OSA / Guide / RIP / 1956 / RFE/RL Background Reports : Subjects | Browse | Search

The text below might contain errors as it was reproduced by OCR software from the digitized originals,
also available as Scanned original in PDF.

BOX-FOLDER-REPORT: 34-4-225
TITLE:             The Literary Scene in Hungary
BY:                AB
DATE:              1969-6-13
COUNTRY:           Hungary
ORIGINAL SUBJECT:  Hungary/31
THEMATIC SUBJECTS: Hungary--1966-1975, Hungary--Literature, Cultural Policy

--- Begin ---

RADIO FREE EUROPE Research

EAST EUROPE

HUNGARY/31
13 June 1969

THE LITERARY SCENE IN HUNGARY

Summary: The Hungarian regime is eager to win over the
writers to full cooperation. The increasing activity
of the Writers' Union is marked by various movements
in the domestic field and by an open-door policy toward
East and West alike. The inner weakness and uncertainty
of the official cultural policy has given way in face
of the questioning of the guidance system. The testing
of those measures which have been introduced by the
NEM in the cultural field is in full swing. The
writers are fighting for a better existence. The
progressive nature of Hungarian cinematic art is
again being demonstrated.

X X X

New Waves on Old Shores

The Hungarian literary scene has apparently lost its
brightest colors. Mount Parnassus lies in shadow. The regime's
attention is focused on the economic field, canalizing all
efforts for the implementation of the NEM. Economic policy
specialists, economists, managers, technical experts and
scientists are shouldering the great burden of this ambitious
reform. In this situation the literati are playing a secondary
role and are left behind even by the sociologists, historians
and philosophers. This state of affairs is aggravated by the
fact that the output of literary masterpieces and artistic
productions has decreased lately, and a creeping atmosphere of
apathy is sensed by some literati. Therefore present-day
Hungarian literary life is often characterized as "tranquil."
However this epithet can be applied only in a restricted sense,
and primarily in connection with the relationship between the
regime and the writers. For a decade the regime and the literati
have been living together in peace, avoiding any dramatic clashes.
This peaceful coexistence was preserved even at the height of the
Czechoslovak crisis. Furthermore, "tranquillity" prevails among
the literary schools which side by side and are accepted even
by orthodox die-hards. And "tranquillity" marks the activity
of the critics, whose strongest outbursts are no more than a storm
in a teacup. Behind this "tranquillity," however, there are

[Page 2]

remarkable undercurrents which make it worth exploring and
analyzing literary life.

The regime, in spite of its preoccupation, is eager
to obtain the writers' co-operation for the great tasks ahead.
This is shown in many ways. For example, Premier Jeno Fock met
with the representatives of literary and artistic life at the
end of February 1969, a meeting which was the latest link in the
chain of high-level encounters between Party-state leaders on the
one hand and writers and artists on the other. On this occasion
Fock, in the course of a detailed report on the regime's foreign
and domestic policy, openly admitted that the results of the NEM
did not yet warrant any self-satisfaction. Farther progress,
he said, could only be achieved in a social atmosphere in which
the preconditions for free and genuine debate were assured. Only
such an atmosphere could pave the way for evolution. The 
debate-provoking effect of the NEM is hardly detectable, however, in
the activity of the writers' and artists' organizations. Their
work on behalf of democratization is just beginning and is so
far unsatisfactory because they are following the new developments
with skepticism and internal quarrels are rife in their
organizations. They must further the exploration of society with
bold and constructively critical, realistic works. The regime
and society, said Fock, expect more activity and concrete
suggestions from them, and they should utilize the increased
opportunities for free operation. [1]

The sum of over four million forint which was allotted
a few months ago to the publishing houses to enable them to pay
higher royalties to the writers, can be evaluated as a further
token of the regime's interest. [2] The regime's consistent
buttressing of the Writers' Union, its activities, and the shaping
of its independent stand justify the assumption that the regime is
keenly interested in ensuring the co-operation of the writers.

Turning now to the slowly increasing activity of the
Writers' Union, two significant movements should first be
considered. These are the "Discovery of Hungary" and the
"For the Reading Public" movements. Both were inaugurated at the
plenary meeting of the Writers' Union in March 1968.

The "Discovery of Hungary" movement is a major venture
in sociological analysis. It is an attempt to achieve a thorough
stock-taking of Hungary's economic, social and cultural progress
during the past 25 years, and to survey the present situation.

------------------------------

(1) Nepszabadsag, 1 March 1969; Magyar Nemzet, 2 March 1969;
Magyar Hirlap, 28 February 1969.

(2) Elet es Irodalom, 26 April 1969.

[Page 3]

The object of this movement is to help the regime in the
implementation of the NEM and other reform plans by a
comprehensive sociological exploration -- and incidentally to
commemorate in 1970 the 25th anniversary of the "liberation."
Some 26 noted writers are active in this movement.

The "Discovery of Hungary" movement received great
publicity through an experimental and vehemently discussed
publication. The discussion cleared the way ahead for the
movement, the stubborn opposition of some local officials was
overcome, and the "culprit" (who had been sharply attacked)
successfully defended -- which was a courageous and almost
unexampled act on the part of the Writers' Union. [3]

Since the "Discovery of Hungary" movement and the
whirlwind around it have already been analyzed in extenso, [4]
it need only be remarked that the first publications of the
movement are expected in a year's time. The movement is already
known beyond the borders of Hungary. Izvestia, for example,
reported on it at length and commented that it was something
that could be stimulating even to the Russians themselves. [5]

The other movement, "For the Reading Public," has a
long-term program. According to various assessments, the
reading of books is an unknown experience for half the adult
Hungarian population and there is practically no book buying in 
one-third of all Hungarian villages -- that is, in 1000 localities.
The object of the movement is to improve this grave situation by
mobilizing the mass organizations, associations and societies,
the publishers, the book-marketing enterprises, and the librarians.
But this ambitious program was nearly wrecked owing to
organizational difficulties. It is now proposed to establish an
"operative commission," a "social presidium," and a "co-ordinating
commission" to guide this mammoth undertaking. The progress of the
movement so far is insignificant but the central role of the
Writers' Union in it should be noted.

The moves which the Writers' Union has taken to 
safeguard its interests, and the planned reorganization of sections of
the Union, [6] are further remarkable examples of its activities.

--------------------------------

(3) Antal Vegh, the "culprit," in the meantime published his
first play, a peasant drama in Kecskemet, and a novel.

(4) Cf., AB: "Hungarian Literary Life: Intriguing New Traits
Despite Czechoslovakia," Hungarian Background Report/19,
Radio Free Europe Research, 6 November 1968; and "The
'Discovery of Hungary' Movement Comes into the Spotlight Again,"
Hungarian Situation Report/14, RFER, 20 February 1969.

(5) "Izvestia on the 'Discovery of Hungary' Movement," Hungarian
SR/9, RFER, 5 March 1969.

(6) Magyar Hirlap, 23 April 1969

[Page 4]

Now let us examine the Writers' Union's international
work. It is characterized by an open-door policy in all
directions, toward East and West alike.

The Hungarian Writers' Union has extraordinarily strong
connections with the Soviet Writers' Union and a mixed commission
has been established by the two Unions to encourage the spread of
Russian and Hungarian literature in each other's countries.
Besides the writers' representatives, the delegates of the main
publishing authorities and the copyright bureaus are participating
in this body. The work of the commission is helped by the fact
that Hungary and the Soviet Union signed a Convention on the
Reciprocal Protection of Copyrights on 17 November 1967. The
Convention came into force on 1 January 1968 and is valid for
a term of three years. It is of outstanding importance, as it is
the first of its kind concluded by the Soviet Union in the field
of international copyrights.

The Hungarian Writers' Union has friendly connections
with the Writers' Unions of the socialist countries. The
recent Socialist Writers' Conference which was held in Budapest
could, be indicative of the present intensity and future prospects
of these connections [7].

According to Imre Dobozy, general secretary of the
Hungarian Writers' Union, the Hungarians have a "well-ordered"
relationship with the Czech, Slovak and Yugoslav Writers' Unions.
Mutually beneficial moves are being made by the Rumanian and
Hungarian Unions, but cooperation with the Bulgarian, Polish
and East German Writers' Unions leaves much to be desired, both
in energy and exchange of information [8]. It should be said
here that the Hungarian Writers' Union s connection with the
Slovak, Rumanian and Yugoslav Writers' Unions is favorably
influenced by the Hungarian minorities' literary activity in those
countries.

The Hungarian Writers' Union's connection with the
Czechoslovak (later the Czech and Slovak) Writers' Union deserves
closer attention. In the post-invasion period, the Hungarian
writers were the first to restore disrupted contacts with their
Czechoslovak colleagues. The first joint meeting was held in
Prague as early as the middle of December 1968 [9], and a
cooperation agreement between the Hungarian and Czechoslovak

--------------------------

(7) Cf., Hungarian SR/19, RFER, 13 March 1969

(8) "The Plans and the Tasks of the Writers' Union," Magyar
Hirlap, 23 April 1969.

(9) Cf., Hungarian SB/85, RFER, 19 December 1968.

[Page 5]

Writers' Unions was signed in Budapest in the middle of
February 1969 [10]. The deepening friendliness of the
relationship was demonstrated recently, when an official
delegation of Hungarian writers from Slovakia was dispatched to
Budapest with the explicit consent and support of the Czech and
Slovak Writers' Unions.[11]

The open door policy of the Hungarian Writers' Union
toward the West is founded on tradition. The Hungarian is
strongly influenced by occidental culture and is eager to
familiarize the West with his own culture. So the Writers'
Union does its best to organize and push forward the
dissemination of Hungarian literature [12]. In addition, the Union
performs a remarkable service by fostering bilateral cultural
cooperation with the Western countries and by participating in
international literary gatherings.

The Hungarian attitude toward the West was clearly
demonstrated at the Budapest meeting of the Socialist Writers'
Unions, when a plan for closer co-operation with the West in the
literary field was accepted and the Hungarian Writers' Union
was commissioned to initiate the revival of GOMES (Communita
Europea degli Scrittori -- European Writers' Community).[13]

These, then, are the main trends of the work of the
Hungarian Writers' Union. Its activities must be considered a
remarkable new phenomenon in the Hungarian literary scene. [14]

---------------------------

(10) Cf., Hungarian SR/13, EFER, 17 February 1969.

(11) For echoes of the conference, see: Geza Molnar, "Exciting
Encounter," Elet es Irodalom, 10 May 1969.

(12) Cf., Conference of International Literary Translators in
Budapest. Hungarian SR/77, RFER, 21 November 1968.

(13) Cf., Hungarian SR/19, RFER, 13 March 1969.

(14) The substantial role of the Hungarian Writers' Union's
President, Jossef Darvas, in the activization of the Union,
the replacement of Istvan Szirmai by the more flexible
Gyorgy Aczel in the chairmanship of the HSWP CC 
Agit-Prop Committee, and Gyula Illyes's election to the 
vice-presidency of the International PEN Club should be recorded
here as significant sidelights of the period under
examination.

[Page 6]

The System of Cultural Guidance is Questioned

The more realistic cultural policy of the Kadar regime with
its reduced Party control is marked by a further phenomenon, i.e.
the reassessment of the cultural guidance system and the aspiration
to democratize it. Until now the principles of this system have
been laid down through ideological maxims, legal provisions and
explicatory statements made by the highest Party and state organs,
but recently these principles have been examined by people who
did not belong to the very highest level of cultural administration.

On the pages of Tarsadalmi Szemle, the theoretical and
political monthly of the HSWP, an outspoken debate has been
staged over the guidance system, Ivan Vitanyi, who belongs to
the Valosag circle, fired the first shot. His article "Art and
Guidance," published in the August-September issue of Tarsadalmi
Szemle, was a "bold attempt to build up a new theoretical base for
the regime's cultural policy. The idea of "Heuristic Guidance"
was the backbone of his thought. (Heuristic: a method which
stimulates someone to investigate a matter further by himself.)
According to this theory, which is derived from cybernetics, the
regime's cultural guidance should be given on a higher level and
its fixed boundaries should be opened up to fresh ideas and new
developments, because the well-educated part of society is now
eager for an explanation of such developments and the artists
are voyaging in seas hitherto unsailed. Since Vitanyi's article
has been already reviewed [15], our attention can be focused on
the debate which followed.

The first reaction came from a former Party secretary
of the Writers' Union, Dezso Toth, a critic, literary historian,
and political collaborator with the HSWP CC. [16] He thought
Vitanyi's article "sparkling" and "useful," but complained that,
his theory narrows down the subject on Which guidance is to be given
to the arts themselves, whereas its proper subject is, so to speak,
the relationship between the masses and arts which have been
stirred by the Party and state-led society. Toth therefore
rejects Vitanyi's "negative salami tactics" definition, according
to which the regime has had to yield an inch at a time to the new
artistic trends which were previously condemned by it. According
to Toth, the era of dogmatic distortions has by and large come
to an end and the correction of these mistakes (i.e., the
"negative salami tactics") will not be a feature of the future.
This, however, did not imply the "immobility or infallibility"
of guidance, because future decisions will also be determined

-------------------------

(15) AB: "Hungarian Literary Life: Intriguing New Traits Despite
Czechoslovakia." Hungarian BR/19, RFER, 6 November 1968.

(16) Tarsadalmi Szemle, November 1968.

[Page 7]

by changing facts, such as the foreign policy situation, the
critic's balance of power in the various branches of the arts,
or the ideological emphasis in a season of the theater.
Books and plays which are obstructed today might be allowed
tomorrow.

Toth rejected Vitanyi's view that Marxist aesthetics
should "be neutral toward the various artistic trends, and
advocated instead a rather selective aesthetic approach. Bat
this selection or differentiation did not mean that publications
policy should be oriented only to the conclusions of aesthetics,
i.e., that critics of aesthetics, together with publication policy,
should only have a "relative autonomy" and guidance should
embrace both. Furthermore, guidance should control new
literary experimentation. Toth then argued that guidance pays
an ever-increasing attention to the artistic programs of the mass
media and to their connections with the centers of the various
artistic branches.

As far as the further "democratization" of guidance is
concerned, Toth suggested that selected groups should take part
in the work of providing guidance. These groups should consist
of representatives of the distribution and communication network
as well as of "councils" formed by the public.

Janos Breuer, a music critic, joined in the debate [17]
and pointed out that Vitanyi's theory did not take into
consideration the public, which is actively taking part in these
developments. Cultural life needs a long-range program, which
promotes what is new, what has not so far been tried. This
program, however, should not entail legal provisions or
prohibitory signs: police interference, such as prohibition or
permission, is by no means the most important task of guidance.
That task lies beyond the pure artist-power relationship, in
the creation of cultural bases (e.g., the setting up of a music
publisher, a record factory, or a music fund) and the permanent
co-ordination of conflicting artistic interests. The
decentralization of cultural life reached such dimensions that
even the positive work of the supreme authorities was easily
blocked by the disagreement of other authorities, organs or
institutions -- as, for example, when Radio Budapest defied the
intentions of the Ministry of Public Education and ignored the
compositions commemorating the Great October Socialist Revolution.
The ideological content of art should be kept in mind and "proper"
artistic trends maintained.

----------------------------

(17) Tarsadalmi Szemle, December 1968.

[Page 8]

Miklos Almasi, critic, aesthetician, and follower of
Gyorgy Lukacs, also took part in the argument. [18] He
thought that the guidance of the arts is impossible without a
scale of values. This scale of values should be created by the
aestheticians, but only the critics had made use of one so far.
However, a scale of values of this type has not yet been born
and it is highly doubtful that a system of values will be found
which can embrace the political and the aesthetic realm alike.
"Heuristic guidance" is the cry of our age and therefore the
guidance system must be reformed. Of the three aspects of art,
i.e., political, aesthetic and sociological, it is
indisputable that the aesthetic form should govern. The basic
problem is the localization of culture in general within society
as a whole. In pursuit of the New Economic Model, cultural
guidance must discover the outlines of a new orientation. The
important society-forming role of art and culture is questioned
today. A great yearning for autonomous work of a high
intellectual order is deepening, but the arts can deliver only
on an ever-narrowing scale enough substance to satisfy the
ideological demand and to help understand and spiritually master
the present era. Our basic concept that art is a primary
"society-consciousness" forming medium must be revised.
Cultural guidance must take pains to organize a new system of
cultural mechanism to restore the arts to their original
function.

Laszlo Ranody, a film director, enriched the debate
with a contribution dealing mainly with the cinema. [19]
Taste is a great catalyst of ideological controversies, and it
might be useful to examine the trends of ideology and taste.
Film-making is a field in which guidance applies a greater
degree of interference and - horribleadictu -- even takes
administrative measures. There are prohibitory signs even
today. But guidance boosts its prestige and authority when,
following the conclusions reached in debate, it relaxes these
prohibitory signs. The debate represents the school of
democratism. Guidance has no answers for many questions, but
the trend of development is healthy. This is demonstrated by the
ever-increasing range and the international successes of
Hungarian cinematic art.

Bela Ujvary, an academy lecturer, took part in the
discussion as an expert in the fine arts and examined Vitanyi's
theory from that point of view. [20] Guidance, he said, has a

------------------------

(18) Tarsadalmi Szemle, February 1969.

(19) Tarsadalmi Szemle, March 1969

(20) Tarsadalmi Szemle, March 1969.

[Page 9]

twofold task: to support efficiently trends characterized by
Marxist attitudes and to criticize objectively trends marked by
bourgeois attitudes. Its practical implementation, however,
is not the task of the Party or the state leadership, but of
the social organs and, in the case of the fine arts, of the
Association of Fine Arts. The experts have to work subjectively,
thanks to the absence of rules of procedure or prescriptions,
and artistic life is therefore doomed to unproductive undulation.

Bela Kopeczi, writer, historian, former head of the Main
Publication Directorate of the Ministry of Culture, and deputy
rector of Budapest's Eotvos Lorand University, joined in the
debate, [21] and emphasized that the policy governing the arts
is confronted with a "very complicated reality," but has no
adequate analytical means of exploring the arts themselves or
the taste and receptivity of the public. Socialist art policy
will still be identified by many people with the art-policy
of dogmatism, although history also provides examples of the
opposite. Lenin and Lunacharskii as well as others took 
into consideration the peculiarities of art, its relative autonomy
toward politics, and the objective and subjective difficulties
deriving from an assessment. Art policy as such can assert
its influence partly by creating good conditions for creative
work and partly by taking care of the distribution of what
artists produce. At the same time, art policy should organize
the channels of criticism and form public opinion. It is the
critic's duty to decide whether an artistic work has value or
not and whether this value is a "socialist" one or "another"
one. Criticism manifests itself on different levels -- in the
judgment of the institutions, in the reviews of the professional
critics, and in the echo from the public. Art policy must consider
all these critical judgments. It is really a hard task even to
set up the organizational framework of this critique-mechanism,
owing to the complicated interrelations between the different
levels where representatives of the most divergent trends and
notions can be encountered. Many questions of Marxist
aesthetics are being debated today, and the professional critics
therefore show a restraint which is primarily derived from
ideology. All this makes the situation even more complex and
worsens the position of art policy, which has to make decisions
primarily from a political-ideological point of view. The proper
selection of values should be achieved through theoretical
awareness, open clashes of views, and crystallization of the
various artistic and critical trends.

Even an HSWP CC member took part in the debate [22] --

-----------------------

(21) Tarsadalmi Szemle, April 1969.

(22) Tarsadalmi Szemle, April 1969.

[Page 10]

Emil Keres, an actor and director of the Budapest Thalia
Theater. He emphasized that Vitanyi's treatise was an attempt
to obtain further democratization of art guidance. Vitanyi
is worried by three questions: are we really exploring the
genuinely new? Why is the proper scale of values absent from
this exploration. Is "everybody" represented in the "guiding"?
It would be worth discussing these questions exhaustively with
the specialists in these areas.

These are the most interesting pros and cons which have
so far been put forward in the course of the slowly broadening
debate revolving around Vitanyi's theses on "heuristic guidance."
They reveal the undercurrents coming from left and right and
expose the inner weakness and uncertainty as well as the
difficulties of this guidance system. The thorough questioning
of the guidance system is a fascinating phenomenon of Hungarian
literary life. Although it contains a few orthodox statements,
on the whole it airs fresh ideas about the further decentralization
and democratization of cultural life. [23]

Cultural Life Under The Influence of the NEM

The NEM introduced a broad range of measures touching
all sectors of cultural life. [24] The driving force behind
this penetration into the region of culture was the requirement
to make cultural enterprises and institutions economically, more
efficient and so diminish the enormous burden which is being
imposed on the state budget. The state spends about 9,000
million forint annually on the maintenance and operation of the
vast machinery of culture -- cultural and arts services, public
education and schooling. The value of the products created
and the distribution activity and services carried on by the
cultural enterprises and institutions equals more than 3-4
thousand million forint annually. [25] At present the annual
subsidy granted only to these enterprises and institutions
amounts to 430 million forint.[26] In order to reduce

----------------------------

(23) On this problem also see Dezso Toth, "Questions of Our
Public Education Policy. Culture and Party Guidance,"
Nepszabadsag, 13 April 1969, and Gyula Vonsik's lecture at the
Academy of Public Educators in Szeged, in which Vonsik mentioned
that the views of the cultural leaders are conflicting.
Csongrad Megyei Hirlap, 22 December 1968.

(24) On this subject, see also AB, "General Survey of Hungarian
Literature," Hungarian BR/l3 RFER, 11 July 1968.

(25) Laszlo Ballai, "Our Reform and the Financial Conditions of
Education," Tarsadalmi Szemle, August-September 1967.

(26) "The Price of Culture," Magyar Hirlap, 23 July 1968.

[Page 11]

this immense sum, the regime introduced economy measures such
as the transfer of cultural institutions, from the ownership
and supervision of the ministries to that of the local councils,
the closing of some cultural establishments, the introduction
of a new management system for the theater, the setting up
of the Council for Cultural Foreign Trade, the creation of
the Cultural Fund and the introduction of the cultural levy.
Additionally, the price level of cultural services has been
raised.

The exact economic consequences of all these measures
are incalculable at present owing to the relatively short time
which has elapsed since their introduction and to the scanty
data available. One economy device, however, should be
closely scrutinized on account of its highly political characters
the Cultural Fund and the cultural levy.

In summer 1967 the government established the Cultural
Fund under the direction of the Minister of Public Education
for the promotion of ideologically worthy cultural values and
for the repression of those which were ideologically less worthy --
the so-called "trash products and services." This fund comes partly
from the state budget (Parliament voted 10 million forint in
additional subsidies when it was established) and partly from
the fixed levies which are paid by the cultural enterprises and
institutions on those products and services which are declared
by the Ministry of Public Education and the Main Publication
Directorate as having "less cultural value" and are therefore
liable to the cultural levy, or, as it is commonly termed, the
"trash tax."

At present the accumulated capital of the Cultural
Fund could be around 50 million forint. According to data
which have been disclosed piecemeal, the total revenues of the
fund reached 29 million forint during the first half of 1968,
to which the levies contributed 24 million. [27] The gross
expenditure of the fund during 1968 was 30 million forint. [28]

Turning to the various sectors of cultural life, the
field of book publishing deserves a closer examination. It was
disclosed that, out of 4588 books published in 1968, only 36
suffered the imposition of the "trash tax," while 95 were
subsidized by the fund. [29] In 1968 the publishers paid a levy
of 10 million forint into the fund in respect of their "trash"
publications. Taking into consideration that in 1968 the gross
income of the book distributing network was 892 million forint, [30]

---------------------------

(27) Magyar Hirlap, 10 January 1969.

(28) Pal Ilku's speech in Parliament, Nepszabadsag, 19 April 1969.

(29) Tibor Banos: "Book Publishing Subsidy and Levy." Magyarorszag,
10 November 1968.

(30) Sandor Varga: "The 'Book Salesmen' Chip in," Elet es Irodalom,
8 March 1969.

[Page 12]

neither the present activity of the fund, nor the book
publishers' share in it, represents a significant factor which
could be a determining influence on the business policies of the
publishing houses. Conversely, it should be kept in mind
that, according to the calculations of the publishing houses,
the average publication time for a book is one and a half or even
two, years. So the time needed to ripen a manuscript into a
book is relatively so long that the possible impact of the
"levy-subsidy" system on book publishing will first become
perceptible in the next few years. It should be noted,
furthermore, that the publishing houses are accustomed to
fashion their publishing policy according to the wishes of their
customers -- who are mainly the book-distributing enterprises.
These enterprises in turn place their orders in the light of
public demand. And so it happened that Szovkony, the Book
Distributing Enterprise of the Agricultural Co-operatives,
placed an order with Szepirodalmi Kiado, the literary publishing
house, worth 19 million forint, out of which 14 million forint
was earmarked for "good" reading material for villagers, and
5 million forint for the firm's other publications. [31]
What is meant by "good" reading material? Surely books which
provide entertainment -- and probably material which can easily
be described as "trash literature."

This example demonstrates that business connections of
this sort among publishing houses and book distributing
enterprises might frustrate the political aims which motivated
the establishment of the Cultural Fund.

From the theaters, the Cultural Fund received 200,000
forint in 1968. [32] Out of 160 productions, 24 were subjected
to the cultural levy [33]. The fund supported the national
festivals and the "theatrical days," announced a play-writing
competition, awarded scholarships to writers, rewarded theatrical
organizers, and encouraged directors to stage new and, from
the cultural-political point of view, important plays. [34]

This 200,000 forint, however, represents only a minor
part of the vast subsidy which flows annually from the state
budget to the theaters. In 1968 the total amount of state
subvention was around three million forint, -- 15 times more
than the revenue received by the Cultural Fund from the theaters. [35]

---------------------------------

(31) Tibor Banos: "Book Publishing, Subsidy and Levy." Magyarorszag,
10 November 1968. 

(32) Delmagyarorgzag, 18 February 1969.

(33) Magyar Hirlap, 10 January 1969.

(34) Delmagyarorszag, 18 February 1969.

(35) Eszakmagyarorszag, 2 March 1969.

[Page 13]

Nevertheless, the centrally directed "levy-subsidy system"
has aroused deep controversies between the theater directors
and the Ministry of Public Education. For example, the
director of the Debrecen Csokonai Theater encountered great
difficulties with one of the new Hungarian musicals, which
he staged in Debrecen and sold out by advance subscription
for regional performances. The musical was fined, the
director's budget was upset and the subscription holders'
expectations falsified overnight. The Ministry of Public
Education refused the director's plea that the levy should not
be imposed -- at least not on the planned subscription
performances for the villagers. [36]

In the case of the film industry, the Cultural Fund
proved to be useless as an incentive. On the contrary, the
fund paved the way for further commercialization. In the
field of the fine arts the enterprises which do not come under
the authority of the Ministry of Public Education refused
flatly to pay the levy, which so far has not been made legally
enforceable.

To conclude our discussion of the question, it can
be said that the controversial functioning of the Cultural
Fund raises a basic question: does this method of art directing
fulfill the political aims which underlie it, or not? It was
repeatedly said that the system should be revised, and the
main objection raised against the system was that decisions on
artistic values were taken exclusively by a central organ --
i.e., the Ministry of Public Education -- and that they were
therefore liable to be arbitrary and subjective, while this
particular form of decision-making encouraged the formation
of cliques.

One of the proposals for amendment of the system
came from the Marxist philosopher Gyorgy Lukacs, who, in
agreement with the ITEM principle of decentralization, recommended
that the decision-making activity of the Ministry of Public
Education should cease and that the publishing houses
themselves should decide from which publications they would
make profits and what publications they judged worthy to be
subsidized from their own capital. [37]

The testing of the various measures -- promising
ones as well as politically dubious ones -- which were
introduced into the cultural field by the NEM, has just
started. This testing is a promising sign that the development
is moving in a direction which will probably facilitate

------------------------------

(36) Hajdu-Bihari Naplo, 13 April 1969.

(37) Kortars, April 1969.

[Page 14]

a greater decentralization, more elbow room for the professional
leaders of cultural enterprises and institutions, and less
interference from cultural politicians and cultural bureaucrats.
Developments to date and the present situation have not disproved
the view, in spite of some disturbing examples to the contrary,
that the NEM can be instrumental in the healthier development
of cultural life.

The Writers' Struggle for a Better Existence

During the last two decades the whole structure of
Hungarian society has been considerably altered, How this
historical process of change has slowed down and reached a
stage of consolidation. Within the changed structure of society,
however, a new phenomenon has become distinct, viz., the slow
transformation from a "uniform" society toward a "pluralistic"
one. Various groups of people, bound together by similar 
socioeconomic standing, are becoming conscious of their own special
interests and are beginning to fight for them. The writers
have become such an interest-conscious colony.

Hungarian literary life has always been rich in
lamenting "literati," who grumbled about their bitter lot; but
it has shown little evidence of organized action to better the
writers' position. Now the outlines of such activity are
perceptible. The initial impetus for it came from the members'
meeting of the Writers' Union held on 14 March 1968, at which
Jozsef Darvas, the President of the Union, declared that it
should be converted into an interest-safeguarding organization,
which, apart from defending the spiritual interests of Hungarian
literature, should take care of the material interests of the
"literati." It was furthermore proposed to establish an Economic
Executive Committee within the Writers' Union, and it was also
suggested that experiences of safeguarding writers' interests
which had been gained by the Writers' Union of the other Communist
countries should be collected. At the meeting the rather low
honorarium (royalty) scheme, which in practice is based on a
1955 arrangement, was sharply attacked. The members' meeting
accepted the principle that an over-all raising of the royalty
scale is necessary with an additional loosening-up of the
rigid royalty categories if quality is to be rewarded. Besides
the honorarium scheme, the unfavorable terms of publishers'
contracts were also criticized.

This drive to safeguard writers interests, which
started more than a year ago, has already produced its first tiny
fruits. Apart from the fact that the writers had already been
included within the Hungarian social security system at the time
of the March 1968 membership meeting, the first amendment of the
vehemently-attacked royalty scheme has been approved. The
Minister of Public Education has decreed that royalties for the
first edition of certain literary works should be raised by 50

[Page 15]

per cent. (38) To cover the additional costs to the publishing
houses which might result from this increase, the regime
allotted them more than four million forint. [39]

The new Copyright Bill which was enacted by the
Hungarian National Assembly on 18 April 1969 can be counted as
a further gain for the writers.

The writers' struggle for a better life has now
reached a stage where a two-level advance can be registered.
On one level, the "literati" themselves are coming forward
with pressing fresh ideas for the reorganization of the whole
literary field in order to better their lot; on the other
level the organ of interest protection, i.e., the Writers'
Union, is elaborating proposals for the regime to improve the
position of the writers.

As far as the "literati" level are concerned, Elet es
Irodalom opened its pages to a fascinating dispute on how the
literary field should be reorganized and the unhappy lot of the
writers alleviated. In order to reveal the backstage intricacies
of Hungarian literary life and to give a more detailed picture
of the present mechanism of Hungarian literature, the main points
of this discussion will now be given.

The discussion was initiated by Janos Olah and Domokos
Varga in an article entitled "From the Writer to the Reader." [40]
The authors emphasized that writers' royalties in Hungary
are the lowest in any socialist country. The present honorarium
(royalty) scheme fosters quantity but not quality, and easily
marketable books with a big imprint earn much more money than
those with smaller printings. Only a slight degree of competition
exists among the publishing houses, which are slack in their
work and rather careless in their selection of books to print.
There are 20 publishing houses in Hungary, of which 16 are
controlled by the Main Publishing Directorate. The two mammoth
publishing houses for serious literature, Szepiradalmi and Magveto,
linger miserably on with little capital but a large plant, and no
distribution organization, printing office or mass medium. These
mammoth publishing houses are clumsy. To increase the competition
among publishers, new small publishing houses should be
established either on a co-operative basis or as an enterprise
which is controlled by a periodical.

Printing offices are few, their machinery is obsolete,
and their printing capacity insufficient. The printing of

------------------------------

(38) Decree No. 2/1969/II. 19.

(39) Elet es Irodalom, 26 April 1969.

(40) Elet es Irodalom, 7, 14 December 1968.

[Page 16]

belles lettres requires too much time, averaging from six
months to one year, and the quick reprinting of successful
works which are sold out is quite impossible. Hungary, as
a country with 10 million people, has the right to own at
least one or two large, modern printing offices.

The book marketing organization operates in difficult
circumstances. The headquarters of this organization fixes
the book lists without taking the observations of the trade
network into consideration. Determining the size of the
various editions is the most delicate question which crops up
between the publishing houses and the book
marketing organization. Taking a whole year as a basis, some
28 per cent of the books remain unsalable. These are the
so-called expensive and useless "protocol editions."

Until now the publishers have made profits by editing
"classical" Hungarian literature, but the market is now
saturated with the classics. This means increasing difficulty
for official publishing policy, which supports such works. This
difficulty, however, cannot be lessened by the Cultural
Fund and the cultural levy or "trash tax." The latter have
failed to achieve their goals, especially since the cultural
"fines" have not been sufficiently high to deter the mass
publication of popular works, No publishing policy is stronger
than the market.

The benign and helpful culture administrators cannot
be trusted with the future. A proper evolution might be
secured through serious debates among those concerned,
including the writers. Book publishing and marketing need
new organizational forms. Talented writers require better
managing. There are only a few materially independent writers
who can afford to experiment with literature. For most
writers such experimentation can be fatal because the rejection
of their manuscripts will be the end of them.

That is a summary of the article written by
Janos Olah and Domokos Varga: now let us look at the reactions.

The first reaction to this rather bitter round-up
came from Ambrus Bor, a well-known writer. [41] He emphasized
that the book is a commodity which should be marketed. 
Book-publishing should be governed by demand. True literature
should be offered to the public and not forced upon it. Money
comes from turnover -- a principle which is accepted even by
the famous publishing houses abroad, for example by Gallimard
in Paris, which finances its special editions by printing

---------------------------

(41) Elet es Irodalom, 18 January 1969.

[Page 17]

and selling "books for the masses. Such a self-financed edition
is the new, beautiful, defining dictionary, the Littré.

It is wrong to collect a "trash tax." The publisher
should be a Maecenas who earns his own working capital as "best
he can without any interference from the state -- which at
present takes the cream of his earnings.

The honorarium scheme is humiliating. It measures
the manuscript "by the inch, and so do the publisher and
editor when fixing the scale of royalties. The capacity of the
printing offices has been increased during the last two
years. It is naive to scorn the backwardness of the book
marketing organization, when book salesmen's wages equal that
of the unskilled worker and the book commission agents are
practically fobbed off with tips for cigarettes.

Directly in conflict with these views are those of
Gyorgy Lukacs, who condemns the "mercantilist" approach to
culture in no uncertain terms. In an interview published in the
April issue of Kortars, the Writers' Union journal, Lukacs
maintained that" the "application of the NEM principle of
profitability to the cultural sphere was anti-Marxist and a
regression to capitalism. Cultural products, which are of
vital importance for the development of socialism, he asserted,
have value but no price. Therefore, they should not be
treated as merchandise and their cost to the public should
be kept low, especially since only the labor socially necessary
for the production of paper, print and similar things could be
fixed with any precision or justice. Outside of rejecting the
bureaucratic distortions inherent in subsidization thorough
the Cultural Fund, however, Lukacs had little to say about the
type of financial mechanism which would be both capable and
ideologically suitable to support such a scheme. The
"mercantile" character of culture, he merely said, would become
less necessary as the standard of living rose.

Miklos Vajda, a former reader at the Szepirodalmi
Publishing House, raised another question with which Lukacs
seemed unconcerned, namely, whether one could earn a living
on literature alone. [42] According to him, only a few people
can achieve this, i.e., most "great" or "reputed great" writers,
the authors of adventure stories, novels for young people,
popular memoirs, comedies, librettos and cabaret shows. Many
people, however, do their creative work only in their free
time and make a living by taking other jobs. The poets,
playwrights, essayists and critics cannot exist on their
literary activity alone.

The royalty scheme should be more differentiated;
it is wrong to reward mere quantity. The administration of our
literary life is greatly overorganized, and too many cooks are

-------------------------

(42) Elet es Irodalom, 25 January 1969.

[page 18]

busy spoiling the broth. Competition should be instigated
among publishers, among newspapers, and between publishers
and newspapers, as well as among writers. This might be
fostered by new contests, honorary titles, and public polls
to determine the "best" (or even the "worst") novel of the
year.

The next writer to enter the lists was Geza Molnar, a
former editor-in-chief at the Magveto Publishing House, a
former member of the Party center's press department, and
a member of the Writers' Union's Party organization. [43]
He raised the question of book prices. These prices did
not reflect the difference between "genuine" and "trashy"
literature. The number of books written by contemporary
literati is decreasing, while "trash literature" rules the
market and even enjoys protection. Trash literature should be
opposed and the public demand which manifests itself on the
book market should be properly transformed. Book marketing is
carried through by three monopolistic marketing organizations
(AKV, Muvelt Nep, and Szovkonyv). The marketing areas are
fixed in order to, eliminate any competition. Rivalry would be
a good thing.

Istvan Dobozy, general secretary of the Writers'
Union, contributed to the dispute by offering some thoughts
on the royalty scheme. [44] After the enactment of the
Copyright Bill, the Writers' Union must start devising the new
honorarium scheme. Royalties, apart from minor corrections,
have remained virtually unchanged for one and a half decades,
whereas the cost of living has increased and wages have been
raised. Dobozy also brought out of storage the principles of
improving the royalty scheme which had already been accepted
by the March 1968 membership meeting. At the beginning of
1969 the regime rushed to the help of the writers. [45]

The "sovereignty" of editorial readers, editorial
offices, and cultural leaders must be strengthened in order
to raise the standard of literature. The plight of the
translators of literary works is even worse, because their
royalties were raised by only 15 per cent, whereas the writers
are enjoying a 50 per cent raise.

Literature needs better methods of propagation. New
forms of publicity such as debates between writers and critics,
should be instigated and carried on in the newspapers or on
radio and television -- as is done abroad. Additionally,
so-called "book premieres" should be arranged. Trash literature

-------------------------

(43) Elet es Irodalom, 1 February 1969.

(44) Elet es Irodalom, 8 February 1969.

(45) For further details see page 14-15.

[page 19]

cannot be eliminated or reduced "by legislation.
Geza Hegedus, a noted writer, said that every writer
should seek those fields in which he can succeed. There are
many options: book-publishing, periodicals, newspapers, the
theater, the motion picture industry, radio and television.
Success is determined by supply and demand and not by aesthetic
values. The supply has increased, owing to a greater demand.
Competition has sharpened within the various genres and this
has led to cliques and the development of groups with special
characteristics, whereas the writers are labeled by the commonly
accepted literary categories. The critics, book salesmen,
publishers, librarians, writers and readers should be got
together in order to work out the nature of the demand for the
writers' services.

The next to enter the dispute, Endre Balazs, brought
the problem of the labor market into the foreground. [46]
The number of writers is increasing and therefore details of
those who seek employment have to be registered, categorized
and centrally administered. The Art Fund as a safeguarding
institution might be the most suitable organ for this operation.
The Art Fund might make contact with employers with a view to surveying
the available labor force. Unfortunately, the public education
organization is unwilling to employ writers. Other possibilities
are jobs in the motion picture industry, television, book
publishing, radio and the theater; but inbreeding or the
"do-it-yourself" trend is prevalent in these fields. Most of the
writers with a labor book (i.e., an employment card) are employed
by the enterprise journals.

Sandor Varga, director of Szovkonyv analyzed the
situation from the salesman's point of view. [47] He disclosed
that publishers used to offer their planned books to the three
big book-marketing organizations through the medium of a prospectus.
This prospectus usually gives a 5-8 line review of each of the
books on offer and marks the prices. The publishers are not
obliged to fulfill the orders given by the book marketing
organizations. If they print more than was ordered they carry the
risk. The book-marketing enterprises operate as genuine industrial
or commercial enterprises with a working capital which is also
taxed by the levy imposed on the fixed and working capital of
industrial enterprises.: Therefore the book-marketing organizations
are primarily interested in a quick turnover. Their work is,

----------------------------

(46) Elet es Irodalom, 1 March 1969.

(47) Elet es Irodalom, 8 March 1969.

[page 20]

however, hampered by the difficulties in printing and reprinting
procedures, A printing office requires an average eight-month
transit time for the printing process alone, plus the
additional time which is spent on reading, editing, and translating
and on the technical preparation of the manuscript. It is not
the book salesmen who are responsible for the poor marketing of
so-called "volumes of essays and studies."

Concluding the debate, Janos Olah and Domokos Varga
underlined some alarming facts: the number of books written
by contemporary Hungarian writers is not only shrinking disquietingly,
but the local councils and the enterprises are curtailing their 
allotments to the libraries as well. [48]

The writers' worries should be taken seriously. A
"joint forum should be established alongside the Art Fund, the
Main Publishing Directorate, the Writers' Union, the Literary
Department of the Ministry for Public Education, and other organs
with the objective of caring for the "spiritual capital" of
literature.

Olah and Varga proposed that the Main Publishing Directorate
arrange a round-table conference on the problems which remained
unsolved after the conclusion of the Elet es Irodalom debate, to
which all those concerned in the matter should be invited.

The discussion reviewed above perhaps exemplifies the
literati's endeavors to better their lot.

Let us now look at the Mother question -- that of the Writers'
Union as an interest-safeguarding organization. As has been noted,
the Writers' Union has started a campaign to improve the
writers' living standard by pressing the competent authorities
to give them more help. Beyond the successes it has already
achieved, the Writers' Union reserved to itself the, rights to
co-operate in legislative work for the implementation of the
Copyright Law. Apart from this important task, the Union is
spearheading the drive for the transformation of the honorarium
(royalty) scheme to meet the needs of the literati.

Conclusion

Prom the aforegoing it may be seen that Hungarian
literary life is far from quiescent. Both in organizational
and individual terms it is characterized by movement, ferment
and the promise of change. With a few exceptions, [49] however,

--------------------------

(48) Elet es Irodalom, 15 March 1969.

(49) See, for example, Antal Vegh´s "Stagnant Water," Erzsebet
Galgoczy's "A Million Kilometers to Budapest," and
Szylvester Ordogh's "The Class."

[page 21]

the questions which have been or are now being debated are unrelated
to the content or style of the literary works themselves.
Instead, they concern the political and economic environment
of the Hungarian cultural world, the conditions in which not only
the literati, but also the publishers, printers, distributors,
book salesmen, critics, etc., must live, work and create.

In other words, Hungarian writers are engaged in
a reassessment of the fundamental principles and factors which
affect their work. Through this reassessment, it is hoped,
a new basis and framework will be created which will further
expand the limits of expression, decentralize the direction
of cultural activities, encourage greater experimentation, and
provide the financial security and incentive necessary for a
qualitative improvement in contemporary Hungarian literary and
cultural output. The attitude of the regime -- neutral in some
respects, positive in others -- plus the present "open door
policy" toward both Western and Eastern cultural trends,
provides some hope that these goals will be at least partially
achieved.

(more)

[Page 22]

APPENDIX

Although not directly related to the literary scene,
the following section on the Hungarian film industry throws
light on the current political climate and the nature of
official cultural policy. For this reason, it is of interest
with respect to its possible implications for the future of
Hungarian literature.

X X X X

The Progressive Forces in the Hungarian Cinema Are Given the
Green Light

The new paths explored by Hungarian movies have already
been examined at length and it has been shown that the Hungarian
film is giving an impetus to a welcome surge of intellectual
activity. [1]

Two films which have been recently presented to the
Hungarian public and to the Cannes Festival jury deserve closer
attention because of their ideological and political implications.
Both films could be labeled as extraordinarily "touchy," because
they not only dwell upon delicate historical occurrences for
which the Rakosi regime can be blamed, but also touch on such
basic problems as the historical role of spontaneous, slightly
anarchistic revolutionary movements, dangerous aberrations such
as the violence and dogmatism of the Communist revolution, man's
defenselessness against terror, the morality of power, the
devastating consequences of the axiom "the end justifies the means,"
the high moral value of humanism, and the role and mission of the
individual in history. The films in question are: Sparkling Winds
and The Thrown-Up Stone.

Sparkling Winds (Fenyes szelek) or The Confrontation,
as Dilys Powell called it, [2] was directed by Miklos Jancso,
an exceptionally conscientious and intellectual artist, with a
scenario by Gyula Hernadi. The story of the film is as follows:

In a provincial town in Hungary, a group of NEKOSZ [3]

---------------------------

(1) AB: "General Survey of Hungarian Literature." Hungarian
BR/13, RFER, 11 July 1968.

(2) The Sunday Times, London, 23 February 1969.

(3) NEKOSZ=National League of People's Colleges, an educational
organization which operated from 1946 to 1948 to create
a new socialist elite from more than 10,000 juveniles of
working class and peasant stock.

[page 23]

students decide to attempt a dialogue with the students of the
town's Catholic college. The provocative behavior of the NEKOSZ
students, however, scares away the theological students and
prevents a real confrontation. In order to overcome the college
students' resistance, the secretary of the NEKOSZ group makes
friendly overtures; but the plan to win them over falls
through, and the NEKOSZ secretary is demoted in consequence of
this failure. The NEKOSZ group, led by a new female secretary,
then starts a series of cruel attacks on the students and teachers
of the parochial college, such as book burning, window smashing,
chasing the teachers and priests out of town, intimidation,
and desecration of ecclestical vestments -- all designed to
facilitate the takeover of the parochial college buildings.
These anarchistic actions are stopped by the arrival of senior
NEKOSZ leaders, who reprimand the culprits (and the female
secretary in particular) for such antisocialist misdeeds.

Although the film is set in 1948, its "message" is
almost timeless. The students' attempts "to discuss, contest
and act are a reflection of what has been happening in
universities all over the world." [4] But there is more to it
than that. The film is a comment on the special situation in
Hungary too, and implies that the Communist struggle for power
in Hungary will wind up in an outburst of terror which will
destroy the sound revolutionary forces of youth.

Sparkling Winds evoked an unprecedented stir in
Hungary. The" discussion on it started early in February 1969
and achieved such dimensions that the critics have already
labeled it the "debate of the year." It roused the public and
invigorated the former NEKOSZ members, Communists and non-Communists
alike. The whole apparatus of the mass media was utilized for
the debate and special discussion conferences were held. The
argument revolved round the role of NEKOSZ and methods of
revolution which give rise to the dilemma: dialogue or force,
the conduct of the Church and Communist policy at that time.

Sparkling Winds promoted a revaluation of Hungarian
postwar history's "heroic age," 1945-1948, and, in this
connection, the historical role of NEKOSZ. The development
of society should not be influenced by despotic methods; the
terror of the Rakosi era frightened the people away from the
idea of "socialism." The masses can be won over to socialism
only by patience, by argument, by dialogue. In a community the
individual has a right to find his own way -- he should not
be forced into a mold by society. So Sparkling Winds
represents the self-criticism of socialism. To understand the

--------------------------

(4) Variety, 26 February 1969.

[page 24]

significance of the nationwide intellectual upsurge inspired by
Sparkling Winds, one should think of it in these basic
terms.

The regime has abstained from applying the brakes on
the free flow of thought which has been provoked, and even let
the film be performed in Cannes -- contrary to the advice of some
anxiety-ridden people, who thought that the West would misuse
the film as anti-Communist propaganda. So Sparkling Winds
can make its mark in the West.

The Thrown-up Stone (Feldobott Ko), directed by a
leading cameraman, Sandor Sara, with a scenario by Ferenc
Kosa, Sandor Csoori and Sara, is one of the Hungarian industry's
newest films. It was premiered in the middle of April 1969
in Hungary and then sent to Cannes as the official Hungarian
entry for the International Film Festival. The plot is as follows.

A young Hungarian failed to get into the Budapest
Film Academy because his father had been tried and imprisoned
on trumped-up charges. The crime of the father, who worked
on the railroads, consisted of stopping a train in good
faith in order to meet a Russian comrade who was on it. For
this act the father was branded as a saboteur, and the fate
of his son was also sealed. However, the young man succeeded in
getting a job as a land surveyor by making an untruthful
statement that his father had died long ago. During the course
of his surveying work he experienced at first hand forced
collectivization of the land. The peasants were dragged away
by force and their wives maltreated by mounted police. The
farmers' beloved vineyards were destroyed in order to make
room for collective farming. A Greek, with whom the young
man got on friendly terms, worked successfully for
collectivization, but some bureaucratic decisions led to his
being killed by enraged peasants. The young man traveled as
far as the Transdanubian region of Hungary, where he shared
the life of a group of gypsies. The gypsies remained outside
the new system and were humiliated by brutality perpetrated in
the name of hygiene -- the hair of men and women alike was
close-cropped, and they were deloused, instead of being
helped by the state authorities to move out of their filthy
and louse-ridden shacks. The young man protested against this
brutality by taking photos of what was done. The story ends
with the young man succeeding in entering the Film Academy and
making a film of his experiences.

The Thrown-up Stone is a characteristically Hungarian
film which reviews a dark period of recent Hungarian history.
This is the first film to reveal that peasants were arrested
because they failed to sign an application for kolkhoz membership.
It strikingly mirrors the depressing atmosphere of the era of
fake trials and individual tragedies, and gives a factual account

[page 25]

of what happened to people during the Rakosi era. At the
same time it is a moving protest against the violation of human
rights, against the humiliation of man's dignity, against abuses
and unlawfulness. [5] Furthermore, the film rejects the axiom
"the end justifies the means."

This "bitter," "true," and "courageous" film received
very favorable reviews in the Hungarian press and has already
been labeled by some as "the year's best work of art."

Sparkling Winds and The Thrown-up Stone
substantiate the view that the Hungarian cinema enjoys a relatively
great freedom, [6] and represents a significant progressive
force.

These two films are milestones on the road leading
to the regeneration of the Hungarian cinema, to successes abroad
and to an intellectual upsurge at home.

In addition to these feature films, short documentary
films encourage intellectual fermentation and influence the
regime's social politic. The short film is gaining an
ever-increasing importance thanks to the yearly short film
festivals at home and to successes abroad. These films have a
partly sociological character, and record reality bluntly.
For example, the short film I Do What T Want (Az csinalok
amit akarok), directed by Mariann Szenes and Arpad Szabo,
documented the misery of vagrant youngsters, three or four
thousand of whom, both boys and girls, are apprehended annually.
Life in the gutter, where prostitution, debauchery, misery and
sickness are rife, was boldly exposed by the film. [7] Social
documentation of this kind is a characteristic by-product of the
Hungarian film industry.

AB
(Hungarian Unit)

--------------------------

(5) Delmagyarorszag, 18 April 1969.

(6) This freedom has recently aroused envy among the Poles.
Cf., Stanislaw Grzelecki: "Strongly, Beautifully and in
the Hungarian Style," Zycie Warszawy, 16-17 February 1969.

(7) Kepujsag (Tolna), 26 April 1969.

  OSA / Guide / RIP / 1956 / RFE/RL Background Reports : Subjects | Browse | Search