"Parasha play": From letters about the hunger strike 1980

Valery Abramkin / Photo: Archive of the International Memorial

Valery Fedorovich Abramkina’s dotted place (1946–2013) is quite standard for the Moscow intellectual: work in the Research Institute, the author’s song (was even the commandant X of the rally of an amateur song club in 1971), reading and spreading samizdat, then from Vera Matveeva moved to Galich ... since 1978 - a member of the editorial board of the samizhda magazine “Search”, which we called would be socio-political and art, and the participants simply called it “free”. On December 4, 1979, Abramkin was arrested. The accusation was based not only by editing the magazine, but also by the article “Is there anything on earth” about the court over human rights activist Alexander Ginzburg. On October 4, 1980, Abramkina was sentenced to three years of camps, a new business was also aroused during the imprisonment, and another three years were added. Abramkin left the camp with tuberculosis, a good knowledge of the rules of the criminal world and the desire to reform this Gulag system. In 1989, he founded the Public Center for Promoting the Reform of Criminal Justice, which still helps prisoners.

For those who are not very familiar with prison realities, we give a detailed comment as an afterwood.

Play in the parach

The text is subjected to slight correction. The names of the cellmates, according to the desire of the relatives of Abramkin, are given in abbreviation. Comments inside the text belong to Katya Abramkina.

<...> It all started with a balilander, or, in the event of a scoop, a scoop [so called prisoners who spread "food" in cameras] that transports Balanda into huts. This scoop previously fueled the guys with a balanda addition in a couple of cigarettes per day. And suddenly, as if getting close to me, he stopped heating and refused to cigarette. This all somehow slipped away from my attention due to “grandiose” plans: write a play from prison life, where all the action will develop in the same cell + in one walking courtyard, of course, with shy voices and faces that look into the peephole and feeding trough. The plot was already pushing, but the intrigue seemed obviously pale, there was not enough conflict. And here they added it to me. The day after the strange behavior of the scoop, I felt a kind of chill from the side of the cellmates, but attributed him to his rejection of the morning poker: the play occupied me more and more. I went to walk with G., V. and Yu. She remained in the cell to discuss, as it turned out later, my fate. And after the walk, the same scoop (another “accident” - he worked for the second day in a row, while they usually change every other day) threw a note: “Guys! The bearded is a bad person! " And all, there was nothing more there. Yes, another nuance. I noticed that the “scoop” wanted to convey something, held out his hand, I see that it was not for me, he jerked from the feeder with his bowl and turned away. It seemed to me natural: since the matter does not concern you, it is better not to be curious and not to look.

The note was demonstrated to me, demanding explanations. But here I did not enter the seriousness of the moment (the thought flashed: this is what to put the basis of the main conflict! A note thrown into the camera!). He did not enter and laughed: what, they say, the demand is from me - a scoop and ask. And then a cool conversation went, ending that I nearly traveled around the muzzle of V. and boiled by Yu. I did not take into account, and I had no complaints about them, the first in nature, the second most likely were freaks. And this forty -year -old Borov just knocked me out with his stupidity. Just (a day ago) he was frank with me, God shared the news than, and then he went like a kid to play stupid games. All this looked stupid and vile.

The first analysis was built on arguments, for me simply incomprehensible. For no reason, such notes will not be thrown into the camera. Lord, ”I tell them,“ the whole prison is known that every second scoop, if not more often, the bastard, and works for the opera. Why does the opera need this? And here I could not really explain anything to them. It didn’t reach them why. They did not see this and did not hear no matter how much they sat. (“No matter how much I sit,” Yu.) The scoop was afraid to take cigarettes, and I shugged from him so that he would not recognize me ... No logic helps. They demanded a guarantor from me. Victor? [1] Victor is not suitable, he knows me by the will, I need a prison guarantor. And where did I get it if all my previous cellmates remained on the other side of the corridor ... It was not very good to end. One against the three, and even such a weight category, I would not have to be exhausted. But either the shatterness of their arguments, or my confidence was prevented by the resolution of the conflict. I was asked to break from the hut. I did not break, and at four in the afternoon I calmly asked the corps to transfer me to another camera. For reliability, he reinforced his demand by the declaration of a hunger strike. The corps refused to transfer me, promising to report to the authorities. He reported for a long time. Before the end, I was taken to the corridor to the officer on duty. I repeated my request, abandoning the details of the conflict. And then the duty officer talked. He himself, they say, cannot solve this issue (lied, the dog, as he can), and we must wait for the decision of the highest authorities. “However,” he added with a malicious one, “if you have to be bad, hit the door, we will put you in boxing.” So this is what they achieve - so that I break from the hut and confirmed the legend of the hen for the whole prison! I had to explain to me that even if they would kill me, I'm not going to break, but I will have to answer for the consequences. At the same time, he repeated again about the hunger strike ...

Perhaps these were the most difficult days in my prison life. Continue analysis and smear dirt? God with her, let him dry - he will move easier. For all these days, I did not utter a word. These three, who did not interrupt for a minute of their rumble, seemed to have no existence for me. I was lying all day on the skeleton and “read” Turgenev. The lines jumped before my eyes, not wanting to connect into some meaningfulness. I felt sorry for myself, like a little boy, vilely offended for nothing. It was just right to repent of all your prison sins: for a sharp word thrown in a fever, the staleness and indifference, insufficient participation in the troubles of the neighbors, for bad thoughts about others, etc., etc. But with all the desire it was difficult to gain sins for such a punishment. God! for what? Well, let the punishment cell, still some kind of jerk. But is this conviction of people living next to you in your meanness and corruption?

However, outwardly this was not expressed in anything. Unless he threw a bit of gray hair (the smallest, then saw) into the hair, but again, after a three -month break, he began to smoke. I immediately broke the play (sketch). From superstition. It seemed as if he himself had a “conflict”. Continue it further with my tendency to tragic interchanges - Lord Lord.

And what saved me? Well, firstly, these three with glazed eyes that let go of flat hints in my direction. Secondly, Victor, with whom I talked every day and kept him in the course of events. And, of course, the “drink of the chronos” [memories of the previous (before arrest) life]. I remembered all our joyful May days. Especially for some reason, 75, a trip to St. Petersburg ... [In May 1975, Valery Abramkin, together with his wife (at that time of the future), went to Leningrad to collect materials for the Samizdat collection of works by Daniil Harms.]

Vertukhai did not wait for entertainment. I did not break from the camera. On May 4 and 5, he gave two statements for a cut [2] with the announcement of an unlimited hunger strike before transferring me to another camera. In the statements, I clearly indicated that the conflict was provoked from the outside, and assigned possible consequences to our colonel.

All these days, outwardly, I was more calm than ever. He fell asleep as usual, immediately after the end of the end (he did not pretend, but really fell asleep), jumped up at six in the morning, did a lightweight charging, walked, read, wrote, walks, however, had to be canceled (they were not laid for a hunger strike). And the results were not slow to affect. On May 5, a sharp fracture came in the mood of my cellmates. Firstly, the fact that they are not taken from the camera after the holidays, but they are not touched, did not fit with the version that I am a hen. Secondly, we were taken to the bathhouse, and Yu., Slowing down, while we went out into the corridor, asked the guy from the Hozo-Services about me, and he (as I found out after) was stunned and said that Yu. Crazy (the guy also remembered how they wore me [on the first day of staying in the “Butyrka” of Abramkin, they shaved the willy and shaved a burgundy. Since the investigated prisoners should not be equated to the convicts even in appearance, he naturally resisted. Thirdly, my behavior did not fit in in any way with how an exposed informant should behave. Fourth, the fifth, the “messenger” looked at me from one of our guys and asked to prepare Xiva. Now other hints have already gone: they say, it would not be bad to arrange a redundancy, but I have not reacted to these hints. The sour on the faces of my judges did not please me. For myself, I firmly decided to stay in this cell in any turn in this cell.

The sixth was pulled to the opera. He showed pretty good awareness in the anatomy of the conflict. I gave me a lecture on my poor behavior in prison, that I was not in my affairs, I download my rights and, “in accordance with the instructions received from the will” I expose their employees (assumed, a seedlings). I refused to discuss any issues with him, except for transfer to other camera. The opera took it abruptly and said that such stories, if I do not change my mind, will wait for me here in prison, at a shipment, in the zone. It was not difficult to understand what they wanted from me: repentance and promises to be a cord. And then they will blackmail the seeding history, its development. And whether Burtsev should connect at this stage [3] [investigator in the case of the magazine “Search”] and Co. For all this I showed the captain (this time I spoke with me not an ordinary bribe, but Kum [kum - an operational worker], a rank higher) a cultural cook. The opera was completely infuriated, he promised that I would sit in this cell until the end of the term, that the doctor would check on the 7th day of the hunger strike, would I (by the smell of acetone), and in case of deception they will put me in the punishment cell. At the same time, Kum showed good awareness of our conversations with Victor, promising to punish us both.

While I was absent, there was a redesigning in the cell. The guys apologized very touchingly, asked to forget everything and remove the hunger strike. I, as best I could not offend them, explained that I am now holding a hunger strike not because of them, but because of the opera, and therefore I can’t remove it.

On the same day, they pulled from the hut of G. as if to the investigator (although he had just, with me, closed it). Returning, G. showed his donkey ears, singing after the opera that it is better for me not to blame and take off the hunger strike, otherwise they will get, and they can throw me into another hut, say, to the common fund, where, with such information with me, they will not speak. All this, of course, is very easy, friendly. But it was easiest for me to deal with this “adviser” (in the same soft and friendly tone). Yu. From V., they were completely sad and said that since they are to blame for everything, they would join my hunger strike in the morning. G. nothing had left, how to show solidarity. <...>

True, he added that if the hut is dispersed, I will be to blame. I had to put all the points over I. My hunger strike is my own business. After an apology to them, I have no complaints, but I do not advise them to starve.

In the morning, the whole camera refused to take soldering, sugar and porridge. After half an hour, operas (all the same captain) began to pull us on a circle (into the corps booth) one at a time.

Afterword

The text of Abramkin describes a rather dangerous situation. A note was transmitted to the camera from which the cellmates concluded that Abramkin is a snuff. Then follows the analysis in which at first Abramkin does not want to take part (and if you do not deny the accusation, then I agree with them). Abramkin needed a prison guarantor. This provocation could have several goals: to make Abramkin start a fight and hang additional accusations on him, or so that the cellmates beat him, or he began to “break from the hut” - this would confirm that he was a snitch (according to unwritten rules, under intra -charming conflicts, one cannot turn to the administration for help). The hunger strike was Abramkin’s natural protest against this provocation. Later, when the situation was clarified, the cellmates began to demand the redescents, because their accusations were not confirmed and Abramkin had the right to satispulation. But he did not participate in this prison procedure.

The prison administration began to persistently hint to Abramkin so that he removes the hunger strike. He was threatened, on the one hand, by sanctions against cellmates (which, in turn, began to put pressure on Abramkin), on the other hand, through cellmates, by translation “to the common fund”. This would mean a translation into a common camera for several dozen people, where the only way to prove that you are not a informer is to kill the one who accuses you of this. As a result, those cellmates who continued to feel the guilt for false accusations joined the hunger strike of Abramkin. This also made the fourth cellmate follow their example, so as not to arouse suspicions of working for the prison administration.

[1] Sokirko Victor Vladimirovich (1939–2018), economist (Moscow). He published a samizdat collection “In Defense of Economic Freedoms” (1978–1981). Member of the editorial board of the magazine "Search" (1979–1980). Political prisoner (1980, sentenced to 3 years conditionally). Chairman of the Protection Service of convicted business executives and economic freedoms (1989–2001).

[2] Career Georgy Antonovich (b.1919) - Head of Butyrsky Prison (1967–1983).

[3] Burtsev Yuri Antonovich (b. 193?) - senior investigator of the Moscow city prosecutor's office. He conducted cases of members of the editorial board of the magazine "Search" (1979–1981), members of the free inter -professional association of workers (1982).