Black andnWhite—and RednAll OvernDon’t look for it at the corner newsstandnor in the promotionals fromnPublisher’s Clearing House. Exceptntor professional Soiet watchers, few-nAmericans een know of the existencenof Culture and Life, an “illustratednmonthly magazine of the Union ofnSoviet Societies for Friendship andnCultural Relations with ForeignnCountries, ” published in English.nRussian, French. Spanish, andnGerman at the Izvestia PrintingnWorks. Founded in 1957. C&L promotesninternational appreciation fornthe strength and vitality of Russiannculture. Or at least tries to. If Sovietnweaponry were on a par with theirnpublishing, we could forget all aboutnstar wars.nTechnically, the magazine is primitive.nWhile most American pressesnlong ago converted to offset technology,nC&L is still stuck with the samenletterpress techniques they began withn>7 years ago. The type is dirty, uneven,nand often broken. Photosn— mosdy black and white, with a fewncolor — are cloudy, with no betternthan newspaper resolution. Screensnare ill-aligned, and the proofreadersndeser’e and may get) 10 years innSiberia. The text abounds with hilariousnviolations of English diction, syntax,nand idiom. “The bright gifts ofnYuri Tynyanov were a display of hisnentity and lively interest in the culturenof the new Soviet society,” we are told,nwhile “transferring the arms race intonouter space is something between anSword of Damocles and a PandoranCase.” A sociologist shares “his ideasnabout a research” in which “we offerednwomen to evaluate the behavior andnway of life to their husbands.” If wenliegin to suffer anxieties under thesenassaults on our language, never fear:nthe work of a leading Soviet painterncaresses us with details that “rock voun44/CHRONICLES OF CULTUREnTYPEFACESnto sleep like sea waes, and we graduallynlose the idea about the realit>- ofnour bearings.”nThe reader’s “idea about the realitynof our bearings” does not grow muchnsteadier when he attends to the themesnwhich govern C&L’s pages. In a typicalnarhcle, “The world must remembernits saviours,” X’asily Morozov,n”military observer at the Novosti Pressn.gency and recipient of the USSRnState Prize,” sets the record straight onnhis country’s role in Eastern Europe:nThe liberation of a number ofnEuropean and Asian countriesnbv the Soviet Armed Forces,nand the temporarv presence ofnSoviet troops in their countriesnhad nothing to do with then”exporting” of the socialistnsysterp. It simply providednmore favourable opportunitiesnfor truly democraticndevelopments. The people’sndemocratic and socialistnrevolutions in those countriesnwere prepared by their internalnsituation. They were notn. “imported” on the bayonets ofnthe Soviet troops, as Westernnbourgeois historiography andnpropaganda have been trying tonprove. When we explore thenprerequisites for the revolutionsnin the -liberated countries wenmust always stick’to historicntruth.nNo doubt it is a dogged determinationnto stick to historic truth thatnprompts the editor of a Polish magazinento tell C&L that despite unnamedn”difficult problems,” Poland will remainn”a reliable friend and ally of thenSoviet Union.” “Only in the family ofnthe socialist community nations,” henavers, “can we live and develop as annation, which is totally sovereign, withnthe guaranteed inviability of our frontiers.”nSince this comment was madenin the presence of editors from Hungarynand Czechoslovakia, his point isnclear.nOther contributors—who all writennnin a tone of unrelenting earnestness,nwithout the slightest hint of irony ornplayfulness—are likewise eager to tellnus of the marvels of the Soviet world.nOne hails “the steady growth of wellnbeing” enjoyed by the average Sovietnfamily of four (why, they have a threeroomnapartment and are even savingntowards a car!), while a second laudsnthe humane and ecologically sensitivenoil communities of Siberia. A thirdnwriter interviews a poet and a composernwho pooled talents to produce theninspiring song Cowards Do Not PlaynHockey! Elsewhere in these pages wenfind a portrait of the achievements ofnan Estonian singer who “won greatnpopularity with his Blind Musicianndevoted to three, famous singers: RaynCharles, Jose Feliciano and SteienWonder” (all of apparendy unknownnnationality).nHere and there they do concede thatneverything in Russia is not perfect, atnleast not yet. A Soviet economist admitsnthat love of work is not yet “annorma for every individual in thisncountry” and that the Soviets do “lagnbehind the USA in such spheres as perncapita consumption.” But he is quicknto add that socialism is uniquely suitednfor raising “the importance of labournin the scale of value’ and to explainnaway the absence of consumer goodsnby pointing to “the initially low economicnleel of pre-revolutionary Russianand the ravages of two wars.” Innanother article—surely the best in thenmagazine—a Party demographer concedesnthat “divorce is on the upsurge”nand reports on research to solve thenproblem. His conclusions—whichnpoint the finger at the “negative character”nof “a nagging wife”—shouldngive food for thought for the manynfeminists in this country who havenwedded their cause to the hard left:nI do hope that the reader willnnot gather the impression thatnwe are trying to blame onlynwomen for conflict situations inna family. . . . However, wenwould like to say to women, forn