The Daily Worker Newspaper, May 17, 1924, Page 5

AUTEN RAEN ERIE NN PCAN neatnnen nt ( “The idea becomes power when it pene- trates the masses.” —Karl Marx. SPECIAL MAGAZINE SUPPLEMENT THE DAILY WORKER. May 17, 1924. a SECOND SECTION This magazine supple- ment will appear every Saturday in The Daily Worker. THE MAKING OF LENIN REMINISCENCES OF LENIN BY L. TROTZKY. T IS unquestionable that to the fu- ture big biographer of Lenin the period of 1900-03, of the old “Spark,” will be of exceptional psychological interest and will at the same time pre- sent great difficulties. For it was just in those short years that Lenin be- came Lenin. This does not mean that he did not grow further. Quite the contrary; he grew—and by what leaps!—both before and after the No- vember revolution, But that, was al- ready a more organic growth. * a * REAT was the bound from “un- derground” to power on Novem- ber 7, 1917. But this was, so to speak, the material leap of a man who had measured and weighed all that one could measure and weigh. The growth, however, which preceded the split at the second party convention was unnoticeable to the outside on- looker. It was the more resolute in- ner leap. The present reminiscences aim to furnish the future biographer some material relating to this unusually significant and important period in the spiritual development of Lenin. * * * ARRIVED in London in the autumn of 1902—it must have been in Oc- tober. It was early in the morning. A cab brought me to the flat of Niko- lai Lenin. The door was opened, as far as I remember, by Madame Lenin. Lenin was still in bed and his face bore an expression of welcome mixed with legitimate perplexity. Suck were the circumstances in which ow first meeting and our first conversa tion took place. Both Lenin and his wife already knew of me thru a lette? from Clare (Krjijanovsky), who for mally introduced me in Samara into the “Spark” organization under the nickname of “Pen.” And I was re- ceived as such: “The ‘Pen’ arrived!’ * . os WAS filled with tea in the kitchen- dining room while Lenin dressed. I told about my escape from Siberia and complained against the poor “Sparkist” organization at the fron- tier. The smugglers had mercilessly fleeced me in excess of all tariff and standards. I delivered to Madame Lenin a modest package of addresses and passes, or more prebably infor- mation about the necessity of discard- ing several unfit mailing places. At the instance of the Samara group I had visited Kharkov, Poltava and Kiev, and almost everywhere, at least in Kharkov and Poltava, I was able to discover but a very weak system of communication, *-_ * & ATER I took a long walk with Lenin about London. He showed me Westminster (from the outside), and some other notable buildings. I do not remember how he said it, but the nuance of the meaning was such: “It is they who possess the famous Westminster.” “They” signified, of course, not the English, but our capitalistic enemies. Lenin always had this slight shade, not at all emphasized and profoundly organic, in the timbre of his voice which expressed itself whenever he talked about some cultural treasures or new achievements, about the or- ganization of the British Museum, the wealth of information of the London Times, or, many years later, about German artillery or French aviation: “THEY are capable or THEY pos- sess, THEY have done or THEY have achieved—but what enemies THEY are!” The invisible shadow of “they”—the exploiting class—envel- oped all human civilization, in his view, and he was always, aware of this shadow as unmistakably as of daylight. ENIN took me on this long walk to get acquainted and examine me. And it was really an examina- tion thru the “entire cirriculum.” In answer to his questions, I told about the members of the Lena colony of ex- iles, about the internal groups there, how we collectively studied in the Moscow Transient prison his book, “The Development of Capitalism in} Russia,” and in exile we labored over “Capital” (Marx), but stopped at the second volume. Apparently it was pleasant to him that the young com- rades devoted attention to his most important economic work. ovna which has a moral, an emotional foundation,” Lenin said to me once. It is not difficult to imagine what a contrast Vera Ivanovna, with her vague radicalism and _ subjectivity, with her slovenliness, made in compar- ison to Lenin. It is not that there was no sympathy between them, but there was a sense of difference, of natural incompatibility. But she, as a fine psychologist, felt the power of Lenin, not without a certain subtle hostility, even in those days. It was this that she expressed in her phrase about his “deadly grip.” I began to perceive, but gradually Lenin in Childhood. WAS quartered by Madame Lenin several blocks away in a house where Vera Ivanova, Zasulich, Martov and Blumenfield, the manager of the “Spark” printing shop, lived. The lodgers occupied rooms one on top of the other. There was another large common room, which Plekhanov christened, after his first visit, “The Dive.” In this room there always reigned great disorder. Here coffee was tdken and people dropped in for a talk and smoke. Hence, the name. Thus the short London period of my life commenced. _* * © URING the London sojourn, as well as later in the Geneva pe- riod, I met Zasulich and Martov much more frequently than Lenin. Living in London in the-same flat, and in Geneva usually dining and supping in the same little restaurants, Martov, Zasulich and I met several times a day, whereas each meeting with Lenin, who lived with his family, was in the nature of a small event. *-_ * @ ERA IVANOVNA was an individ- ual person and peculiarly fasct- nating. She wrote very slowly, living thru. genuine pains of creation. “There is a.great deal in Vera Ivan- 1 and not without difficulty, the intri- cate relations which existed among the members of the “Spark” staff. arrived in London, as already said, being very provincial in every re- spect. Up to that time I had never been not only abroad, but even in Petrograd. In Moscow as well as in Kiev I lived only in the Transient prison. The Marxian writers I knew only thru their articles. * * * REMEMBER my atention was at- tracted by several leading articles and sketches in “The Spark,” which, altho unsigned, were written with the pronoun “I,” as, for instance, “in such an issue I said,” “I already wrote about it on such a date,” etc. I in- quired whose articles they were, It appeared they were all by Lenin. One day I remarked to him that it was in my opinion literally inconvenient to employ the pronoun “I” in unsigned articles, “Why inconvenient?” he asked with interest. “Somehow, it is so,” I replied vague- in such a literary method a bit of “ego-centricity,” but in reality the emphasis in his articles, even those that were not signed, was a way of fixing his own line of thinking, be- cause of his uncertainty about a line taken by his close collaborators. * ” a | Hex. there is before us on a small scale that steady, persistent ten- sion towards a goal which breaks {down all conditions, which stops be- fore no formalities, and which is the fundamental characteristic of Lenin, the leader. * a + HE political pilot of the “Spark” ‘was Lenin, but the main publicist strength was Martov. He wrote eas- ily and endlessly in the same way as he talked. Lenin, on the other hand, Spent much time in the library of the British Museum where he pursued theoretical studies. * * * EVERAL months later, already in the weeks preceding the second convention, there burst forth an edi- torial difference between Lenin and Martov on the question of the tac- tics of street demonstrations, more accurately about conflicts with the police. Lenin said: “It is necessary to fogm small armed groups, and it is necessary to teach fighting workmen to combat the po- lice.” _ But Martov was against this. The controversy was taken up by the edi- torial staff. “Will not something like group terror grow out of this?” I said about Lenin’s proposal. It should be recalled chat at that period the struggle against the terrorist tactics of the Socialist-Revolutionists played a big part in our work. . > * SELDOM came across Lenin and Martov engaged in a private con- versation, outside of meetings and conference. Lenin disliked even then long arguments, vague conversations which always turned into gossip and twaddle. This greatest engineer of revolution, not only in politics, but also in his theoretical labors, and of foreign languagés, as well as in his conversation with people, was unfail- ingly possessed of the same idea— his nature was perhaps the most utilitarian which the laboratory of history ever produced. Alongside of Lenin, his nearest co- worker at that time, Martov, already felt himself ill at ease. They were still addressing each other as ‘‘thou.” but in their relations a coolness was clearly manifesting itself. Martov was more vitally interested in the current day and its sensations, in cur- rent literary work, in public and po- lemical activities, in news and con- versations. *> ¢ * ENIN, allowing today to pass be- neath him, penetrated tomorrow with his thought. Martov made in- numerable and frequently brilliant hypotheses, suggestions which he fre- quently forgot himself. Lenin took that which he wanted when he want- ed it. The embellished fragility of Martov’s ideas caused Lenin more than once to shake his head anxious- ly. Not only were there at that time no different political lines in exist- ence, but they were not even in sight. Only now, looking backward, can one trace them, *-_ * ATER, before the split in the see- ond convention, the “Sparkists” ly, for I had no definite ideas on the| divided into “hard” and “soft.” This subject. “I do not find it so,” Lenin said and laughed a little enigmatically. At that time one might have discerned appellation was at first much used, testifying that if there was no-clear dividing line as yet, there was already (Continued on Page 8) nt