Translated material
To teach freedom
Russian Journal: Moscow State University: Formula of presence today in education, in culture (in politics) and in your personal professional dimension (in your life and in work).
Oleg Voskobobonikov: Moscow State University Elitaren to the impossibility, he has always been so now. And he cultivates his elitism in every possible way. This is expressed, in particular, in the same celebration of the anniversary, in other high -profile actions and, finally, manifests itself in a social position, representation. And the representation of Moscow State University is the most elitist: “We will hold the bar” and the like. In fact, for society, all with white threads are shit: this is a closed university, which is almost impossible into.
I cannot evaluate unequivocally whether the Moscow State University still retains a leading position in the field of higher education. If I say yes, it will be a dumb small town false -patriotism, bravado, which I hate at Moscow State University. He, like other universities, has its own positive and its negative aspects. Of course, the university remains the main university of the country, while he has his own separate column in the budget.
For me, the university is the main thing, I do not consider this work only as part of my life, for me, probably this is a whole life. Therefore, I continue to hold there, despite the poor working conditions and an unfair monetary reward. But when compared with other Moscow universities or academic structures, the conditions at Moscow State University are normal, tolerant.
RG: Is there a Moscow State University, subculture today? How does it exist, where are its boundaries detected? What has changed significantly over the past 10-20 years?
OV: I do not really understand what a subculture is, unlike just culture. It seems to me that today's students have become lower. I think this is a manifestation of their subculture. At the exams, of course, they behave differently, but you should go out into the corridor, and you understand that you were in the square. On the other hand, this is a problem not of students, but people who are selecting students. The fact is that today the reception plan has decreased. It is possible that this is my teaching. The teacher is supposed to grumble that the student is the further, the worse. Although, judging by the performances of students on exams, not everything is so bad. Of course, they began to speak worse, express their thoughts worse; One gets the impression that the level of teaching at school has decreased. They often do not know elementary things. But, having seen students at universities in France, Germany and England, you can’t say that ours is worse, sometimes it seems even better. Because, unlike most large universities in Europe, there is still a selection at Moscow State University, which European universities cannot afford. But they cannot afford this not because they are so bad, but because the laws are such - the university should be open. And we have it closed. For example, in Germany, twenty -five thousand students are studying at a normal ordinary university, and at the largest university in the country - Moscow State University - Twenty will not be set. Therefore, everything, in general, must be compared.
It seems to me that the emeuscular corporate environment exists, but no longer at the level of “we are teachers of Moscow State University”, but at the level “we are teachers of such and such a department”, and the department through the faculty is already belonging to Moscow State University. The emeuscular environment is very fractional, in my opinion. If there were general university professional patriotism, we would be able to connect to fight for our rights, which we do not know how to do. Not a single demonstration, not a single social movement of teachers has yet been planned, although all this has long been required. The problem of normal working conditions has long been ripening. But, of course, such a demonstration would look ridiculous, because there would be few of us - well, such a crowd will come out under the windows of the rector on the Sparrow Hills, they will be shown on television, and the audience will say: they are completely burned, not only do they take such money for the entrance exams, they still do not have enough. That is, in public opinion, I believe, the main thing is the always inaccessibility of Moscow State University.
My pessimistic thoughts come down to the fact that Moscow State University will not become better, because the emeust teachers will no longer be enough for them. Another thing is that there can also be no inner justice in the distribution of even these unfair income. Because the university is alien to democracy. There can be no deep democratism at the university, just as it cannot be in any public or political structure in Russia. We have the same hierarchy as, for example, at the Moscow City Hall or in the government, with all the values that are consequences from here.
I know from my experience that a corporate emeusch spirit exists outside the university walls. For example, when you go abroad and meet a person from Moscow State University there, you feel something native in it, and I would call it a kind of emeusile corporate spirit in external space. I, of course, are pleased to see a graduate of Moscow State University somewhere in Marburg, Paris or Milan.
RG: What is acute for you today in your field of humanitarian space/(in your industry of humanitarian knowledge), Russian (oh) and not only? Do you intend to correlate the next and long -term scientific research with this understanding?
OV: For me personally, the main thing is the cultural -powerful function: to show my students that it may be interesting in the notable, at first glance, plots, like the history of the Middle Ages, and, besides this, show them how science can be engaged in other countries, how it happens there. Not that I give some special lectures on methodology. But I drive quite a lot, communicate with Western professors and students, and, of course, I have something to tell. I always tried to get something new of such trips for myself, but since I am teaching now, I consider it useful to convey this knowledge to others. I tell students about famous historians, whom I had to see, or about how classes are being conducted at the famous Annals School. Thus, for me the most relevant today is teaching itself.
The meaning of the university teaching is that you teach students not a story, they can only learn history, first of all, you teach them to think. After all, you can think very differently. You can cook in your boiler, fenced off from the world, and think in your own way, which is sometimes not bad, because, to be too open, you can become a slave to all kinds of influences. But it seems to me that the only thing that the university can really teach is freedom of thought. For me, this is the most important function of the university. This freedom and breadth of thought are not described, by and large, in words. The university was born 800 years ago as something free, it was formed against the background of state institutions as one of the full institutions around the idea of freedom, autonomy - freedom of thought, freedom of distribution of funds. Of course, this was exactly what was brought to Moscow to Moscow, breathing in all this in Marburg. I am trying to teach my students this freedom. And I hope that the university can provide this. And it is wonderful that there are still people who want to learn to think in their own way.