Solzhenitsyn
From Dr Konstantin Bazarov
Sir: Hodder and Stoughton have been brandishing their alleged ' experts" very publicly, so it is
not unreasonable that they should he expected to produce them for Inspection. Not only do they flatly refuse to do so (Letters, October 21), but they still blandly assert that these are "acknowledged experts on Soviet affairs," whose word must presumably be taken, even though we don't know what it is or who they are! Throughout its exceedingly chequered career the Burg/Feifer book has been surrounded by such shifting sands of vague generalisation, unsupported by one single scrap of honest, genuine evidence Which can be independently investigated. In fact, wherever these statements can be investigated they can invariably be demonstrated to be false. David Floyd Pointed out some examples at the Very beginning of this Spectator correspondence, and the very fact that his and my reactions echoed Jlorl other so amazingly is an 1,odication of just how misguided Idookbuyer's initial comments Were, since our views on almost everything but this are likely to be very different. Alan Gordon Walker will no doubt be glad to know that this is the last letter, vituperative or Otherwise, that I shall be writing, though I shall be reviewing the book elsewhere. But since Burg has made so much play with the „Scandinavian newsman Per Egli rlegge as a reliable authority on Solzhenitsyn, one final comment
here on Burg and Feifer's book seems worthwhile. On pages 31819 they deal with the actual award of the Nobel Prize to
Solzhenitsyn, saying that on Octo
ber 7 he was told he was unlikely !c) win it. "This was a Norwegian
Journalist's interpretation — Passed to him by a mutual friend Of the hurried advance of the date." Typically, the "Norwegian Journalist " is not named on these Pages thou h on page 325 "the No,rwe though
correspondent who had correspondent who had
le'ePhoned " Solzhenitsyn is dentitled as Per Egil Hegge, and Pages 318 and 319 do in fact leature in the Index under his name. Hegge's interpretation of these events was, of course, wrong, since the announcement of the Nobel Prize award to Solzhenitsyn came the following day. Yet this Norwegian journalist who was so utterly wrong in his interpretation of the public actions of his fellow Scandinavians is held up by Burg as an authority on the private thoughts of a " recluse-like " (Burg and Feifer's words) Russian writer. And it was on such a flimsy basis as this that Burg and Feifer rushed into print in the Sunday Times with potentially damaging speculations about the writer at a time when, as they themselves make clear in chapter 36 of their book, he was in an extremely difficult and dangerous position with a real possibility of a vicious campaign or even KGB action being launched against him.
Burg and Feifer's book does at least repeatedly draw attention to the "sordid machinations" and "doubtful claims" that have surrounded the publication of Solzhenitsyn in the West, where he has been "easy prey to the Western publishers willing to exploit the situation." As they correctly point out on pages 301302, it was Solzhenitsyn's need to protect himself in this situation that led to the appointment as his authorised attorney of the Swiss lawyer Dr Fritz Heeb, an appointment whose results "were very quickly beneficial to Solzhenitsyn," say Burg and Feifer. Ironically, of course, in view of his unsuccessful efforts to stop them!
As both David Floyd and I have already pointed out, the " experts " who are supposed to have vetted the book' for Hodder and Stoughton simply can't exist — the sort of expertise claimed for them could not possibly be "acknowledged," as Alan Gordon Walker claims, by anyone competent to judge. But if Hodder and Stoughton did indeed show advance proofs to someone who spoke fluent Russian and knew something about Solzhenitsyn and the Soviet Union, then it is hardly surprising that they have insisted on refusing to allow their names to be mentioned in connection with this utterly worthless farrago of gossip, rumour and speculation. It could only discredit them.
Konstantin Bazarov 41 Wisteria Road, London SE13
Previous page
