rights. We have received, and still receiving, a lot of material from labor camps, psychiatric institutions, and from the activists of the Jewish Exodus movement. " (H,130-131)
"This underground stream of documents from the Soviet Union to to Western Europe and the United States began as a trickle in the mid-1960s. THe volume had become so great by 1972 that the Munich-based Radio Liberty assembled enough samizdat to produce four volumes averaging more than 600 pages each. These formed the basis of a samizdat archive, directed initially by Albert Boiter, that grew to tens of thousands of pages of material. In 1973 and 1074, when the New York Chronicle was getting underway, the Radio Liberty Arkhiv Samizdata averaged more than 3500 pages of documents from the Soviet Union each year."(H,131)
"This material was being smuggled or simply carried out of the Soviet Union by Western correspondents, by tourists and diplomats. Some was being sent in diplomatic pouches. The early issues of the Chronicle itself were slipped into the sealed diplomatic mail of the Moscow embassies of Italy, the United STates, France and Canada, although not necessarily with the ambassador's knowledge. Letters sent to Vienna and Helsinki from Moscow successfully carried samizdat. Addressed to these "neutral" capitals, they seemed to pass Soviet surveillance of international mail more readily than letters going else where in Western Europe. " (H, 131)
"There was little risk in these enterprises, and so the samizdat flow surged by the year. At worst, a foreigner carrying samizdat out of the Soviet Union would be searched and the material confiscation...But for every piece of samizdat the KGB found, hundreds of other documents streamed out of the Soviet Union." (H, 131)
"The surrogate Chronicles have been directed to two large audiences. One iabroad, largely in the United States and WEstern Europe, and composed of journalists, government officials, human rights advocates attached to various civic organizations, and scholars. The other audience is the Soviet population itself. Some 2,000 copies of the Russian translation of each issue of the Chronicle of Human Rights in the Soviet Union are printed and most of those are intended for the Soviet Union. In addition, Khronka Press has reprinted Russian copies of the Moscow Chronicle as issues have been recieved in New York. The pressrun has gotten up to as many as 1200 and these too are meant to be smuggled into the Soviet Union." (H, 133)
"Outside of the small group in Moscow that has provided continuity for overall production responsibility, there has been a larger corps of correspondents, informants, messengers, writers, typists, couriers and distributors without the Chronicle would have remained the narrowly focused brief bulletin it was in 1968. Now a periodical of 100 pages and more per issue, the Chronicle probable ranks in the numbers of people producing it with a large newspaper." -second round
"What would be called the 'news flow' in an American periodical has developed in the Chronicle case with remarkable efficiency. It has improved over the years as the network spread, connecting not only the sources of news but readers and user of Chronicle information both inside the Soviet Union and abroad. The KGB seems to have been unable to halt the Chronicle news flow, and indeed may have decided that the most difficult task in attempts to silence the publication. For Chronicle information moves through successive hands to typed pages in a private world of special and close peripheral relationships. It may be remembered that in the first months of the infant Chronicle, Natalia Gorbanevskaya..."-how to get them info (H,120)
"This system has functioned for years with impressive reliability and accuracy, while also protecting the Chronicle. Even persons who lived in Moscow and knew active dissidents and who themselves were involved in the democratic movement usually did not know who compiled the Chronicle." (H, 120)
"To discuss the organization of the Chronicle is virtually a contradiction in terms. Those who have worked on the Chronicle describe an amorphous, undisciplined process in which participants pass slips of paper with handwritten notes brought from Siberia or carry a few sheets of type-written paper across Moscow to another apartment. Trust in one another and deep commitment to promoting the practice of civil rights nurtured voluntary and self-discipline work on the Chronicle. It has been a system devoid of directives and commands, as well editorial assignments." (H, 121
"News from labor camps also flowed naturally to the Chronicle, as wives and friends of dissidents returned from remote Siberian prisons to pass on information. The Soviet labor camps eventually became something of a seive for information." (H, 121)
Ginzburg interview:
"The basic thing is that there are lots of political prisoners. Each one is sentenced to a certain period of time, so no month passes when someone is not release. NAturally, e can carry a good deal of information from the camps. When you leave the camp you feel like a "stuffed duck," we'd say. For three months before you are scheduled for release,, people are giveing you information to pass on. After I got out, I'd remember things in my sleep and I'd wake up and write them down.
Then you would write down things in the camps and smuggle those out. It's hard, but not impossible. I managed to get a copy of the labor camp rules smuggled out. In 1969, we made a tape recording inside a camp and smuggled that out and Voice of America broadcast it. We thought about smuggling for 24 hours a day." (H 121-122)
Bukobsky interview
"The information comes by devious routes. Some is carried when a fellow is released from the camps. THere would be a contact somewhere along the line after he left. Or you could bribe prison guards so that when you met with relatives, you could pass written information or verbal information. Then the relatives might stop in Moscow and pass on what you said." (H, 122)
"Trials of dissidents are an obvious source of news for the Chronicle. Although ostensible public, the trials usually have been held in courtrooms packed with KGB crowds. But when friends of dissident could argue their way info the courts, they would make careful notes of procedures. It was risky business, for the notetaker was automatically identified to the KGB and he or she invited arrest of questioning. In later years, friend of dissidents smuggled small tape recorders into courtrooms. From these recordings came the unusual transcripts of trials published by the Chronicle." (H, 123)
123: by mid '70s full proceedings
"Time and again, as Soviet authorities attempted to stage political trials in the form of authentic proceedings, the Chronicle published embarrassing verbatim texts showing judges refusing to hear dissidents' evidence, or prosecutors and investigators distorting facts and of judges handing down sentences against all rational consideration of original charges." (H, 123-124)
127: estimate 20-40 people involved in final stages of an issue
early years just NG
129: flaws
"One can find similar imbalances in the early years of the Chronicle regarding religious affairs, pr the vast Soviet rural population, or workers' grievances, or women's rights. The Chronicle was the child of Moscow intellectuals concerned with rights of speech and press. Successive issues of the Chronicle attracted readers with like attitudes, ready to contribute like information. Grigorenko's special interest in the Crimean Tartars, Alexeyeva's contacts with the Ukranians, and Kovalev's connections with Lithuanians likewise accounted for some earlier editorial themes." (H, 129)
"THe surrogate Chronicles in London, New York, and Munich have become important in their own right as outlets for Soviet internal news. Their circumstances allowed editors leeway in shaping publications, although the Kline-Chalidze Chronicle of Human Rights in the USSR or Lyubarsky USSR News Brief found themselves limited, too, by the available channels of information from the Soviet Union. (H,130)
THe Chronicle of Current Events that is translated and printed by Amnesty International has become an unequaled source of photographs of Soviet human rights activists. Smuggled from the Soviet Union and reproduced beginning in the volume containing Chronicle nos. 28-31... (H,130)
News reports that have reached New York and Munich from Moscow have come through many channels. Recall that the Kline-Chalidze Chronicle was started in the spring of 1973, after it seemed that the Moscow Chronicle had been silenced. With that Moscow outlet closed information flowed to New York." (H,130)
Reddaway interview: "We were amazed at the volume of material forwarded to use; it was really enormous, so much so that it was never able to fit all the available material in one issue. THe sources are many: for instance, we have recieved a great deal from the so-called democratic circles, the humanists, as it were, of the Soviet movement for human rights. We have received, and still receiving, a lot of material from labor camps, psychiatric institutions, and from the activists of the Jewish Exodus movement. " (H,130-131)
"This underground stream of documents from the Soviet Union to to Western Europe and the United States began as a trickle in the mid-1960s. THe volume had become so great by 1972 that the Munich-based Radio Liberty assembled enough samizdat to produce four volumes averaging more than 600 pages each. These formed the basis of a samizdat archive, directed initially by Albert Boiter, that grew to tens of thousands of pages of material. In 1973 and 1074, when the New York Chronicle was getting underway, the Radio Liberty Arkhiv Samizdata averaged more than 3500 pages of documents from the Soviet Union each year."(H,131)
"This material was being smuggled or simply carried out of the Soviet Union by Western correspondents, by tourists and diplomats. Some was being sent in diplomatic pouches. The early issues of the Chronicle itself were slipped into the sealed diplomatic mail of the Moscow embassies of Italy, the United STates, France and Canada, although not necessarily with the ambassador's knowledge. Letters sent to Vienna and Helsinki from Moscow successfully carried samizdat. Addressed to these "neutral" capitals, they seemed to pass Soviet surveillance of international mail more readily than letters going else where in Western Europe. " (H, 131)
"There was little risk in these enterprises, and so the samizdat flow surged by the year. At worst, a foreigner carrying samizdat out of the Soviet Union would be searched and the material confiscation...But for every piece of samizdat the KGB found, hundreds of other documents streamed out of the Soviet Union." (H, 131)
"The surrogate Chronicles have been directed to two large audiences. One iabroad, largely in the United States and WEstern Europe, and composed of journalists, government officials, human rights advocates attached to various civic organizations, and scholars. The other audience is the Soviet population itself. Some 2,000 copies of the Russian translation of each issue of the Chronicle of Human Rights in the Soviet Union are printed and most of those are intended for the Soviet Union. In addition, Khronka Press has reprinted Russian copies of the Moscow Chronicle as issues have been recieved in New York. The pressrun has gotten up to as many as 1200 and these too are meant to be smuggled into the Soviet Union." (H, 133)
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Hopkins, Vol. 5 "New Times"
85: Reboot w/ press conference
"In doing so, they were trying to demonstrate that the Chronicle was a legal enterprise, that htey themselves were doing no more than excersising the right of free press guaranteed in the Soviet constitution. But they also were inviting KGB retaliation, for they were challenging Andropov's authority, deliberaley it seemed."
prepared the back missing issues 28-30
"There was somehing new about the Chronicle. For the first time, contributors to the Chronicle publicly associated themselves with what Soviet authorities bluntly said was an illegal publication. Tatyana Khodorovich was a Russian-language linguist, a cultured woman with the just ends of the blossoming Soviet human rights movement. The other two public sponsors of the new Chronicle were equally dedicated. Tatyana Velikanova, a mathematics programmer, had long been connected with the Chronicle as a source of information. Sergei Kovalev, an internationally known biologist, was a friend of Andrei Sakharov and shared the physicist's concerns about the repressive nature of Soviet society. In a separate statement drafted in Khodorovich's hand, and given to correspondents that May 7 when the Chronicle reappeared, Kovalev, Khodorovich and Velikanova obligated themselves to distribute the Chronicle. Others before them had been tried and imprisoned for as much.
'We consider it our duty,' they said, 'to facilitate the wide distribution to the maximum possible extent. We are very convinced of the necessity of making available this very truthful information about infringements of the basic rights of man in the soviet Union to everyone who is interested. (H, 87)"
part of initative group
107: pushing libel charge
"The London involvement began with a translation by Max Hayward of no. 5 of the Chronicle, dated December 1968. It appeared in subsequent issues of Survey, the British journal dealing with Soviet and East European affairs. Its editor, Leo Labedz, was perhaps the first foreign expert in Soviet affairs to recognize the significance of the Chronicle, sufficient in any case to translate into English and reproduce an entire number outside of the Soviet Union. At this point, Peter Reddaway, a Soviet specialist and lecturer at the Chonicle and took on the task of translating subsequent issues into English, beginning with no. 7. These he had mimeographed and sent privately to other Sovietologists. At the optimum, about 100 English-language copies of the early Chronicle were produced. Asked to do a book, Reddaway collected the first 11 issues of the Chronicle-those of the Gorbanevskaya ere-to produce an annotated and analytical account of the fledgling Soviet democratic movement that appeared in 1972 as the volume Uncensored Russia.
As Reddaway worked on his book, the head of research for the London-based Amnesty International also took an interest in the Chronicle. Dr. Zbynek Zeman, a scholar of Czech extraction, recognized that the Chronicle published precisely the type of well-documented information about human rights violations with which Amnesty International dealt. Starting February 1971, then, with issue no. 16, Amnesty International translated each Chronicle issue into English. Districution eventaully reached a maximum of 3,000 copies.
As all this was going on in London, other versions of the Chronicle were born in New York. Valery Chalidze, the physicist who with fellow scientists Andrei Sakharov and Andrei Tverdokhlebov had formed the Human Rights Committee, had been allowed to travel to the United States for a lecture tour in December 1972. Once Chalidze was there, Soviet authorities promptly deprived him of his Soviet citizenship, thus banishing him from his native country. Within a few months after this, it was clear that the Chronicle under KGB pressure had ceased to publish. Chalidze was not directly involved in the Chronicle's production, but he was nonetheless intimately associated with Moscow's dissident community. One in the United States, and with the Chronicle, apparently suppressed, Chalidze was urged to fill the void. The stimulus came from Edward Kline, a wealthy New York businessman with a special dedication to Soviet human rights. With line's financial backing, Chalidze set up Khronika Presss in New York and in mid-1973, as part of Khronika Press, began publishing a was facsimile of the Soviet Chronicle. The New York version was called A Chronicle of Human Rights in the USSR. Printed in both English and Russian, six times a year, its content, style and format (save for being printed rather than typewritten) mimicked for the Soviet Chronicle. Originally, the editors were Peter Reddaway and Edward Kline. Subsequently, Pavel Litvinov replaced Reddaway who became the London correspondent, and Valery Chalidze became editor in chief.
The Kline-Chalidze drew on a variety of sources in and outside the Soviet Union and ably continued the work of the Soviet Chronicle during the latter's 18-month hiatus. Russian-language copies were smuggled into the Soviet Union, and the English-language veresion were distributed among Western journalists, government specialists, and scholars specializing in Soviet affairs.
While the original Chronicle reappeared in Moscow in May 1974, the question in New York obviously was, What now? The decision was to continue the Chronicle of Human Rights, as a backstop to the Soviet Chronicle and because it could get information in English about Soviet human rights events to influential readers far more rapidly that the Moscow Chronicle. At the same time, it was decided to reproduce the Moscow Chronicle itself in Russian as copies arrived in the United States. This amounted to a Chronicle printing press in exile. Ultimately as many as 1,200 copies per issue of the Russian-language Chronicle were produced in New York, most of them destined for the Soviet Union.
95: MunichChronicle
96-97: post '74 Chronicle, more caught up in national groups, Jews
"In doing so, they were trying to demonstrate that the Chronicle was a legal enterprise, that htey themselves were doing no more than excersising the right of free press guaranteed in the Soviet constitution. But they also were inviting KGB retaliation, for they were challenging Andropov's authority, deliberaley it seemed."
prepared the back missing issues 28-30
"There was somehing new about the Chronicle. For the first time, contributors to the Chronicle publicly associated themselves with what Soviet authorities bluntly said was an illegal publication. Tatyana Khodorovich was a Russian-language linguist, a cultured woman with the just ends of the blossoming Soviet human rights movement. The other two public sponsors of the new Chronicle were equally dedicated. Tatyana Velikanova, a mathematics programmer, had long been connected with the Chronicle as a source of information. Sergei Kovalev, an internationally known biologist, was a friend of Andrei Sakharov and shared the physicist's concerns about the repressive nature of Soviet society. In a separate statement drafted in Khodorovich's hand, and given to correspondents that May 7 when the Chronicle reappeared, Kovalev, Khodorovich and Velikanova obligated themselves to distribute the Chronicle. Others before them had been tried and imprisoned for as much.
'We consider it our duty,' they said, 'to facilitate the wide distribution to the maximum possible extent. We are very convinced of the necessity of making available this very truthful information about infringements of the basic rights of man in the soviet Union to everyone who is interested. (H, 87)"
part of initative group
107: pushing libel charge
"The London involvement began with a translation by Max Hayward of no. 5 of the Chronicle, dated December 1968. It appeared in subsequent issues of Survey, the British journal dealing with Soviet and East European affairs. Its editor, Leo Labedz, was perhaps the first foreign expert in Soviet affairs to recognize the significance of the Chronicle, sufficient in any case to translate into English and reproduce an entire number outside of the Soviet Union. At this point, Peter Reddaway, a Soviet specialist and lecturer at the Chonicle and took on the task of translating subsequent issues into English, beginning with no. 7. These he had mimeographed and sent privately to other Sovietologists. At the optimum, about 100 English-language copies of the early Chronicle were produced. Asked to do a book, Reddaway collected the first 11 issues of the Chronicle-those of the Gorbanevskaya ere-to produce an annotated and analytical account of the fledgling Soviet democratic movement that appeared in 1972 as the volume Uncensored Russia.
As Reddaway worked on his book, the head of research for the London-based Amnesty International also took an interest in the Chronicle. Dr. Zbynek Zeman, a scholar of Czech extraction, recognized that the Chronicle published precisely the type of well-documented information about human rights violations with which Amnesty International dealt. Starting February 1971, then, with issue no. 16, Amnesty International translated each Chronicle issue into English. Districution eventaully reached a maximum of 3,000 copies.
As all this was going on in London, other versions of the Chronicle were born in New York. Valery Chalidze, the physicist who with fellow scientists Andrei Sakharov and Andrei Tverdokhlebov had formed the Human Rights Committee, had been allowed to travel to the United States for a lecture tour in December 1972. Once Chalidze was there, Soviet authorities promptly deprived him of his Soviet citizenship, thus banishing him from his native country. Within a few months after this, it was clear that the Chronicle under KGB pressure had ceased to publish. Chalidze was not directly involved in the Chronicle's production, but he was nonetheless intimately associated with Moscow's dissident community. One in the United States, and with the Chronicle, apparently suppressed, Chalidze was urged to fill the void. The stimulus came from Edward Kline, a wealthy New York businessman with a special dedication to Soviet human rights. With line's financial backing, Chalidze set up Khronika Presss in New York and in mid-1973, as part of Khronika Press, began publishing a was facsimile of the Soviet Chronicle. The New York version was called A Chronicle of Human Rights in the USSR. Printed in both English and Russian, six times a year, its content, style and format (save for being printed rather than typewritten) mimicked for the Soviet Chronicle. Originally, the editors were Peter Reddaway and Edward Kline. Subsequently, Pavel Litvinov replaced Reddaway who became the London correspondent, and Valery Chalidze became editor in chief.
The Kline-Chalidze drew on a variety of sources in and outside the Soviet Union and ably continued the work of the Soviet Chronicle during the latter's 18-month hiatus. Russian-language copies were smuggled into the Soviet Union, and the English-language veresion were distributed among Western journalists, government specialists, and scholars specializing in Soviet affairs.
While the original Chronicle reappeared in Moscow in May 1974, the question in New York obviously was, What now? The decision was to continue the Chronicle of Human Rights, as a backstop to the Soviet Chronicle and because it could get information in English about Soviet human rights events to influential readers far more rapidly that the Moscow Chronicle. At the same time, it was decided to reproduce the Moscow Chronicle itself in Russian as copies arrived in the United States. This amounted to a Chronicle printing press in exile. Ultimately as many as 1,200 copies per issue of the Russian-language Chronicle were produced in New York, most of them destined for the Soviet Union.
95: MunichChronicle
96-97: post '74 Chronicle, more caught up in national groups, Jews
Hopkins, Vol. 4, "Betrayed"
68: Yakir and Krasin
70: it was their survival instinct
72: example to stop others
74-75: Chronicle covers own demise
"The KGB's political case was helped by the fact that Radio liberty did routinely broadcast in Russian large segments of the Chronicle issues as they reached the radio's central offices in Munich, West Germany Germany. Moreover, Posev, the monthly Russian emigre journal ideologically connected to the NTS and published in Frankfurt, reprinted whole issues of the Chronicle. These reprints were distributed abroad and were also smuggled back into the Soviet Union. THe Chronicle group instantly realized that a tactical mistake had been made in Posev's and Radio Liberty's use of the Chronicle numbers....The KGB script for all the trials played amply on the fact that the Chronicle to all the appearance worked in unison with foreign enemies." (H,77)
70: it was their survival instinct
72: example to stop others
74-75: Chronicle covers own demise
"The KGB's political case was helped by the fact that Radio liberty did routinely broadcast in Russian large segments of the Chronicle issues as they reached the radio's central offices in Munich, West Germany Germany. Moreover, Posev, the monthly Russian emigre journal ideologically connected to the NTS and published in Frankfurt, reprinted whole issues of the Chronicle. These reprints were distributed abroad and were also smuggled back into the Soviet Union. THe Chronicle group instantly realized that a tactical mistake had been made in Posev's and Radio Liberty's use of the Chronicle numbers....The KGB script for all the trials played amply on the fact that the Chronicle to all the appearance worked in unison with foreign enemies." (H,77)
Hopkins, Vol. 3 Case 24
1970-1972: KGB focuses in dissidents
"The very harassment and persecution of Soviet political reformists, of religious dissenters and of outspoken nationalists by the KGB were the Chronicle's editorial fare. THe KGB could not delve into internal dissent without coming into contact with the Chronicle. It was thus inevitable that one target of the directorate was the Chronicle itself. (H, 48)"
"The pattern of arrests and imprisonment suggested KGB concentration on those publicized dissidents who associated with Western correspondents-hence, the Amalrik trial and conviction in November 1970 in remote Sverdlovsk after the publication in the West of hist book." (H,50)
"It was also clear to foreign observers, not to mention the better informed Soviet leadership, that the Chronicle of Current Events had become the most consistent, reliable, and reknowned source of what the Kremlin regarded as hostile and politically dangerously information. (H,50)"
"The final issues of the Chronicle edited by Gorbanevskaya in late 1969 had included summaries of a samizdat publication called Crime and Punishment that intended to expose former NKVD during Stalin's dictatorship. Under Anatoly Yakobson, the style, persisting in detailed reports of trials and labor camp conditions and enriching its reportage with new insights in Soviet political life. Issue no. 17, dated December 1970, carried a report of KGB supression of a previously unpublicized Ukranian nationalist group that had put out 15 issues of its own underground journal between 1964 and 1966 promoting Ukranian independence. Issue no. 19, in April 1971, listed 16 films produced in the Soviet Union that either had been censored before showing or whose distribution had been restricted. Issue no. 21, dated dated typewritten underground journal that contained authoritative private political information, including a transcript of the closed Communist party meeting that ousted Nikita Khruschev in October 1964l The Chronicle, numbering on the average about 40 typewritten pages, was by now something more than recitation of a small Mowscow group. Appearing regularly every two months, it had developed a solid network of informants that routinely funneled more and more news through Chronicle channels to the final editor. (H, 51)"
59-lots of cases... "These cases suggest the breadth of the KGB investigation into the Chronicle. And they underscore that, by 1972, the Chronicle reached samizdat readers far beyond Moscow. A loosely woven network had been created to pass information between the Chronicle group in Moscow and supporters in most part of the country. The last issue of of the Chronicle before it was forced into silence, no. 27, carried news reports from 35 locations in the Soveit Union. KGB investigations and trials also documented that the Chronicle was also being reproduced in weidely separated regions of the country. (H,59)"
"The very harassment and persecution of Soviet political reformists, of religious dissenters and of outspoken nationalists by the KGB were the Chronicle's editorial fare. THe KGB could not delve into internal dissent without coming into contact with the Chronicle. It was thus inevitable that one target of the directorate was the Chronicle itself. (H, 48)"
"The pattern of arrests and imprisonment suggested KGB concentration on those publicized dissidents who associated with Western correspondents-hence, the Amalrik trial and conviction in November 1970 in remote Sverdlovsk after the publication in the West of hist book." (H,50)
"It was also clear to foreign observers, not to mention the better informed Soviet leadership, that the Chronicle of Current Events had become the most consistent, reliable, and reknowned source of what the Kremlin regarded as hostile and politically dangerously information. (H,50)"
"The final issues of the Chronicle edited by Gorbanevskaya in late 1969 had included summaries of a samizdat publication called Crime and Punishment that intended to expose former NKVD during Stalin's dictatorship. Under Anatoly Yakobson, the style, persisting in detailed reports of trials and labor camp conditions and enriching its reportage with new insights in Soviet political life. Issue no. 17, dated December 1970, carried a report of KGB supression of a previously unpublicized Ukranian nationalist group that had put out 15 issues of its own underground journal between 1964 and 1966 promoting Ukranian independence. Issue no. 19, in April 1971, listed 16 films produced in the Soviet Union that either had been censored before showing or whose distribution had been restricted. Issue no. 21, dated dated typewritten underground journal that contained authoritative private political information, including a transcript of the closed Communist party meeting that ousted Nikita Khruschev in October 1964l The Chronicle, numbering on the average about 40 typewritten pages, was by now something more than recitation of a small Mowscow group. Appearing regularly every two months, it had developed a solid network of informants that routinely funneled more and more news through Chronicle channels to the final editor. (H, 51)"
59-lots of cases... "These cases suggest the breadth of the KGB investigation into the Chronicle. And they underscore that, by 1972, the Chronicle reached samizdat readers far beyond Moscow. A loosely woven network had been created to pass information between the Chronicle group in Moscow and supporters in most part of the country. The last issue of of the Chronicle before it was forced into silence, no. 27, carried news reports from 35 locations in the Soveit Union. KGB investigations and trials also documented that the Chronicle was also being reproduced in weidely separated regions of the country. (H,59)"
Friday, October 28, 2011
Hopkins- Vol. 2 "The Spark"
21: Baptist newspaper since '64
"From the start, then, the Chronicle was set apart from other and plentiful samizdat literature, political tracrs, petitions, statements and reports...Soviet and foreign journalists could get this type of information in Moscow in the late 1960s only on a sporadic basis and only if they were involved in samizdat and dissident circles. Even then, sometimes incomplete. If one were outside established dissident circles, the most one knew about official actions besides rumors was contained in cryptic Soviet reports. They told virtually nothing except that something had happened. (H, 22)"
-alternative to official information
"The style of the Chronicle was heavy on facts--names, ages, dates, places, specific events. It was light on both judgements and speculation or opinion (H,22)"
NG: "Basically there was an attempt in all the letters to be very exact, to lay out the facts, to describe the violations of rights, to quote articles of law. Nothing was exaggerated. The love for objectivity was in the air. (H, 23)"
"The first issue drew heavily on actions against the Chronicle group and its friends and acquaintances. Besides the Galanskov-Ginzburg proceeding with which some of the Chronicle people were closely connected, protest statements reproduced in that first issue revealed a pattern of signatures. Many of those who encouraged founding of the Chronicle turned up as co-authors of grievances...This is to sat that Gorbanevskaya used what was available, and most of that information came from or was collected by one relatively small Moscow group. (H,25)"
"Production of the Chronicle came from the very first was along the lines of a "chain letter." Gorbanevskaya typed the first seven copies. One went to a Western correspondent, another was saved in order to produce more copies, and the remaining five copies were given out. In the already established form for distributing samizdat, recipients were expected to reproduce further copies. Commonly these were typed, but homemade photocopying of samizdat was increasingly popular. How many copies of a particul samizdat item were made could not be said, the work being done privately and separately. (H, 26)
-expected it to be short
-28: -end of '68, assert legality
-how to submit info
29: ""The price for that system, however, was a secrecy and confidentiality that amounted to an underground publication (H,29). "
"If the Chronicle was legal, why be secret? If the Chronicle was secret could it be legal? (H,29)"
"Not only the now standard arrests and interrogations were reported; political documents and statements, internal disputes involving Soviet policy, and protests and grievances from among an increasingly broad spectrum of the Soviet population were reported as well. The information, moreover, was assembled in one readable source, in direct and unambiguous Russian. There was no need to read between the lines as Soviets routinely did when the official Soviet press reported some specially sensitive issue." (H, 30)
31: samizdat news
"The information flow to and from the Chronicle developed in important ways under Gorbanevskaya. First the volume of facts increased as friends and readers caught on to what the Chronicle wanted and was willing to publish. Also, a sort of "beat" system of reporting emerged. It was not planned but developed simply because of personal interests and contacts. (H, 33)."
Ei: Tartars- Grigorkenko
Jews Takir
Ukraine-Alexeyeva
34: Amalrik, Litinov, Yakir
"Through this connection, the contents of the Chronicle moved through an already established information network of Moscow correspondents, Western news agencies and newspaper, radio, and television reports to editorial offices and media abroad. Abroad, foreign shortwave broadcasters picked up Chronicle information, and individual news reports based on Chronicle items or contents of whole issues found their way back to the Soviet Union in Russian-language broadcasts of the BBC, Deutsche Welle, and Voice of America. Radio Liberty broadcast readings of entire issues of the Chronicle. (H, 34)
"Although foreign radio signals were heavily hammed from the summer of 1968 to the fall of 1973, broadcasts could still be generally served the Chronicle well, as audiences numbering in the tens of millions in the Soviet Union heard the news from the Chronicle. (H, 34)"
36: implications of Red Square
"In the aftermath of the invasion, in the three years leading up to the twenty-fourth Communist party congress in 1971, at which General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev renewed a policy of coexistence and cooperation with the West, important debates were held over the implications of this policy. On the one side, the benefits of detente in terms of Western trade and financial assistance for the lagging Soviet economy were attractive to a number of groups in the Soviet Union. But there also was the argument, frequently made in the Soviet press, that in times of closer relations with the West, greater vigilance was required within the country. This was an old problem for Soviet leaders-... Not great on the re-freeze"(H, 37)
41-42: Gorbanevskaya trial
"From the start, then, the Chronicle was set apart from other and plentiful samizdat literature, political tracrs, petitions, statements and reports...Soviet and foreign journalists could get this type of information in Moscow in the late 1960s only on a sporadic basis and only if they were involved in samizdat and dissident circles. Even then, sometimes incomplete. If one were outside established dissident circles, the most one knew about official actions besides rumors was contained in cryptic Soviet reports. They told virtually nothing except that something had happened. (H, 22)"
-alternative to official information
"The style of the Chronicle was heavy on facts--names, ages, dates, places, specific events. It was light on both judgements and speculation or opinion (H,22)"
NG: "Basically there was an attempt in all the letters to be very exact, to lay out the facts, to describe the violations of rights, to quote articles of law. Nothing was exaggerated. The love for objectivity was in the air. (H, 23)"
"The first issue drew heavily on actions against the Chronicle group and its friends and acquaintances. Besides the Galanskov-Ginzburg proceeding with which some of the Chronicle people were closely connected, protest statements reproduced in that first issue revealed a pattern of signatures. Many of those who encouraged founding of the Chronicle turned up as co-authors of grievances...This is to sat that Gorbanevskaya used what was available, and most of that information came from or was collected by one relatively small Moscow group. (H,25)"
"Production of the Chronicle came from the very first was along the lines of a "chain letter." Gorbanevskaya typed the first seven copies. One went to a Western correspondent, another was saved in order to produce more copies, and the remaining five copies were given out. In the already established form for distributing samizdat, recipients were expected to reproduce further copies. Commonly these were typed, but homemade photocopying of samizdat was increasingly popular. How many copies of a particul samizdat item were made could not be said, the work being done privately and separately. (H, 26)
-expected it to be short
-28: -end of '68, assert legality
-how to submit info
29: ""The price for that system, however, was a secrecy and confidentiality that amounted to an underground publication (H,29). "
"If the Chronicle was legal, why be secret? If the Chronicle was secret could it be legal? (H,29)"
"Not only the now standard arrests and interrogations were reported; political documents and statements, internal disputes involving Soviet policy, and protests and grievances from among an increasingly broad spectrum of the Soviet population were reported as well. The information, moreover, was assembled in one readable source, in direct and unambiguous Russian. There was no need to read between the lines as Soviets routinely did when the official Soviet press reported some specially sensitive issue." (H, 30)
31: samizdat news
"The information flow to and from the Chronicle developed in important ways under Gorbanevskaya. First the volume of facts increased as friends and readers caught on to what the Chronicle wanted and was willing to publish. Also, a sort of "beat" system of reporting emerged. It was not planned but developed simply because of personal interests and contacts. (H, 33)."
Ei: Tartars- Grigorkenko
Jews Takir
Ukraine-Alexeyeva
34: Amalrik, Litinov, Yakir
"Through this connection, the contents of the Chronicle moved through an already established information network of Moscow correspondents, Western news agencies and newspaper, radio, and television reports to editorial offices and media abroad. Abroad, foreign shortwave broadcasters picked up Chronicle information, and individual news reports based on Chronicle items or contents of whole issues found their way back to the Soviet Union in Russian-language broadcasts of the BBC, Deutsche Welle, and Voice of America. Radio Liberty broadcast readings of entire issues of the Chronicle. (H, 34)
"Although foreign radio signals were heavily hammed from the summer of 1968 to the fall of 1973, broadcasts could still be generally served the Chronicle well, as audiences numbering in the tens of millions in the Soviet Union heard the news from the Chronicle. (H, 34)"
36: implications of Red Square
"In the aftermath of the invasion, in the three years leading up to the twenty-fourth Communist party congress in 1971, at which General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev renewed a policy of coexistence and cooperation with the West, important debates were held over the implications of this policy. On the one side, the benefits of detente in terms of Western trade and financial assistance for the lagging Soviet economy were attractive to a number of groups in the Soviet Union. But there also was the argument, frequently made in the Soviet press, that in times of closer relations with the West, greater vigilance was required within the country. This was an old problem for Soviet leaders-... Not great on the re-freeze"(H, 37)
41-42: Gorbanevskaya trial
Friday, October 14, 2011
Hopkins Vol. 1 "Resistance"
Hopkins,
Mark. Russia’s Underground Press: The
Chronicle of Current Events.” New York: Praeger Publishers, 1983.
"They were all acutely aware that information five to Western correspondents in Moscow about arrests and trials about ominous reports of hunger strikes in labor camps, and of life there among political prisoners could be transmitted in foreign broadcasts. Sometimes it was just a matter of hours after a document was given to an American news agency in Moscow that a foreign radio report about the event could be heard in shortwave programs in Moscow. The British Broadcasting Corporation, Radio Livbery, Duetsche Welle and Voice of America Russian-language broadcasts circumvented the Soviet censorship administration for the press, radio, television, literature and general publishing. These reports in turn attracted new sources of information, nurturing a grapevine of civil rights news. Khushchev had halted blanket jamming of foreign radio broadcasts in Russian in 1963, with the exception of the officially despised Radio Liberty, whose special focus on internal Soviet political events made it a category unto itself. People could listen to all the foreign news they wanted in the mid-1960s in the Soviet Union. The tacit foreign radio stations was creating a vast information network reporting to the mass Soviet audience independently of the Glavit organization.
"They were all acutely aware that information five to Western correspondents in Moscow about arrests and trials about ominous reports of hunger strikes in labor camps, and of life there among political prisoners could be transmitted in foreign broadcasts. Sometimes it was just a matter of hours after a document was given to an American news agency in Moscow that a foreign radio report about the event could be heard in shortwave programs in Moscow. The British Broadcasting Corporation, Radio Livbery, Duetsche Welle and Voice of America Russian-language broadcasts circumvented the Soviet censorship administration for the press, radio, television, literature and general publishing. These reports in turn attracted new sources of information, nurturing a grapevine of civil rights news. Khushchev had halted blanket jamming of foreign radio broadcasts in Russian in 1963, with the exception of the officially despised Radio Liberty, whose special focus on internal Soviet political events made it a category unto itself. People could listen to all the foreign news they wanted in the mid-1960s in the Soviet Union. The tacit foreign radio stations was creating a vast information network reporting to the mass Soviet audience independently of the Glavit organization.
"The information network among the dissidents themselves operated on the basis of personal knowledge and trust and sometimes out of sheer chance. It happened like this: Larisa Bogoraz, wife of Yuly Daniel, was on the train traveling to see her imprisoned husband. She met the wife of Valery Ronkin, who also, it turned out, was on a trip to visit her husband in the same Siberian labor camp. Ronkin was an unfamiliar name to Moscow dissidents. A Leningrader, Ronkin had been arrested in 1965 for antistate activities after the KGB broke up a clandestine and preached a truly workers' state. It was called the Union of Communards and preached a truly workers' state. In the conspiratorial fashion of earlier illegal Russian Marxist circles, the group met in secret. It published a samizdat journal called The Bell on a clandestine printing press...Even after the KGB penetrated the Union of communards and imprisoned Ronkin, not many in the Soviet Union, let alone the outside world, knew about him or his group, such was the compartmental quality of of Soviet life, especially concerning dissident political and police matters. The Moscow dissidents thus learned of the Ronkin case only when two wives met to share common information about their imprisoned husbands. (H, 8-9)"
"What was happening, then, as trials picked up in the Soviet Union of the late 1960s and as dissidents met and talked was a growing awareness of a pattern of events. That some of this information was obtained by Western correspondents and that some of it was broadcast back to the Soviet Union in Russian served to document and enlarge the dissidents' picture of their society. For they suffered from a sense of isolation and ignorance of daily events in the Soviet Union, where authorities ensure that the mass media present a narrow and particular portrait of the country. In the late 1960s, Soviet dissidents only graduating assembled facts to convince them that the post-Khrushchev leadership was undertaking a deliberate policy of repression. (H,9)
10-11: Dologprudny meeting
"There were a series of get-togethers among the increasingly active dissidents in the late winter and early spring of 1968. There was no organization, no specific leaders, no agendas, no records-none of the paraphenalia that goes on with planned, orderly action. Natalia Gorbanevskaya remembers talking with Ilya Gabai, among others, before the first issue of "The Chronicle" appeared and deciding that a bulletin of some kind must be issued to publicize the mounting information they had on hand... (H, 10)"
-it was an informal decision 10-11
10-11: Dologprudny meeting
"There were a series of get-togethers among the increasingly active dissidents in the late winter and early spring of 1968. There was no organization, no specific leaders, no agendas, no records-none of the paraphenalia that goes on with planned, orderly action. Natalia Gorbanevskaya remembers talking with Ilya Gabai, among others, before the first issue of "The Chronicle" appeared and deciding that a bulletin of some kind must be issued to publicize the mounting information they had on hand... (H, 10)"
-it was an informal decision 10-11
"The Dolgoprudny meeting ended with an understanding that Natalia Gorbanevskaya would produce some sort of "bulletin" reporting information from friends of the group and anyone else about the persectutions underway. It still had no name. It would be typed because that was how virtually all samizdat was produced in the Soviet Union. The general Soviet public, then or now, did not nor does not have access top printing presses or even mimeograph machines, let alone electonic copiers. Anything produced on Soviet state presses, in any case, is censored by Glavit. This is to say that the talk in 1968 of putting out a private, unofficial "bulletin" readily translated in the minds of those involved into a few typed carbon copies of the samizdat that would be circulated among friends, one of the copies being reserved for a contact in the Western press corps in Moscow. (H,12)
Paradox: "Its main intent was to publicize violations of human rights in the Soviet Union, especially the lesser known incidents, and thereby draw what dissidents thought would be curative world opinion to the Soviet malady. The group set out to be neither clandestine on public activities and confined itself scrupulously within the limits of written Soviet law. (H,12)
12: didn't think it would survive
"The Chronicle group shunned conscious, planned secrecy. They regarded that tactic as too similar to the Bolsheviks, to the Leninst concept of a political movement" (H,13)
"The Chronicle group believed more in public action, in holding a mirror to the the Soviet social syste built by Stalin. They wanted little more than the civil liberties ensured in the 1936 "Stalin constitution." (H,13)
"Yet, as Gorbanevskaya began preparing the first issue of the Chronicle, the work was per force and by habit and practice more of a clandestine operation than a public petition. It was the opposite of how the dissidents, in their more idealistic moments, hoped to function." (H, 13)
"Two specific phrases proved important to the Chronicle-in article 70, the words "slanderous fabrication that discredit," and in article 190-1, "deliberately false statement derogatory" to the Soviet state. The KGB and Soviet courts were to use these time and time again to argue that the Chronicle was an illegal publication."
"In compiling a bulletin bout protests and objections to the Soviet government and about reprisals against individuals who challenged authorities, Gorbanevskaya had to conduct herself carefully. She could not use the telepone to obtain information, for everyone knew that the KGB tapped private phones. She could not, without some risk, carry notes with information on her person. It was risky for her, and it was risky for those who supplied her. KGB experts could trace people by their handwriting. Traveling around spread-out Moscow in crowded buses or the metro took hours our of a day if one wanted personally to talk with friends. Gorbanevskaya had to keep a file of information in her apartment. The KGB could search apartments whenever they chose. She had no readily available reference books on Soviet law to check criminal proceedings. She had no archive, no file of newspaper or magazine clippings against which to check names, dates, places and events. It was like putting together a bulletin out of a shoebox, relying on one's own memory or the memory and exactness of others." (H, 15)
"The KGB could connect documents and typewriters. Each machine, like fingerprints, has its own its own typeface characteristics. One had to be careful in writing samizdat that it could not be traced through other items typed on the same machine." (H, 16)
17: Human Rights Year
17: she gave birth, came back and finished it up
Paradox: "Its main intent was to publicize violations of human rights in the Soviet Union, especially the lesser known incidents, and thereby draw what dissidents thought would be curative world opinion to the Soviet malady. The group set out to be neither clandestine on public activities and confined itself scrupulously within the limits of written Soviet law. (H,12)
12: didn't think it would survive
"The Chronicle group shunned conscious, planned secrecy. They regarded that tactic as too similar to the Bolsheviks, to the Leninst concept of a political movement" (H,13)
"The Chronicle group believed more in public action, in holding a mirror to the the Soviet social syste built by Stalin. They wanted little more than the civil liberties ensured in the 1936 "Stalin constitution." (H,13)
"Yet, as Gorbanevskaya began preparing the first issue of the Chronicle, the work was per force and by habit and practice more of a clandestine operation than a public petition. It was the opposite of how the dissidents, in their more idealistic moments, hoped to function." (H, 13)
"Two specific phrases proved important to the Chronicle-in article 70, the words "slanderous fabrication that discredit," and in article 190-1, "deliberately false statement derogatory" to the Soviet state. The KGB and Soviet courts were to use these time and time again to argue that the Chronicle was an illegal publication."
"In compiling a bulletin bout protests and objections to the Soviet government and about reprisals against individuals who challenged authorities, Gorbanevskaya had to conduct herself carefully. She could not use the telepone to obtain information, for everyone knew that the KGB tapped private phones. She could not, without some risk, carry notes with information on her person. It was risky for her, and it was risky for those who supplied her. KGB experts could trace people by their handwriting. Traveling around spread-out Moscow in crowded buses or the metro took hours our of a day if one wanted personally to talk with friends. Gorbanevskaya had to keep a file of information in her apartment. The KGB could search apartments whenever they chose. She had no readily available reference books on Soviet law to check criminal proceedings. She had no archive, no file of newspaper or magazine clippings against which to check names, dates, places and events. It was like putting together a bulletin out of a shoebox, relying on one's own memory or the memory and exactness of others." (H, 15)
"The KGB could connect documents and typewriters. Each machine, like fingerprints, has its own its own typeface characteristics. One had to be careful in writing samizdat that it could not be traced through other items typed on the same machine." (H, 16)
17: Human Rights Year
17: she gave birth, came back and finished it up
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)