“Bourgeois nonsense”: why Soviet censorship banned Kornei Chukovsky’s “The Mуха-Цокотуха”

One of the most popular children’s poems that every child today knows by heart was under suspicion from Soviet officials and educators at the moment of its birth. Kornei Chukovsky’s “The Mуха-Цокотуха”, written in 1923, did not just fail to reach readers immediately — it was officially banned by censorship and subjected to destructive 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 the party circles? And how did this small masterpiece survive in the face of ideological pressure?

First publication and immediate scandal

In 1923, Kornei Chukovsky first read his new fairy tale to friends and acquaintances. The audience was delighted: rhythmic lines, vivid images, catchy rhymes — it seemed that this was the perfect reading for babies. However, the first attempt to publish “The Mуха-Цокотуха” encountered an insurmountable obstacle. The Provincial Department of Literature and Publishing (Gublit), which performed the functions of censorship, categorically refused to give permission for publication. A record of Chukovsky’s conversation with the Gublit employee Lyudmila Bystrova is preserved in his diary, who explained to the writer that the illustrations to the fairy tale were “improper”: the mosquito is standing too close to the fly, they “flirt”. “As if there is a child so corrupt that the proximity of the fly to the mosquito would provoke licentious thoughts,” Chukovsky wrote with bitterness. But this was just the beginning.

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

The attack of Khrushchev: “chukovshchina” as an ideological enemy

The main accuser of Kornei Chukovsky was Nadezhda Konstantinovna Khrushchev, 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 huge weight. Khrushchev poured criticism on Chukovsky, calling his fairy tales “nonsense” and “disrespect to the child”. She claimed that Chukovsky’s works were not only useless but also harmful because they “do not reflect Soviet life”.

Even a special term arose among party critics and editors — “chukovshchina”. This word denoted all the writer’s creativity that was considered alien to the proletarian ideology. Khrushchev and her allies blamed Chukovsky that “The Mуха-Цокотуха” “undermines children’s faith in the triumph of the collective”, it expresses “sympathy for kulak ideology”, it praises “petty bourgeois” and “kulak accumulation”. It seems that where can one find kulaks in a children’s fairy tale about a fly and a mosquito? However, Soviet educators were able to read between the lines even of what was never there.

“Bourgeois” birthdays and suspicious weddings

One of the most absurd points of the accusation was the word “birthday”. The deputy head of Gublit, Lyudmila Bystrova, explained to Chukovsky that birthdays were a “bourgeois holiday”. 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 the dying and outdated forms of life on the surface”. Birthdays are not just a birthday, 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 Mуха-Цокотуха” end with a wedding — and this also caused a heated reaction. “Literary newspaper” saw in the happy wedding of the mosquito and the ant “idealization of the petty bourgeoisie”. One of the critics 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 ideologues, the fairy tale teaches children “kulak accumulation” and glorifies private property. In a country where communism was being built, this was unpardonable.

Collective letter from the Kremlin kindergarten

The climax of the persecution was a collective letter published in 1929 in the magazine “Preschool Education”. It was signed by “parents of the children of 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 chukovshchina” and claimed that all of Chukovsky’s fairy tales were not only bad but also harmful to children. They accused the author of developing superstition and fears, praising “petty bourgeois” and “kulak accumulation”, and giving “incorrect ideas about the world of animals and insects”.

For Chukovsky, this was a terrible blow. In his diary, he wrote: “So, my ‘Crocodile’ is banned, ‘The Mуха-Цокотуха’ is banned, ‘The Ant’ will be banned tomorrow”. One after another, his works were falling under the censorial pressure, even “Barmaley” and “Aibolit”.

Political subtext: the mosquito, the fly, and suspicious hints

The peculiar thing about the situation was that the censors saw a political subtext in the characters of the fairy tale. According to Bystrova, Komarik is a “disguised prince”, and Mуха is a “princess”. And this already sounded like anti-Soviet propaganda: since princes and princesses are symbols of monarchy, the old world that was destroyed by the revolution. It turned out that Chukovsky, without wanting to, was propagating “bourgeois” values and idealizing the old order.

An anecdote was circulating among the people about how Chukovsky tried to publish “The Mуха-Цокотуха”, 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 is lying around on the collective farm field; and Andropov interrupted before he could read the first line: “What’s going on with the Central Committee?!” This anecdote, like any sharp folk creation, accurately reflected the absurdity of Soviet censorship, capable of seeing counter-revolution even in an innocent children’s fairy tale.

“The Mуха-Цокотуха” survives and becomes a classic

Despite all the bans and persecution, “The Mуха-Цокотуха” survived. In 1927, the fairy tale was published under its modern name. Later, with the relaxation 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 cheerful, mischievous, musical fairy tale was considered “bourgeois nonsense” and an instrument of the ideological enemy.

The history of “The Mуха-Цокотуха” is the story of how literature can resist the pressure of the system, even when it seems that all doors are closed. Chukovsky did not rewrite his fairy tales to please the censorship, did not cross out “suspicious” insects and did not replace “birthdays” with “birthday”. He simply continued to write — for children, for eternity, for those who can hear not politics but joy, fantasy, and kindness in poetry. And today, when we read to children about the Mуха-Цокотуха and her brave savior-ant, we even do not suspect that this little book has gone through hell to get into our hands.

Permanent link to this publication: