(3 of 3)
Creative work, especially by writers, has a tendency to interfere in the political sphere. Writers are forever delving into questions of philosophy and ideology—questions on which any ruling party, including the Communist Party, would like to have a monopoly.
After Stalin's death [Boris] Pasternak wrote Doctor Zhivago and tried to get it published. There was a terrific commotion about this novel and how to handle it. I was informed and had an opportunity to influence the decision of whether or not to publish it—which boiled down to a question of whether or not to accept the advice of someone who was reporting to us—but I failed to act. I have firm grounds for saying that if I had influenced the decision [by coming out in favor of publication], I would have been supported. But I did nothing, and now I regret it.
Pasternak worked hard on Doctor Zhivago. The manuscript found its way abroad, where it was published and caused a stir. It obtained recognition and was awarded the Nobel Prize, though I can't say to what extent his work deserved it. Anyway, Pasternak was chosen to be a Nobel Prize laureate, while here [in the Soviet Union] there were administrative and police measures. When dealing with creative minds, administrative measures are always most destructive and nonprogressive. His book was put into cold storage; it was banned. The decision to use police methods put a whole different coloration on the affair and left a bad aftertaste for a long time to come. People raised a storm of protest against the Soviet Union for not allowing Pasternak to go abroad to receive the prize. I said, "Let's go ahead and publish the book so that Pasternak will be able to go abroad and pick up his award. We'll give him a passport and some hard currency to make the trip."
Then quite unexpectedly Pasternak let it be known through a statement in the newspapers that he had no intention of going abroad, and that he wasn't even going to raise the question.
To this day I haven't read his book and therefore can't judge it. People who've spoken to me about it say they don't have any special admiration for the artistic aspect of the work, but that's beside the point. To judge an author and to judge his work are two different matters. If the book was really of low artistic quality, then that judgment should be left up to the reader.
In connection with Doctor Zhivago, some might say it's too late for me to say that I regret the book wasn't published. Yes, maybe it is too late. But better late than never.
In general, I think we should be more tolerant and extend wider opportunities to our creative intelligentsia. While personally I'm against the new schools of painting, sculpture and music, that doesn't mean I see any need for resorting to administrative and police measures.
* Sakharov's account of this conversation appears in his book Sakharov Speaks, which is being published May 31 by Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.