Fashionable and young

Among the important premieres of October, which I wrote about the last time, there was another one - almost the most important, especially judging by the abundance of articles discussing its advantages and disadvantages. “Gentlemen Golovlev” in the Moscow Art Theater, set by Kirill Serebrennikov, were declared in advance one of the main premiers of the season, largely due to the fact that Evgeny Mironov was appointed for the role of Judas. And Mironov, let's say, in today's theater, is “our everything”. And of course, because of Serebrennikov, not a single step of which is now left without a stormy and biased discussion.

I admit, I just can’t understand the nature of the universal exaltation associated with Serebrennikov. It's not about passionate fans - there are many of them, but in a critical choir their voice is almost not heard. And about the inexplicable and mass irritation that this director causes the theater professionals. God knows that the reason: unexpected and quick success, demand, productivity, lack of professional diploma, self-confident interviews, or something else that is clearly not a theatrical nature. One thing is symptomatic - scolding Serebrennikov, he is always compared with the great figures of the theater, convincingly proving that next to them he is Pigmey. And never - with current colleagues and peers. No other director from his generation is evaluated by critics on such a high account, which is why it turns out that Serebrennikov is alone in the answer for the current state of the Russian theater. But this is by the way. And if you pay attention not to assessments, but only to analysis, it turns out that the articles of qualified critics - both those who love Serebrennikov and those who cannot stand - say the same thing in his new performance.

So. The performance of Serebrennikov turned out to be gloomy and painful. In it, as is often the case with this director, all the undead runs and interferes under his feet - the dead, wrapped in Judas, burst out the jerking girl. Titras are projected onto the walls of the house, as in educational diaphylms: "Golovlevo. Childhood". And the brow-brow-brow in the lowered tights looks directly and devotedly, like a pioneer, in a brownish man easily surrenders the mother of his Nepota brothers, and over the years, like a Komsomol nominee, it becomes an unbearable demagogue with a direct and righteous gaze. As Alena Karas wrote in the Rossiy newspaper: " I would like to call Judas the main character of the Russian myth after the performance, readily recognizing in it politicians and political technologists, ideologists, and the main editors of progressive publications ." The Judas is not a bloodsucker, but an annoying fly-it’s not for nothing that something is so persistently buzzing, a Zhizhita in the Golovlevsky house, and by the end, for those who have not yet understood, Serebrennikov even forces the hero instead of the angel wings, about which he dreamed about, to attach himself to the Mushins.

Talking about the Judas from the Serebrenniki performance, many critics notice another parallel. They write that Evgeny Mironov plays in Judas " a restrained parody of his television prince Myshkin. Having embodied Russian foolishness on the screen in his enlightened version, the actor offers, so to speak, a darkened version of an exclusive national phenomenon " (Roman Dolzhansky, "Kommersant"). Or, as Marina Davydova notes in Izvestia, " he played Anti-Moshkin, creating a terrible double of his screen hero in the Moscow Art Theater ." An amazing manner of baptized, which literally all reviewers, is probably connected with these "Dostoevsky" overtones in the gloomy world of non -humans. Gleb Sitkovsky in the “newspaper”: “ It seems they want to cross themselves, but always miss, as if the Down, trying at the doctor’s appointment to touch the tip of the nose. Judas cuts the air, simply vertically moving his hand from the forehead to the stomach, while others draw the most intricate geometric figures, but still by .” “ Not one makes a whole sign of the whole sign. It seems that someone at least once, and everything around will crumble to dust, as in some kind of film about ghouls ” (Marina Davydova). As a result, it turns out that everyone is clear and the seriousness of the director’s intentions, and the fact that they were not fully realized. Also, good luck is called one voice (except Mironova, Alla Pokrovskaya is the first number in all reviews, who played his mother Golovleva, “ in the course of action, almost physically cringing from the power of the authorized mistress into a miserable trampled cordon ” (Oleg Zintsov, “Vedomosti”). And the problems: those who love Serebrennikov, and those who were not, recognized that the main character is somewhat several Monotonous, and all this gloomy performance requires alterations, so it is better to come to see it later, after a couple of months.

Now about several October-November premieres who did not cause critical battles. Well, firstly, I can’t help but tell about the next performance of my favorite shadow theater, although I understand that the opportunity to visit the performance, designed for four spectators, will not have many. The fact is that the Maya Krasnopolskaya and Ilya Epelbaum presented us with a new work of the Royal Lilikan Theater (whose pompous building is not more than a chest) - now a real classic ballet on an ancient theme called Polypheme Death. And "stars" in it is not anyone, but the soloist of the Bolshoi Nikolai Tsiscaridze. True, out of some sly considerations in the “shadows” they assured that this was last year’s prime minister, but eyewitnesses could not be found, which means that we would consider it fresh. So, under the authors specially written by a whole team (TPO "composer") "classical" music, tiny dolls dance the tragic ballet about the love of Polyphemus for the tiny galatea. About how she laughed at him and sailed away with the Odysseus, and the inconsolable cyclop, blinded by the treacherous Odysseu warriors, dies with grief and ascends to Olympus, where he then teaches angels to dance. From the polypheme that Tsiscaridze "dancing", of course, we can only see our legs, and even then only a little above the ankles - the rest is closed by the upper curtains. But his feet, surrounded by ballerinas, the size of dragonflies, look very convincing. And when the chief prince of the Bolshoi Theater has to curl up in a roll on the bottom of the scene to look into the cave where the soldiers are hiding, and we see it up to the famous hair and the Georgian nose (the eyes are closed by the mask of a cyclops), even skeptics cease to suspect that someone else's, “unzel” legs slipped them.

And in early November, several very symptomatic "youth" productions were shown. Actually, this phenomenon would have to talk separately separately, because now the “Open Scene” municipal program began to actively function, which allows the homeless directors for the little money to put what they want with those actors that they like. Directors and actors most often turn out to be young and want to play for young spectators - in this way you can see how this fresh theatrical shoot is what is interesting, new and fashionable in the theater. If you consider everyone, there could be something like a sociological study. But this is someday later, but for now I’ll talk about several "youth" productions of various origin.

The noisiest of them is “fish -no -we” (it just refers to the “open stage”, which this year arranged a long -playing festival - a review of the performances staged in the program). The Culture Committee, apparently, was not the only source of money spent on "fish". Thus, the play had a good PR, a glossy booklet, a large exhibition in the lobby of fashionable photographers and artists with work on the topics of the metro and sea and many participants, including two actors, DJs and eight musicians. The content of the performance of Teretelis’s currency is a story about a terrorist attack at the Avtozavodskaya station (tells DJ Roman Balachin) plus the story of the dating of a young man and a girl (Alexander Usov and Natalya Moteva) in the subway, which grew into a novel and even a wedding, which, apparently, should look especially fragile against the background of a tragic plot.

This performance gathered in a heap of the whole set of common ideas that it is now fashionable in art. Let's go according to the list: in the art of fashion photography and installations (we put a box - there), in the theater - documentary technique "Verbatim" (there are - teenage dialogues of heroes in the booklet as documentary). The “actual movie” is included (there is - the background of the performance is the shooting in the metro of one of the best authors of the festival “Kinopodar.doc” Andrei Zaitsev). Today it is customary to be socially reserved (eat - look at the plot), you can’t do without club culture (there is - both the DJ and the local Bob Marly - Hera Morales). And a little more “real culture” (there is - Morales sings something in the bard spirit on Brodsky’s words). And all this together has the form of a carefree and meaningless glossy product, which may not have looked so bad on a club stage under a cocktail with conversations, and looks ail in the theater. This is to the question of fashion and gloss.

By the way, the same thoughts came to the head in another performance from the Open Scene, more victorious and more recycled. At the beginning of the season, Konstantin Bogomolov released the Euripid Iphigenia in Avlid. There, the fashion has already been interpreted as the Western theater - on a sharp modernization and reduction of classical texts. Unless here the director did not dare to rewrite the text in today's spirit, and the high poetic syllable of Euripides sounded strangely from the lips of young pizons in stylish three and hats. Without some intonation glamor, they also did not stay here - the director presented Avlid as a southern resort place, placed a picture in the spirit of the 50s with a beach half -naked youth on the program, and the background let out a light praised music.

There is another version of the "youth" performance - claiming not to glamor, but to spirituality (however, also comprehending it in the categories of modity). This kind was the production of the "lord of flies" directed by Alexander Ogarev in Ramt. And the presentation of the history of Golding turned out to be extremely unsuccessful - young actors playing children fell into a squeaky Tyuz manner with exaggerated reactions and gobbled eyes. But it was still hollowing in comparison with the director’s desire to build from a cruel plot - a story about martyrdom. He persistently accompanied the action of the sound of solemn music, projected Christian paintings on the screen and built ridiculous similarities of medieval martyrdom from the actors.

However, okay, I'm not trying to prove at all that all youth performances are not good. Here, for example, Geddu Gabbler, which is now played in the lobby on the fourth floor of the Meyerhold center, is very curious to watch. True, there is nothing specifically youth in it, except that young actors play, and a senior student of the Moscow Art Theater School, Ginkas, Irina Keruchenko, staged a performance. Ibsen's story, shifted a hundred years in advance, in our time, looks quite natural and does not develop primitively. Everything happens in an uninhabited, covered with wrapping paper of a modern house with a glass wall (in the lobby, all this looks very impressive, and the figures of the heroes walking the stairs to the upper floor are thrown through the glass huge shadows on the wall of the neighboring case). And here, in the sensual-lady Gedda (Elena Lyamina), the main thing is not a traditional desire for beauty (she has enough her own, which she constantly goes to admire), but a desire for power. Nothing gives her such pleasure as an understanding that she holds someone's life in her hands.

If you return to the conversation about fashion, it is clear that this Gedda is also made in the manner of a new European theater, about which we have already talked about: rigid modernization and compression (the performance on a massive play is only two hours) plus paradoxical analysis. This style is only mastered by us, and in Europe, where they have not put “costume” productions for a long time, it has long been in use. And just the other day you can verify this - in Moscow the festival of the New European Theater begins, which, by the way, will be closed by the play of the eighteenth century Emilia Galotti, turned by Michael Talhaimer into a modern short and dazzling, like outbreak, a story about love.