Fundamentals of modern parasitology

Someone or anything always precedes any new business. Sometimes these are obvious predecessors, rarely - no. If the predecessors are too obvious, the innovatives are called epigones (this is a long -standing, ancient story): in the literal translation from Greek - those born after, descendants, and in ancient Greek mythology, the sons of the seven Argos heroes who unsuccessfully besieged the G. Thebes (the campaign of the “seven against thebes”), who sent along the trail of the fathers. In fact - nothing offensive.

And it happens that I want not to offend, but it is unlikely to work out. On Monday, May 31, a reward ceremony was announced in Pushkin’s Minutes Named after Pushkin - the traditional art festival “Cherry Forest” ten years after his birth decided to acquire their own award. They did not become a trifle, the premium fund of the new award is 6 million rubles. I, a naive person, thought: about everything about everything, but judging by more or less official reports, each laureate was awarded 6 million! If so, the new prize is even more than the state aid, the monetary expression of which is only five million.

“Passed” the new prize is also bright: “Creative discovery-2010”. Fine. It seems to be. But here is an annoyance: from childhood I do not like it when they deceive me. It is written in the invitation and it is clear that the reference here to one of the best roles of Yankovsky and in general - to the film “The same Munchausen”: May 32. The date of the ceremony is May 32. Mikhail Kusnirovich, the first person of the “cherry forest”, even specifically thanked, alas, the late Oleg Ivanovich for giving us this very on May 32. But on May 32, as I understand this, it is wrong to celebrate the 31st, since the 31st is clearly not the 32nd. And the baron, if you turn to the source, was not at all the fact that he flew or did not fly to the moon, but by the fact that he was not lying. We consider it a small, albeit an annoying detail.

Any bonus, taking the first steps, of course, claims to be something special that distinguishes it from others. Otherwise, why start? Otherwise, you will have to suspect the organizers completely in a bad intention: with a large gathering of witnesses, secular and just the public, to give out considerable, and for someone a lot of money.

What is new in Oleg Yankovsky Award? Um ... Il is very few ... I want to extend the Pushkin quote: “ How would it be explained so as not to angry a praying important fool, too chopping censorship? ". The venue, the list of the jury, the list of laureates - in this case, is also somewhat intersecting with the announced list of the jury ... The schedule of actions ... and the inevitable end of the path ... Damn, the head will soon burst from quotes, by the way, no.

Before the prize of Boris Berezovsky “Triumph” (this year, her laureates received money received money in May, that is, almost simultaneously with the newly -made ones - Oleg Yankovsky’s prizes), and in her place and, so, in the same niche and with the same people and, it seems, almost for the same company is another. She was, if the memory does not change, to encourage the highest achievements. The Yankovsky subtitle Prize (or - the second name) - “Creative Discovery 2010”. Among the laureates - there are ten - Mark Zakharov, Vadim Abdrashitov, Roman Balayan, Leonid Broneva, Sergey Garmash, Alexander Zbruev, Stanislav Lyubshin, Victor Rakov, Inna Churikova, Leonid Yarmolnik. And in the Board of Council, i.e. In the jury - Irina Antonova, Galina Volchek, Oleg Tabakov, Yuri Bashmet, Vladimir Spivakov, Denis Matsuev, Oleg Menshikov, Ingeborg Dapkunaite, Lyudmila Zorina, Philip Yankovsky, Inna Churikova, Gleb Panfilov, Leonid Parfyonov. Of these, half are the members of the jury "Triumph". Almost complete dejavu. Yes, and awards the "Triumph" in the same white hall of the Pushkin Pushkin Mlime.

Not that bad. Non -original. And this is even worse than bad. In my opinion.

True, Mikhail Kusnirovich specifically said that the current laureates were not chosen by either members of the Board of Trustees, nor even Yankovsky himself: " Life itself did it ." If so, then maybe it was worth it to postpone with the announcement of the jury. In order not to put in an awkward, ambiguous position Inna Churikova, the reputation of which has not yet been overshadowed by anything. It is ridiculous: she awarded herself a prize. After all, not everyone heard the words of Kusnirovich, but it is easy to compare the lists. Coincions in such cases look ugly.

Not easier with creative discoveries, moreover, attached to a particular year. Previously, the “triumph” coincided on the goals and objectives with the so-called presidential prize: who for one reason or another was awarded with state aids, where one way or another it was necessary to transfer any specific works, they were moved to the presidential, which was given “for life in art”. In short, if anything got fantasies, so on the Muranian glass from which each laureate was blown off along the half of the weighty cherries, in the palm of the magnitude. On the cut is an autograph of the late artist. It’s not enough for a new business, but there is also money, I believe, considerable.

And so: Gidon Kremer and Tatyana Grindenko play, trying to “cut” mobile and muffled telephone conversations with their violins, in the hall - Nikita Mikhalkov, Naina Yeltsin, jury members - all or almost everything, laureates - all (except armor), other famous and even respected people, and there is no one to say ... what to say? At least that a very good actor, as Yankovsky was, deserves a more original prize. He was not vulgar in his roles. And the prize - due to its unorgribed and incomparable with these "universal" qualities of ambitions - vulgar. How did Akhmadulina write? " O vulgarity - you are not meanness, you are just the comfort of the mind ."

There is money - let's want someone. But - among themselves, not hiding behind the bright name of the beloved actor. No need. Conscious, or what? Modest? Well, as they say, one way or another.