Talk:Alexander Fadeyev (writer)

NPOV?
I tried to correct some places, for which I knew possible way of doing this. But the following three excerpts still should be sourced and rewritten, I believe.

''Fadeyev was brought up in Chuguyevka, Primorsky Krai and took part in the guerilla movement against the Japanese interventionists and the White Army. It was in 1927 that he published a cornerstone of socialist realism, the novel The Rout (a.k.a. The Nineteen), which glorified the valiancy of youthful guerilla fighters.''

''Fadeyev was a great champion of Stalin, proclaiming him "the greatest humanist the world has ever known". During the 1940s, he actively promoted Zhdanovshchina and married a famous stage actress, Angelina Stepanova (1905-2000).''

''The novelist couldn't survive disillusionment in Stalinism during the Khrushchev Thaw and started to drink heavily. He eventually committed suicide at his dacha in Peredelkino, his death occasioning an epigram by his neighbour Pasternak.''

It obviously have heavy POV issues and peremptory statements ("was brought up", "great champion of Stalin", "couldn't survive disillusionment" and likewise). I don't know Fadeyev's biography quite well so far, so who does, please, do this work. Cmapm 21:22, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, I fail to see how "was brought up" is POV. "Great champion of Stalin"? His praise about "the greatest humanist the world has known" (taken from the current EB) speaks for itself. "Couldn't survive disillusionment"? Current Britannica uses a more harsh phrasing: "After the official denunciation of Stalin in 1956, Fadeyev climaxed a long drinking bout by committing suicide". I don't see your point in defending a sloppy normativist writer, who was an inveterate Stalinist to boot. --Ghirlandajo 22:33, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


 * First, Britannica says "After the official denunciation of Stalin in 1956" and not "couldn't survive disillusionment in Stalinism" which I consider a POV. Secondly, well, I read his novel Young Guard myself (although it wasn't compulsory in Soviet schools in the late 1980s) and I didn't found "glorifying Stalinism" (as one could expect from an "inveterate Stalinist to boot") there. I don't know was he "Stalinist" or not in other stories, but I can say he wasn't in that story at all. So, please, overview each story independently, i.e. not relying on your own view of Fadeyev in general, site your sources and everything will be OK. Cmapm 23:26, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

I made a few changes to improve grammar and tone. This article still needs work, imo, but I think its "neutral" enough to remove the POV flag....FRS 20:25, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I corrected some places, which seemed POVish to me. Look through and feel free to place back NPOV tag if necessary. Cmapm 01:18, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Friend of Sholokhov/Inaccuracies
"he actively promoted Zhdanovshchina.... However, he was a friend of Mikhail Sholokhov"

Why the "However"? Sholokhov wasn't in trouble during the Zhdanovshcina, so what's the point of "However"?

As for "1964...correct inaccuracies"; Britannica says it was revised in 51 because it "omitted the role played by party members in the Resistance". "Inaccuracies" are not the same as "omissions". Camillus  talk | contribs

Sholokhov's speech at the 20th party congress
This is essential reading in terms of context around Fadeyev at the time of his death. Its often been suggested that his suicide was a reaction to the secret speech denouncing Stalin. But at the 20th party congress, Sholokhov's speech was a pointed attack on Fadeyev. He blamed him for the poor state of Soviet Literature, accused him of being corrupt, called him "power loving" and as much as suggested he be sent into internal exile far away from Moscow ("Magnitogorsk, Sverdlovsk, Chelyabinsk, or Zaporozhe"). The tone of the speech is such that had Fadeyev lived, he would have been pushed out of the party and arrested. His suicide note gives his view that he did a thankless job under Stalin (whom he considered a butcher of writers) where he laboured for years under constant attack from the party and that an uneducated man like Khrushchev would, rather than reforming literature, only make things worse. The text of the speech is at:. 198.45.174.250 (talk) 00:55, 22 October 2017 (UTC)