The madness of the brave?

A few days ago, a friend called me and asked me to go to participate in a television program in which my good comrade, a good artist, was supposed to be a hero. My function was to act among the defenders of this artist. I refused and was extremely glad when the hero of the program refused. A few days later, she looked (and I swore not to look at the box either in the living) on ​​the network "to the barrier" from the Novodvorskaya and its opponent, little Byaku, I now have no other name for this aunt. She looked and was horrified.

Firstly, the fact that Novodvorskaya was called the leading absolutely specifically for reprisal. Indeed, for Mr. Solovyov, it is no secret that Valeria Ilyinichna honestly and sincerely “is conducted” on provocations. They say to her: well, what else can you say? And she honestly says ... She is thrown in the face of the accusation that she was bought by interested faces, and she begins to explain that she was not bought.

Her interlocutor knows very well where, in what conditions and for what money the family exists of Valeria Ilyinich is in her herself, mother and cat Stasik. I believe that this guest was in the lousy Khrushchev’s lousy Khrushchev. But the audience does not know this and applaud "revelations" with enthusiasm. And Soloviev plays with Novodvorskaya, depicting a kind of loving nephew of a crazy aunt. And he perfectly understands that not his word will remain in the people's memory that Valery Ilyinichna has the right to evaluate, since she herself sat in prison - special psychushka - more than one day. In the memory there will be his mocking “only now you don’t have to die right now in the name of democracy.”

Both Novodvorskaya and its supporter Leo Ponomarev looked sad enough. You will say such supporters of liberal values. But, God forbid what will happen, you will go to these supporters of liberal values ​​for protection, because no one will protect you anymore.

Not once and not two listening to Novodvorskaya, more than once being its interlocutor both on the radio and on television in the old days of the Democrats, I can say for sure that the optimal way of dialogue for Valeria Ilyinichna is short answers. When it does not “start”, but coldly and inexorably draws conclusions from certain events. And when two fighters work against her without rules - she is no polemicist. This is not a drawback, this is a property. It is difficult for me to assume that Mr. Soloviev did not know this properties, it would be unprofessional, and it could not be reproached for unprofessionalism. Therefore, he called her to use it for previously known purposes. And he waved a little Byaka absolutely competently, from time to time pulling her in the most obscene statements.

The result is voting. It seems to me that it was predictable. Because Ham will always defeat the intellectual, his vocal cords are much more powerful. And this victory is half belongs to Mr. Soloviev.

The trouble is that Valeria Ilyinichna will go on the air next time. Since he believes that the stands need to be used as far as possible. I respect her courage and absolute fearlessness, but I do not understand the need to fight the mounting table. After all, the concept of the program is also a mounting table, no matter how it looks released without any editing. From my point of view, Mr. Soloviev manipulated Valeria Ilyinichnaya. It was manipulated with it, and not “was a handle of the position of viewers”, for he himself mentioned the need to sow a reasonable and calling mercy. Neither reasonable nor eternal prevented him from expressing Novodvorskaya, very foul remarks, strictly speaking, not related to the topic of the dispute.

So, the position of Novodvorskaya in this matter - you need to accept any invitation, even to hell with your teeth, if you have the opportunity to express your position. Here I want to return to my comrade artist for a while, who, thank God, refused to participate in the television program, where he was called the hero. In addition to me, the list was much better famous people, fans of his work. Preliminary negotiations showed: none of them will go to this host of Channel One. They do not want to waste time and effort on looking in the end on the screen as the host wants and will make the editor.

I understand their position - winning in the fight against the mounting table is impossible. But I can’t decide who is right? A person who considers it necessary to convey his thoughts and feelings to compatriots even under the threat of distortion and turning out these feelings and thoughts inside out? Or a person who does not want to replenish the ranks of statists in someone else's opera?

In favor of the latter, I can say that Yeshua Ga-Notsri was horrified to hear Levi Matvey interprets his ideas. But Levi Matvey was a supporter ... In addition, an old saying is recalled: do not stand the beads before knowing by whom. And in favor of the first person, the aristocratic rule: do what should, and be what will happen.

And a few more words to those who voted, according to their statement, primarily against the odious Novodvorsk and helpless Ponomarev. I repeat when a terrible thing will happen in your life, these people will help you to the best of their strengths and opportunities. They are so arranged. Maybe that's why now they are so annoying you. They have a lot of shortcomings, they are not angels. Moreover, they are probably not the most powerful defenders, but, with or without errors, with the opposite or direct effect, they will try to do at least something ... otherwise they would not have flogged, knowing what the result will be. Perhaps they look somewhat sorry, but the point is that they are not afraid of this, and this is worthy of respect.