Information about the author: 

Abstract:

Can Platonov be considered a proletarian writer, given his background from the working class and his recognition as such? In Soviet literature, there were terms such as “proletarian writer” that had an obvious ideological meaning. However, when we consider them in the context of specific phenomena, this meaning is not always obvious. Platonov’s references to Mayakovsky’s works and his comments in response to proletarian criticism indicate how his artistic style was transformed under the influence of the ideological discussions of the time. His creative vision tends towards dramatic forms, and his works are influenced by emotional involvement in the tragic fate of his fellow workers, who during the first five-year plan were forced to perform impossible tasks. Engineers and professional writers were accused of sabotaging socialism, and Platonov devoted himself to these topics. Platonov saw himself as a writer who speaks through artistic images. His work was not devoid of aesthetic impartiality, but it was shrouded in assessments rather than meanings. The concept of a “proletarian writer,” as it related to Platonov, has undergone changes over time. According to the charter of the VAPP (All-Russian Association of Proletarian Writers), this meant that the writer had to belong to the combat detachments of the working class. However, this definition was challenged during discussions about codification, and a new interpretation appeared in which the proletarian writer was perceived as a craftsman, a master and a dedicated professional.