Solzhenitsyn again asks permission to ask a question. He is offered to speak instead. After hesitation, the question is resolved.

Solzhenitsyn asks the members of the Writers' Union, who reproached him for refusing to review manuscripts, for refusing to speak to literary youth, to name at least one such case.

The speakers are silent.

Matushkin - A member of the Writers' Union should actively work according to the charter, and not wait for an invitation.

Solzhenitsyn: I regret that our meeting is not being shorthanded, that careful notes are not kept. And yet it may be of interest not only tomorrow and even later than in a week. However, there were three stenographers working at the Secretariat of the Union of Writers of the USSR, but the Secretariat, declaring my notes tendentious, could not or did not dare to present the stenographic record of that meeting.

First of all, I want to remove the stone from the heart of Comrade Matushkin. Vasily Semyonitch, let me remind you that you never gave me any recommendation, you, as the secretary of the SP at that time, brought me only blank forms of questionnaires. At that time of excessive praise, the secretariat of the R.S.F.S.R. was in such a hurry to receive me that it did not allow me to collect recommendations, did not allow me to be received at the primary Ryazan organization, but received me himself and sent me a congratulatory telegram.

The charges that have been brought against me here are divided into two very different groups. The first concerns the Ryazan organization of the SP, the second concerns my entire literary fate. As for the first group, I will say that there is not a single substantiated accusation. Our secretary, Comrade Safonov, is absent here. And I informed him of my every social step, of every letter I wrote to the Congress or to the Secretariat, on the same day, and always asked him to acquaint all the members of the Ryazan Writers' Union, as well as our literary youth, with these materials. Didn't he show them to you? Is it of his own unwillingness? Or because he was forbidden by Comrade Kozhevnikov, who is present here? Not only did I not avoid creative contact with the Ryazan Writers' Union, but I asked Safonov and insisted that my "Cancer Ward", discussed in the Moscow Writers' Organization, should certainly be discussed in the Ryazan Writers' Association, I have a copy of the letter about this. But for some reason, the "Cancer Ward" was also completely hidden from the members of the Ryazan SP. I also always expressed my readiness for public speeches - but I was never allowed to take part in them, apparently for fear of something. As for my alleged arrogance, this is ridiculous, none of you will remember such an incident, not a phrase like this, or an expression on your face, on the contrary, I felt extremely simple and comradely with all of you. It is true that I was not always present at the re-election, but the reason is that most of the time I do not live in Ryazan, I live near Moscow, outside the city. When Ivan Denisovich had just been published, I was strongly urged to move to Moscow, but I was afraid to disperse there and refused. When a few years later I asked for permission to move, I was refused. I applied to the Moscow organization with a request to register me there, but its secretary V. N. Ilyin replied that this was impossible, that I had to be a member of the organization where I was registered according to my passport, and it did not matter where I actually lived. Because of this, it was difficult for me to sometimes come to re-elections.

As for general accusations, I continue to wonder what kind of "answer" is expected of me, to what "answer"? Was it the notorious article in Literaturnaya Gazeta, where Anatoly Kuznetsov was opposed to me, and it was said that it was necessary to respond to the West as he did, and not as I did? I have nothing to answer to that anonymous article. There is a question about the correctness of my rehabilitation - with a cunning evasive phrase "I was serving my sentence" - I was serving my sentence and that's it, you understand that I was serving for the case. There is a lie about my novels, as if "The First Circle" is "a malicious slander against our social system" - but who has proved, shown, illustrated this? Romances are unknown to anyone and you can say anything about them. And there are many other minor distortions in the article, the whole meaning of my letter to the Congress has been distorted. Finally, the tired story of "The Feast of the Victors" is again sucked in - it is appropriate, by the way, to think: where does the editors of "Literaturnaya Gazeta" have information about this play, where did they get it to read, if its only copy was taken from the desk of the state security?

In general, it is done with my things as follows: if I deny some thing myself, I do not want it to exist as a "Feast of Victors", then they try to talk about it and "explain" as much as possible. If I insist on the publication of my works, like "Cancer Ward" or "The Circle", then they are hidden and hushed up.

Должен ли я "отвечать" Секретариату? Но я уже отвечал ему на все заданные мне вопросы, а вот Секретариат не ответил мне ни на один! На моё письмо Съезду со всей его общей и личной частью я не получил никакого ответа по существу. Оно было признано малозначительным рядом с другими делами Съезда, его положили под сукно и, я начинаю думать, нарочно выжидали, пока оно две недели широко циркулировало, - а когда напечатали его на Западе, в этом нашли удобный предлог не публиковать его у нас. Такой же точно приём был применен и по отношению к "Раковому корпусу". Еще в сентябре 1967 г. я настойчиво предупреждал Секретариат об опасности, что "Корпус" появится за границей из-за его широкой циркуляции у нас. Я торопил дать разрешение печатать его у нас, в "Новом мире". Но Секретариат - ждал. Когда весной 1968 г. стали появляться признаки, что вот-вот его напечатают на Западе, я обратился с письмами: в "Литературную газету", в "Ле Монд" и в "Унита", где запрещал печатать "Раковый корпус" и лишал всяких прав западных издателей. И что же? Письмо в "Ле Монд", посланное по почте заказным, не было пропущено. Письмо в "Унита", посланное с известным публицистом-коммунистом Витторио Страда, было отобрано у него на таможне и мне пришлось горячо убеждать таможенников, что в интересах нашей литературы необходимо, чтоб это письмо появилось в "Унита". Через несколько дней после этого разговора, уже в начале июня, оно-таки появилось в "Унита" - а "Литературная газета" всё выжидала! Чего она ждала? Почему она скрывала моё письмо в течение девяти недель - от 21 апреля до 26 июня? Она ждала, чтобы "Раковый корпус" появился на Западе! И когда в июне он появился в ужасном русском издании Мондадори - только тогда "Литгазета" напечатала мой протест, окружив его своей многословной статьей без подписи, где я обвинялся, что недостаточно энергично протестую против напечатания "Корпуса", недостаточно резко. А зачем же "Литгазета" держала протест девять недель? Расчёт ясен: пусть "Корпус" появится на Западе, и тогда можно будет его проклясть и не допустить до советского читателя. А ведь, напечатанный вовремя, протест мог остановить публикацию "Корпуса" на Западе. Вот например два американских издательства Даттон и Прегер, когда только слухи дошли до них, что я протестую против напечатания "Корпуса", в мае 1968 г. отказались от своего намерения печатать книгу. А что было бы, если б "Литгазета" напечатала мой протест тотчас?

Председательствующий Баранов: - Ваше время истекло, 10 минут.

Солженицын - Какой может быть тут регламент? Это вопрос жизни.

Баранов - Но мы не можем вам больше дать, регламент.

Солженицын настаивает. Голоса - разные.