◆ SpookStack

nm ’ Lk : — OTRRWLER WA b : ‘ now is definitely mot like that « ee a ome ry ALL INFORMATION CONTAIN * > WEREIE IS UNCLASsr erm * t - ee a so = + that ame : . Way, eee retiat at Humiane OK = ag hk qsusa . | z ‘hing they bave \° a cet invented products or methods John Steinbeck’s \ i Bieinbect) points out, they a F ‘didn’t. This, from a native of a land “A ‘Russian Journal’ cre gO NT ef cactest wi tall ’ TR Pohert Friadman kinds are automaticcaly described . aay seUEres & aot eo ans see ee OHN STEINBECK’S warm aytmpathy tor ‘people, 38 unquestioned world’s champlons, 8 He: writes feelingly of the rever evidenced in his A Russian Journal, (published today) lence throughout the world for the . is the one positive feature of an account of a visit to the|memory of Roosevelt. Yet he com- Soviet Union which 46 ‘Otherwises- plains of a like tribute by the overrun with frivolous provincialiam i 45 , Goviet peoples to Stalin and sneer and a coy disinclination to face iingly intimates that Stalin was political realities. hypocrite in objecting to adula Bteinbeck has taken out the con- Steinbeck makes the convent Veptional insurance against crit!-| malvete which has it that “eer gev ‘bourgeois plaint about Soviet cen- ernment ia designed Teorship and “suspicion” of foreign- rl OS. 'S51aN JOCRKAL wy oat ne meri to kecp anyone. and cutely explains them as, + Hi ie a ad od Co — Bae — ia an - rik OF moet atu gtticag 8 DCE power ww, ~ ek hee ee ge t | having get M, from keeping &"? traditional Russian behaviour. Very: — 83.75. & . And, “we agreed,” Stet possibly and, In the lMgh of the . . ae oy ; beck writes selemnly, “that ‘thls makes eur author's political maturity this aoe j _cism by concluding that his Journal goun not sarcastic — Bteinbeck does not “+4eil not be satisfactory eHher to aty cinialy saber fonean fanetlon |KDOW of the 30-year effort through the ecclesiastical Left thor the it certainly makes f sf conspiracy and armed attack by y Lompen Right. The first will say/™OTe ETE capitalist states to destroy the Bo- is antl-Ressian, and the second! It & foolhardy ‘fot « man Whol wet Union. ; Foes that it 1s pro-Russian. Surely it is|does not know the facts of life in] One cond go om quoting Stein- . superficial, and how could it be[his own backyard to fare forth esi,iy but what fer? A Russian otherwise? We have no conclusions/an interpreter of his neighbor. Journal is much more enlightening ‘to draw, except that Russian people] There 4s little in A Russian Jour-Fatost the kind of culture waa are like all other people in the|nal to indicate that Stelnbeck has world Some bad ones there are/any comprehension of Marxism, the surely, but by far the greater num- cause for war, the fundamental ber are very good.” difference between capitalism and Tustrate the text are striking Now the above is pretty childish|soctalism. He doesn’t like war tly reproduced. =” stuff. It is a fraudulent ‘objectivity’}he says so. He would hate to ace —=T- wey, which presumes to be accuratefanother one. He is fond of children \ “of merely because it ts inconsistent and/and good, honest people, Russian as ‘superficial enough te draw fire from] well as any other kind. all sides, And it was a waste of Mr. put nis Journal is filled with -Bteinbeck’s time to discover s0frrivis which will not help people ‘Taboriously that all people are alike.linderstand the first socialist state { ‘What a reader logically expect8ipecause Steinbeck himself never _ from e “Russian journsl” is not a/pothered to find out. foe | platitvde but an examination o! Pr See aereeen way of life of a people which rizkt Toe This is a clipping from Page. “a2 of the “all other people.” Daily | Worker soe , 1b toto. | THIS STEINBECK HAS NOT)“ nb aa : fh = es even to the minimum lh ems “Tl. Clipped at the Seat of : i impressions #5) (3 Government. > MEN yet “This reviewer frank-|C> ap :, “by pe could not, decide whether Btein-fo3 a: py ck’s fallure was due to cholce or Gar Sf 7 6 an appalling politicattanitrersey | - ee ee - : pa om re Sel