In the Kremlin

Anthropology and interpretation

October 14, 2015 Sergey Mitrofanov

They say that Putin made a mistake by slipping into Syria, and that through this he will have a collapse of the regime. Oh, you would drink honey with your lips . In fact, Putin or “who advises him there” brought out the entire domestic policy with “negative growth rates”, with the endangered population beyond the borders of the Russian state, and the ones are happy. And even beyond the borders of Ukraine, somewhere in the water area of ​​the Caspian Sea.

We no longer have domestic politics, there was only a military presentation. The generals became our main New Smakers, and the time for flying and the accuracy of the deadly blank, its tactical-technical data, and slaughter force-the main topic under discussion.

Undoubtedly, this is a great victory of Putin and Putinism in our country. She shifts the problem of abstract morality of the post -Soviet man from the “world” and “pity people” to “how many random righteouss are permissible to kill in order to achieve our military advanced”. And the final answer is far from clear. After all, we don’t think that we are seriously that our ultra -precise missiles are really ultra -ultra -super -precisely separated by the terrorists who have settled in a separate house, say, from an ordinary shawarma manufacturer or from a child running past? However, the forest is chopped, chips fly, this is understandable. War is generally a very narrow range where you can freely polemize. And I want, but how?

Suddenly succeeded. The occasion brought reports that part of the missiles released according to Igilovskaya (banned in the Russian Federation) group in Syria fell into Iran, on the head of a situational ally of Russia. There is nothing particularly sensational in this routine news. Rockets are not a scalpel in the hands of a multi -experienced surgeon. The Americans just bombed the hospital in Afghanistan. They admitted, apologized, began negotiations on compensation. It happens, but there is little good too.

So here, you think, four out of twenty -six Russian missiles flew to Iran! Not in the capital and not on the main imam! However, there was an occasion to be striking the rear Russians. Some feel the absurdity of war, thought about its meaning. Others supported the general line, whatever it consisted of. Although we can naturally cannot check what really happened there, we - both. Russian society does not have household remedies of missile control.

In other words, where rockets fell is a matter of pure faith or pure trust, which are distributed according to the inner algorithm. If there are two messages - from the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, that everything is fine, and from the head of the Pentagon , which is not all, then the answer to the question of whom we trust more is more likely to the field of worldview and historical memory. Stalinist conservatives, of which now, are obviously proceeding from the fact that the Russian missile is never mistaken, as the NKVD investigators have never been mistaken, how the leader of the peoples was never mistaken, how the current national leader is never mistaken. In contrast, the liberal-West comes from the old, like the Bible, anthropological observation that the truth in Russia has never told the people.

She was not said when Kursk was drowning, nor when polite people fought in Ukraine, nor when they knocked Boeing. The logic of justification for non -true is an attribute of social comfort, as our liberal thinks. Is it worth it to be surprised that then he concludes that civilization, where for centuries there are influential media, independent justice and where they appreciate an uncomplicated view of things, is more accurate in their messages than the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, to whom to sell these missiles in the third world? But the reason is not as important as the fact that this situational disagreement exposes a more serious split that has gone deep into the centuries. Between the tradition of the serf peasant, justifying the master and basal, and the rebellious tradition of the escaped slave, the “irrevocable”.

The same in essence the split showed himself in the case of the awarding of the Belarusian writer Aleksievich Nobel Prize in Literature.

In no way, I do not want to replace the Nobel Committee, domestic literary critics and go into the artistic advantages or disadvantages of the work of the Belarusian writer. From an anthropological point of view, a wave of denial of the decision of the Norwegian Committee by a significant part of the “serfs” of Russian society is more interesting. Although, it would seem, well, the Norwegian committee - does he not have the full right to proceed from his “Norwegian” preferences, and here, in fact, you?

But they wrote that the Alekseevich Prize ... killed the Nobel tradition. And now, after Aleksievich, nobody will need it, such as it will wallow on the street - no one will pick up. And that this is an informational bomb in the direction of Russia to sow ideological discord. As if we have not enough discord. As if in the distant Norway there is a matter for which Ivan beats Peter in the Donbass.

The egoism and egocentrism of the Russian “serf” proved itself to fully in his holy confidence that the West as a social organization, including in the person of its satrap committees, exists exclusively for the sake of it and around it - at least in the form of wrecking.

As the writer Prilepin witly remarked : “This is a prize - it is from a tremendous sense of humiliation. First, this Olympics, then Crimea, then actually wasted from the territory of Ukraine the DPR and LPR. Now Syria. Bombs from the Caspian Sea fly where they want. Where they order, or rather. It is necessary to answer somehow. ”

Barowned and answered bombs, however, weakly. Just a literary prize, moreover, for some reason issued by a practically fellow tribe, Putin and Lukashenko. And it’s funny that the situation is similar to what was happening around the award to Boris Pasternak for Dr. Zhivago. Then, too, everyone violently disagreed at first, but then, after three decades, they seemed to be reconciled. Although it is not a fact that they would have given a Pasternaku prize today and would understand the arguments of the Norwegian Committee.

Imagine ... After all, what is a “doctor of Zhivago” from the point of view of contemporary Zakhar Prilepin? Almost a ladies' novel. About love. But the written was loose, hard, without a clear plot. It is impossible to retell it, the torment of a doctor. In addition, burdened with long philosophical reasoning, which no one needs for nothing today. However, in order to understand the logic of the Nobel Committee, one should go back to the Soviet past, and imagine what all the so -called Soviet literature was then.

To some extent, it was also a full-flowing polyphonic river, like any other literature in the world. It had its own bestsellers - with millions of print runs. Romanes, plays, novels, poems, even wonderful in their own way ... Scenarios were written, films were shot. But all this was united by one small flaw, one strange property - they completely absent a description of a person at the point of contact with political reality. There was completely no human assessment of what was happening in the country, revolution, regime, what happened as a result. The merit of Pasternak is that he, being inside the Soviet rules of behavior, filled this gap, showed a hitherto unknown hero - a reflective intellectual, and thereby immortalized himself.

Time passed, oddly enough, but to some extent Aleksievich did the same as Boris Pasternak. As a writer, she thought about the moral assessment of the post -Soviet (“Russian” world, about where he is going and where he will come - that almost no one else is done in modern literature. There is the same strange white spot today as before the Doctor Zhivago. What we want as civilization, tormenting and burning resources is unknown. I do not guarantee that Aleksievich fully happened, but it is symbolic that the Nobel Committee with a stunning sensitivity for our time managed to react to her writer's feat. And so, yes, you are right, still a little deepened our split.



Photo:
1. Syria. 10.10.2015. Russian troops at the Khmeimim airfield. TASS
2. Germany, Berlin. 10/10/2015. The press conference of the Nobel Prize 2015 Laureate in the literature of the Belarusian writer Svetlana Aleksievich in Berlin. Kay nietfeld / dpa / TASS