Translated material
Release the beast
There were three at the traffic light: a fair -haired pregnant woman, hugging a boy of about six years old, and a man in a dark T -shirt with the inscription “God is with us”. They waited for green light and discussed something. “Zay, you are oh *** la,” the man said a little raising a little voice. "Moron. Close your mouth, ”she answered. The traffic light blinked. The man put a woman's hand on the waist. And everyone went.
There was nothing unusual in the incident. No one shuddered, did not round his eyes, did not begin to sprinkle his head as ash.
The language of hatred is everyday life, a real sign of time along with commercial patriotism, import substitution, large -scale searches, Olympic Sochi, colorful military holidays and monumental Sobyaninsky construction sites.
The language of hatred is now the language in which people communicate in Russia. Not only they call and stigmatize, convict, “wet in the toilet”, “roll into asphalt”, “merge”, “close”, but they simply live: they speak in kitchens, in schools and hospitals, in facebooks, “classmates” and on the forums of platforms for socially active citizens.
The language of hatred has become a public norm. He is legalized by the main trendsetter of the language norm - the media. In the language of hatred, state propagandists and oppositionists are equally successfully broadcast. It's not about the views. The same designs sound on the air of Channel One, Echo of Moscow, Russia and Rain. However, I admit, the biggest surprise was to hear the “shame of scum” in the innocent radio review of car dealers.
The language of hatred is everyday life, a real sign of time along with commercial patriotism, import substitution, large -scale searches, Olympic Sochi, colorful military holidays and monumental Sobyaninsky construction sites.
Of course, the language of hatred is more suitable (and used) for accusatory conclusions, speeches at the opening of provincial monuments to Stalin and Dzerzhinsky, revealing reviews of theatrical and film recordings, the texts of which then become denunciations, and those - accusatory conclusions. In these cases, the language of hatred became reference. And this largely determines the orders of the mass viewer (listener). In a margin from the TV or radio, people try to be like people from the air.
Neurotized by aggressive etheric invectors in high colors, spectators and listeners, as they say, “discard the negative”: they are readily included in injury, expose to ostracism, “take it into clean water”.
In the language of hatred, it is almost impossible to speak of mercy. And it is also difficult to sympathize with it. The behavioral models become more rigid, and ethical norms become unsteady. The promise to turn someone into a radioactive ash does not contradict a survey of “with the persons of what nationality you are afraid to encounter on the street: Chechens, Ukrainians, I am difficult to answer.”
About ten years ago, at the time that is now commonly called vegetarian, I ended up on the same bench with writer Edward Limonov. There was a charity evening. One of the speakers a lot and spoke with feeling about mercy and the innate feeling of compassion for the Russian people. “What nonsense! This is a lie, ”the writer muttered. We argued a little, juggling with examples from classical Russian literature and biographies of its authors. It turned out that a Russian man, maybe was peaceful and compassionate, but all went out. The Soviet man replaced him.
The results of the experiment to create the so -called Soviet man, in fact, can really be summed up only now, when the first generation grew and matured, personally not familiar even with those who saw people who lived before the revolution.
The engineering of human souls, with the help of which the Soviet man was grown, was based on a bizarre mixture of a primacy of public values over family and propaganda templates over simple human truths. But the main thing is permissiveness in the name of a certain public interest, which, of course, is higher than the individual. From this, the tone that publicly speaks, even in everyday life, is a Soviet person - a thunder, and tonality is peremptorous.
The Soviet man is leading, inconvenient, subject to trends, is ready to copy the intonation, thoughts, and sometimes even entire templates translated through the mass culture. Over the decades of Soviet power and twenty -five new post -Soviet years, we were given a lot of these templates. A special role in the formation of Soviet man was destined to play television, the most massive of arts, an unsurpassed agitator, collectivizer and propagandist.
“Previously, they spoke in Kaluga in the Kaluga dialect, and in Yaroslavl in Yaroslavl. Now everyone equally speaks the language of “House-2”, ”one philologist recently complained to me-in response to the story of how the presenters and correspondents on the direct broadcast of the new holiday-the Airborne Forces Day-shouted equally loudly. Talking about each new ship, the correspondent frowned menacingly and, turning to a scream, reported the number of shots and their range as if a ship (and with it a correspondent) already in battle; The audience of the holiday from small to great told another correspondent about the removal that Russia could give the enemy. The enemy, however, was not called by name. But intonation implied - he is at the gate! Following the transmission about family values began. The presenters have changed. Their tone remained the same. About seven minutes after the start (about five minutes before the first advertising pause), the guests of the program switched to a scream. At the time of access to advertising in the studio, the first fight was prevented.
The results of the experiment to create the so -called Soviet man, in fact, can really be summed up only now, when the first generation grew and matured, personally not familiar even with those who saw people who lived before the revolution.
On late Soviet television, the abrupt-aggressive manner of leading news was balanced by the chant-cultural and natural scientific sector, programs, which, for example, were conducted by Andronikov and Kapitsa, and the news about the compressed ring of enemies-the programs “with all my heart”.
In gold for the television industry, the late 80s and early 90s of spectators, accustomed to trust television, shocked everything at once: and what the journalists of the View program said, and how the stunning Urmas Ott was dressed and at which the fireplace was sitting and what they spoke about in commercials. All this was perceived as a whole. And they trusted everything to the same extent, they copied everything. One of the epoch -making letters on the TV of that time: “I bought the“ dollars ”that you talked about. And they torn. How not ashamed to lie! Especially on television. "
Television has changed. For a person who does not break away from the screen, it changed imperceptibly, smoothly. The viewer did not always notice how, under the usual brand, a product of completely different content, a different tonality suddenly turned out to be under the usual brand. Aggression spread through the mass media at the speed of an infectious disease, crieding became fashionable, acute turnover became part of the editorial policy. In one near-television bar, I recently heard a conversation between two editors gathering guests for a socio-political show: “And n . just alarm? Doesn’t we enligate the whole hype? " I turned around. I found out one of them - according to the previous work on TV. I could call the channel, but it does not matter. This happens on almost all channels.
One student once asked me: it was a special, someone invented program for the extension of the TV, did someone write it in the Kremlin, the FSB or somewhere else, and then realized? I replied that hardly anyone in Russia is able to seriously come up with and implement such a long-term project. Just hatred is a much more primitive feeling than compassion. It is quite difficult to learn to forgive in a Christianly, and to forgive (that is, turn a blind eye to injustice and simplification of morals) is easy. And it is worth wearing the inner nerve, but add nervousness - as everything is perceived as if it should be.
Some television critics believe that it is possible by some strong-willed bossal decision to publish a directive about the new course of the media, a course for good, to ban and use the language of hatred in television and radio anestics-and the neurotic population will calm down, heal and return to normal. Don't think. Not even because I do not believe that someone would have needed such a directive, but also because it is very easy to brutalize. And it is much more difficult to humanize back.
Perhaps this will come out with those who find the opportunity to grow and become themselves without any external influence from the media. Perhaps we already know some of this new generation of Russians. Perhaps when the Soviet man himself, suffocating from hatred, will die out, they will say something. In a new language.