“Bourgeois Nonsense”: Why Soviet Censorship Banned Kornei Chukovsky’s “The Muffin”

One of the most popular children's poetry fairy tales known by every child today was under suspicion from Soviet officials and educators at the moment of its birth. Kornei Chukovsky’s “The Muffin,” written in 1923, did not just fail to reach readers immediately—it was officially banned by censorship and subjected to devastating criticism from the highest authorities. Why did such an innocent story about a fly finding a coin and throwing a birthday party provoke such anger in party circles? And how did this little masterpiece survive in the face of ideological pressure?

The First Publication and the Immediate Scandal

In 1923, Kornei Chukovsky first read his new fairy tale to friends and acquaintances. The audience was thrilled: rhythmic lines, vivid images, resounding rhymes—seemed like the perfect reading for children. However, the first attempt to publish “The Muffin” hit an insurmountable obstacle. The Provincial Department of Literature and Publishers (Gublit), performing the functions of censorship, categorically refused to grant permission for publication. A record of Chukovsky’s conversation with the Gublit employee Lyudmila Byストrova is preserved in his diary, who explained to the writer that the illustrations for the fairy tale were “improper”: the gnat stands too close to the fly, they “flirt.” “As if there is a child so morally corrupt that the proximity of the fly to the gnat would provoke licentious thoughts,” Chukovsky wrote in despair. But this was just the beginning.

In 1924, the fairy tale was finally published—however, under the changed title “Mushina’s Wedding” and with cuts. However, this version did not give peace to the ideological guardians either. A real campaign against “The Muffin” unfolded later, and it involved not only ordinary censors but also the most influential figures in Soviet pedagogy and politics.

The Attack of Kryukovskaya: “Chukovskianism” as an Ideological Enemy

The main accuser of Kornei Chukovsky was Nadezhda Konstantinovna Kryukovskaya, the widow of Lenin. She was not just the wife of the leader; she stood at the origins of the Soviet system of popular education and upbringing. And her opinion on children's books had great weight. Kryukovskaya launched a fierce attack on Chukovsky, calling his fairy tales “nonsense” and “disrespectful to the child.” She claimed that Chukovsky’s works were not just useless but harmful because they “do not reflect Soviet life.”

A special term even emerged among party critics and editors—“Chukovskianism.” This word denoted all the writer’s work considered alien to the proletarian ideology. Kryukovskaya and her allies blamed Chukovsky that “The Muffin” “undermines children’s faith in the triumph of the collective,” expresses “sympathy for kulak ideology,” and praises “petty bourgeoisie and kulak accumulation.” It seemed that where could one find kulaks in a children's fairy tale about a fly and a gnat? However, Soviet educators were able to read between the lines even that which was never there.

“Bourgeois” Birthdays and Suspicious Weddings

One of the most absurd points of accusation was the very word “birthday.” The Deputy Head of Gublit, Lyudmila Byストrova, explained to Chukovsky that birthdays were a “bourgeois festival.” In the new Soviet society, where the church was separated from the state and old traditions were declared relics of the past, any mention of birthdays was perceived as an attempt to “keep on the surface of life the dying and outdated forms of life.” Birthdays are not just a day of birth, but a festival associated with the Orthodox calendar, with the name of a saint. Therefore, everything associated with them automatically fell under suspicion.

However, the critics went further. The birthdays in “The Muffin” end with a wedding, and this also caused a heated reaction. “Literary Gazette” saw the happy wedding of the Gnat and the Fly as the idealization of the petty bourgeoisie. One critic wrote: “What do these verses say? About the power of money.” Indeed, the story begins with the fly finding a coin and going to the market—so, according to the ideologists, the fairy tale teaches children “kulak accumulation” and glorifies private property. In a country where communism was being built, this was unpardonable.

A Collective Letter from the Kremlin Kindergarten

The culmination of the persecution was a collective letter published in 1929 in the journal “Preschool Education.” It was signed by “parents of children in the Kremlin kindergarten.” These were not ordinary people—they represented the elite of Soviet society, and their voice was extremely significant. In the letter, they called for “fighting against Chukovskianism” and declared that all of Chukovsky’s fairy tales were not just bad but harmful to children. They accused the author of developing superstition and fears in children’s books, praising “petty bourgeoisie and kulak accumulation,” and giving “incorrect representations of the world of animals and insects.”

For Chukovsky, this was a terrible blow. In his diary, he wrote: “So, my ‘Crocodile’ is banned, ‘The Muffin’ is banned, ‘The Ant’ will be banned tomorrow.” One after another, his works fell under the censorial press, even “Barmaley” and “Aybolit.”

Political Subtext: The Gnat, the Fly, and Suspicious Allusions

What gave particular piquancy to the situation was that the censors saw a political subtext in the characters of the fairy tale. According to Byストrova, the Gnat is a “disguised prince,” and the Fly is a “princess.” This already sounded like anti-Soviet propaganda: for princes and princesses are symbols of monarchy, that old world which was destroyed by the revolution. It turned out that Chukovsky, without even realizing it, was propagating “bourgeois” values and idealizing the old order.

A joke was circulating among the people about how Chukovsky tried to publish “The Muffin,” coming for approval to each of the leaders. Lenin stopped him: “In the Soviet Union, a fly cannot go to the market!”; Stalin was upset that money was lying around on the collective farm field; and Andropov interrupted, not letting him finish the first line: “What are you talking about the Central Committee?!” This joke, like any sharp folk creation, accurately reflected the absurdity of Soviet censorship, capable of seeing counter-revolution even in a harmless children's fairy tale.

“The Muffin” Survives and Becomes a Classic

Despite all the bans and persecution, “The Muffin” survived. In 1927, the fairy tale was published under its modern title. Later, with the weakening of censorship pressure in the 1960s, it was printed in mass editions and entered the golden fund of children's literature. Today, it is hard to imagine that once this joyful, mischievous, musical fairy tale was considered “bourgeois nonsense” and an instrument of an ideological enemy.

The history of “The Muffin” is a story about how literature can withstand the pressure of the system, even when it seems that all doors are closed. Chukovsky did not rewrite his fairy tales to please the censors, did not cross out “suspicious” beetles, and did not replace “birthdays” with “birthdays.” He simply continued to write—for children, for eternity, for those who know how to hear joy, fantasy, and kindness in poetry. And today, when we read to children about the Muffin and her brave rescuer-gnat, we even do not suspect that this little book had to go through hell to get into our hands.

Permanent link to this publication: