Olzhas Suleimenov, a poet, writer and literary critic, a Kazakh public and political activist, and a diplomat, was born on May 18, 1936, in Almaty into the family of an officer of a Kazakh cavalry regiment repressed in 1937. Suleimenov is regarded as a poet of the sixties. His friends were three pillars of those years: Andrey Voznesensky, Yevgeny Yevtushenko, and Robert Rozhdestvensky. Suleimenov’s poems were translated into English, French, German, Spanish, Czech, Polish, Slovakian, Bulgarian, Hungarian, Mongolian, and Turkish. In 1975 he published a book of literary criticism entitled Az i Ya. Kniga blagonamerennogo chitatelia (Az and Ya. The Book of a Loyal Reader). This book provoked a negative reaction of Moscow and was forbidden. The author did not publish anything for eight years and nearly stopped writing poetry.
In 1989 Suleimenov became an initiator and leader of the national movement “Nevada – Semipalatinsk” whose goal was to have the Semipalatinsk nuclear testing area and other nuclear testing areas of the world shut down. In 1995–2002 Suleimenov was the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Kazakhstan to Italy, as well as to Greece and Malta. Since 2002 he has been Kazakhstan’s permanent representative in the UNESCO. His books include such titles as Earth, Bow Down to Human!, Argamaks, Sunny Nights, A Night-Parisian, Good Time of the East, A Year of Monkey, A Clay Book, Over White Rivers, and A Round Star. In the interview the author of the banned book Az i Ya spoke about his viewpoint on the “Eurasian theory,” censorship, Kazakh literature, and rapprochement between peoples.
Mr. Suleimenov, how popular is the “Eurasian theory” in Kazakhstan? In what ways is it similar and dissimilar to the Russian “Eurasianism”?
“Of course, the interpretation of the term currently given in Russia is different from the Kazakh interpretation. It is aimed at the denial of Atlanticism and all things Western. For example, there is some Dugin who calls himself a Eurasianist and insists on such tendencies. The Kazakh “Eurasian theory” presupposes cooperation and involves Eurasia from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. In other words, we are for cooperation, not confrontation. That is why we are against the Bolshevik categorical principle “either… or.” We are for the Christian Orthodox principle “both… and”: both East and Europe, as well as Asia and the whole world. We want to be comprehensible to each other and to the entire world.”
You are a poet and a public activist; for a while you were a parliamentarian. What is, after all, spiritually closer to you?
“A person who is a writer and a poet is a public activist anyway. Since one writes not for oneself, but for the society, one wants to find not only listeners or readers, but people who understand and accept ideas, discoveries. The writer tries to disseminate his or her own personal ideas, thus forming the consciousness of the society. Each of us has our own model, and some manage to spread this model, while others remain in closed space. That is why I change genres, write not only poetry but also political essays, and participate in international activity.”
The Ukrainian and Kazakh peoples are united by the historic memory of common tragedies, above all, the 1932—1933 Holodomor. One can assume that in Ukraine not everything is known about the tragedy of famine in Kazakhstan, while it may well be so that in Kazakhstan not all people know about the Ukrainian Holodomor. What should be done for the mutual pain to make our peoples closer and help them choose a correct way in the future?
“In Paris I met with prominent Ukrainian diplomats when the UNESCO resolution regarding the Holodomor was being discussed. We then pointed out that it is necessary to speak with compassion about this tragedy and not only here in Ukraine, but also in the Volga region and Kazakhstan. Since Kazakhs lost a lot in those fatal years – a third of our population perished!”
Unfortunately, contemporary and classic Kazakh culture is not fully represented in Ukraine. In your opinion, what books should be translated into Ukrainian, and what names are worth being introduced to our readers?
“For example, Abay Kunanbayev’s works have been translated into Ukrainian. Currently, unfortunately, a certain slowdown is taking place in Kazakhstan. If young, new names appear, they do so in very unnoticeable way, so even I do not always notice them. We will wait for new geniuses.”
You talk a lot about rapprochement of peoples, but it is not only culture. What is rapprochement of peoples in a global understanding? How close can relations be between Ukrainians and Kazakhs?
“Rapprochement of consciousness is what is important, because we understand the good and evil in the same way. If we evaluate such things in the same way and if our consciousness gets closer, this will help us solve mutual problems. Ukrainians and Kazakhs have somewhat similar mentality. Generally, Slavic people and Kazakhs are close in their worldview.”
Your book has been said to be an equal to The Gulag Archipelago in that it brought the perestroika nearer. Do you agree with this opinion?
“This is what western authors wrote; they enumerated five books which formed a special consciousness of the Soviet Union people, and thus brought the perestroika closer. They named my book among them.”
In Soviet times you were pressured from all sides. Perhaps, there is no other book that endured so many attacks as your Az i Ya. Now there is no censorship. When is it easier for you to write?
“In the past everyone said that censorship prevented people from writing. And now that there has been no censorship for 20 years, have many great works appeared in literature? No. Censorship (if it is not so lethal as it was under Stalin) facilitates the development of literature and culture. Under the Stalin regime this was, of course, impossible. Censorship at the time was like concrete that covers grass and prevents sprouts from shooting.
“In our literature we need a kind of a censorship, at least the ethical kind. In my time there were a few ‘no’s’ – no to propaganda of violence, pornography, religion, war, and anti-Soviet issues. Well, today anti-Soviet themes are not possible, but we can introduce several taboos from which our culture can benefit.”
How do you assess the changes that happened in Ukraine for the last five years?
“Presidents are often replaced here, unlike in our country. Yesterday I talked to one of my Ukrainian friends who is a writer. He said it is good in Kazakhstan because there has been one president for a long time, while Ukraine has elections every two to three years; the society becomes stratified and distracted from urgent problems. A regular change of government and struggle for power is good for stable societies with strong economies; they do not fall down because of this.
“In the transition period where we and you are now, we should keep what we have achieved and not throw it in the cauldron of another perturbation. The experience of Kazakhstan is in its own way attractive to Ukraine. Kazakhstan looks at Ukraine with interest, but sometimes with fear. Now everyone is waiting for January 17 – everyone is trying to guess who will win and whether Ukraine will benefit as a result. Surely, it will affect people. And we cannot be indifferent to you.”
