In the studio Yuliy Kim

Presenter: Viktor Shenderovich

Victor Shenderovich: Today my guest is Yuliy Kim. It would even be somewhat stupid, I think, to explain to radio listeners of Svoboda who it is.

Good afternoon, Yuliy Chersanovich.

Yuliy Kim: Hello.

Viktor Shenderovich: This stupid fashionable word is “self-identification” - what is it? Yuliy Kim - poet, bard?

Yuliy Kim: I think that the word “poet” is the most accurate application to my self-identification. Not only because - mainly - I write poetry, but also because of the general feeling of myself. You can simply say - a Russian writer (if we talk about terminology), since this includes everything - writing plays, which I do from time to time, and prose, and poetry, and song lyrics.

Viktor Shenderovich: Regarding prose: are you writing something like a memoir?

Yuliy Kim: Yes - the prose I publish is mainly memoirs, and just now there is a book on the way - it is being published by the Vremya publishing house - where I have collected everything that I have managed to write in prose. This is mainly memoir literature with some timid attempts at fiction.

Victor Shenderovich: How do you become Kim? How did it all start? Because for me it’s already - I received it ready-made... Probably already in the 5th - 6th grade I was kicked out of class, my friend Alik and I started singing your cycle about the war of 12 in history class - and tried to pass it off as history knowledge. “We are cavalry guards and cavaliers..” And we had big troubles. So for me everything was already ready...

Julius Kim: “We cannot predict how our word will respond...”

Viktor Shenderovich: We studied the history of the 12th year war - how did it all happen?

Yuliy Kim: This happened unexpectedly for me, because I went to study after school at the Pedagogical Institute named after. Lenin, where every second person was already involved in composing songs, it seems to me. In any case, the irresistible example of Vizbor was before everyone’s eyes, before mine too. And I just had to try myself in this area - although I had absolutely no idea that I would primarily be doing this for the rest of my life... I thought of myself as a future writer, in the worst case - as an editor of some thick magazine like some "New World". It was the least I could imagine. However, I graduated from college and then continued to work as a teacher, according to my diploma and contract. He worked for almost 9 years in this capacity. I dare to assure you that I acted there with all my heart and even had good results.

Viktor Shenderovich: Wait, about the results - this is interesting. Pedagogical results are the fate of students. Tell me.

Yuliy Kim: Please. When I was teaching Russian language and literature in Kamchatka, according to the contract - and this is where I went after college, and it was not Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, the capital of this region, it was a truly remote remote village a thousand kilometers north of Petropavlovsk... The village is called Ilpyrsky, and there was a high school there. And there, in evening school, I achieved my first real results. Namely: the man who came to me in September straight from the ship, right from the side of his seiner - and wrote an essay with a D - on the matriculation certificate he wrote with an A.

Viktor Shenderovich: Was it evening school?

Yuliy Kim: It was an evening school. I developed a system of practical grammar, which was basically about getting people to express their thoughts as briefly as possible. And since they were adults, it was possible without losing their thoughts. They spoke as Benya said - “briefly, but sweetly” - that’s how my evening school students wrote. And so that there are as few punctuation marks as possible along their path. Because in spelling they were all more or less strong, but as for syntax, there was complete confusion. And here I taught them a simple technology - let's say, grammatical - how to express their thoughts: a complex sentence with one, or at most two subordinate clauses. And arranging punctuation marks was not the slightest difficulty for them. There was such a case: Petya, I remember, came to me, the first mate of the Izumrud (we had such a cargo-passenger tram), and he wrote his first essay in September, not just on a stake - if you could put zero to the minus tenth power - that's approximately such a mark. I made a terrible number of errors - specifically syntactic ones. He wrote an A on my certificate.

Viktor Shenderovich: They spoke like the Romans - briefly. What years are these?

Yuliy Kim: It's all the 60s... The beginning of the 60s. I came to Kamchatka in ’59, returned in ’62, then came back again and taught a little more - because I missed Kamchatka. And then I went there as a tourist - or simply as an old acquaintance. As for songs, I had the example of Vizbor in front of me, and I tried - I just tried - and in the five years of the institute I composed no more than a dozen songs. And they were all comic, parody.

Victor Shenderovich: Is there anything left?

Yuliy Kim: In my repertoire? Quite a few. For example, there is a song called “Whale Fish”, like my passport song, like my symbol... What is it called now? - "Brand".

Viktor Shenderovich: "In the far north..."

Yuliy Kim: This is my song that I composed then. And there is also a song called “Cursed Lips”, it is also more or less known to everyone - it was composed during the same institute years, dedicated to a very specific lady, and became known as a Russian folk song. I did this completely carelessly, and took up the song seriously when I found myself in Kamchatka, in my village, which was cut off from all cultural centers for a long time every year. Once a month the plane brought some new movie, which was then shown for a whole month. We had to have fun ourselves. And we worked with teachers and students with all our hearts. And what was staged on the school stage was immediately transferred to the club stage. Actually, all these scenes were mixed and all the artists were mixed into a single independent troupe. And we staged programs there and sang songs. I had a women's ensemble and a men's ensemble. We even sang "Beautiful Maidens" from Tchaikovsky's opera "Eugene Onegin", and I, imagine, accompanied - not knowing the notes until now - nevertheless, I somehow picked it up on the local piano. So - that’s when I started studying song (not yet expecting that I would do this all my life, but for real), because I had to compose song compositions. I had already taken the first steps towards what is now called a “musical” - but I did not yet know this word. I had a song program “Autumn Putina”, then a song program “We are for peace”. It was a wonderful program, completely pacifist, I must say.

Victor Shenderovich: Do you still have any texts? I'm not here for you to perform...

Yuliy Kim: Lovers of art songs know them all from “Autumn Putina”. There were: “A sailor plays dominoes”, the same “Whale fish” swam in this song composition, then there were some other things. As for my pacifist program, no one remembers it except myself. The only song that the public could sing along to me is not my song; I don’t remember whose, but it was often sung on the radio back then - “If only the boys of the whole earth...”. You probably know too.

Victor Shenderovich: Even I can, unfortunately, sing along to this song.

Yuliy Kim: Why, she’s good; This one is quite for the world...

Viktor Shenderovich: Well, in general, it’s not the worst song. The attitude towards today, a decade later - the attitude towards what is today called a bard's song - and in general, and personalities, if possible?

Yuliy Kim: A bard's song is something spontaneous... A bard's song is a huge spontaneous mass graphomania that took hold of the masses of intelligent young people in the 60s and continues to take hold of new generations every year. Then, however, part of the soul of the next generations was devoted to rock songs, underground songs, from which rock and some other offshoots, not bards, arose. But, nevertheless, the bard's song, the song of intelligent youth, let's call it that - it continues to exist. And I think that it is doomed to immortality because it is nourished by very powerful cultural and social origins.

This is confirmed by festivals - and by the constant appearance of Russian bard songs, wherever Russian-speaking people appear. There is a bard song festival in Germany, two festivals in America, and twice a year in Israel. In my opinion, this has also reached Australia. As soon as emigrants from the former Soviet Union appear there, this demand, this thirst, and this interest in the song comes with them. As for Russia, the Grushinsky Festival shows inexhaustible interest in this genre. Whatever they say about this festival - that it is approaching a commercial enterprise or not... - I was at this festival (though only once), I saw all its sides, including the negative ones - but the core of this festival is made up of lovers of bard song. The most interesting thing is to wander between spontaneous improvised camps of people who came from all over “Great Rus'” with their flags, standards, with their repertoire - naturally - and how they sing their own or common bard songs near their fires.

Viktor Shenderovich: Can you assess the level?

Yuliy Kim: You know, this level is difficult to define unambiguously. I can’t imagine... Probably, this question would be best answered by Sukharev or Seryozha Nikitin, they are much deeper in the material, as they say. Ask them about the level. I don’t know what they will answer... Gorodnitsky, who is prone to pessimism, will say that the level, of course, has decreased; Sukharev, who is inclined to optimism, will say that it is invariably increasing. I can only say that all kinds of musical influences are certainly reflected in the bard’s song, in its musical sound and, less so, on the poetic level.

Viktor Shenderovich: From names, after all?

Yuliy Kim: Mikhail Shcherbakov still stands as a lonely peak for me - of the subsequent bards after our call. For me he is like that, although there are, of course, a number of other names...

Victor Shenderovich: Of course. Let's go back a few decades. You reported on the songs. How did you become a dissident? You were not a pure dissident, although you had to go underground and take a surname, like Lenin’s, that was not yours. Let me remind you for those who are younger that for a whole decade, in my opinion, there was no Yuli Kim, the poet, but there was a poet Yuli Mikhailov.

Yuliy Kim: You know, just Yu. Mikhailov was there. I never deciphered this "Yu", I left it to the discretion of those who listened or paid attention to the pseudonym. Whatever you want - Yuri, Julian or something else. I was Yu. Mikhailov - and that’s all. It was 16 years, from 69 to 85, when Bulat Shalvovich, with his essay “Belated Compliment”, dedicated to me in the Literary Gazette - in April, as I remember now, he appeared - canceled this pseudonym. That is, he began to write about me as Yu. Mikhailov, then somewhere in the middle he wrote: “What is Yu. Mikhailov, when we all know that this is Yuliy Kim.” But this was already Gorbachev’s time, the spirit of perestroika was already in the air. And after that I returned to my, as they say, “maiden name” and that’s it - since 1985, in all the credits or posters I was listed as Kim - as before.

Viktor Shenderovich: How did it happen that the author of the song about “Whale Fish” suddenly started writing “Lawyer’s Waltz”?

Yuliy Kim: It's all very simple. Many people have experienced such transformations, let us remember Galich. Time, time in general and personal circumstances in particular, led me to a glorious detachment of dissidents, where I served briefly, but gloriously.

Viktor Shenderovich: Anything about these people, because there are already names left, but there are very few portraits?

Yuliy Kim: First of all, in addition to the time and the general movement of events in our society related to the Khrushchev Thaw and so on: firstly, of course, the main event that happened and lies at the basis of the development of this strange social movement of ours, the main event is the 20th Congress, this is the debunking of the cult of Stalin, this is the return of rehabilitated people, this is the appearance - well, in general - of everything that is described by the word "thaw".

Viktor Shenderovich: Tell me, did this somehow happen in your family?

Yuliy Kim: Of course. Both my parents suffered. The father was arrested in ’37 and shot in ’38, the mother went as a member of the family of a traitor to the motherland - she went to a camp for five years. And then another three years of forced exile followed after this. I saw my own mother - I was not yet two years old when they took her - so with conscious eyes I saw her at the age of ten. So all this was experienced on my own skin - by me and my sister. And half the generation that surrounded me... In our institute, in my opinion, half of the students have the same thing in their biographies - either losses in the Great Patriotic War, or great repressions. So that, of course, played a role. And then this social movement, which began to hum around the beginning of the 60s: the Brodsky trial, then the Sinyavsky-Daniel trial, and these growing protests of our intelligentsia against de-Stalinization and so on, all this involved me. As for personal circumstances, they served as a catalyst for my involvement in the common cause.

Viktor Shenderovich: Names, surnames, appearances?

Yuliy Kim: Please! The first and main name is Peter Yakir, first my friend, and then my father-in-law - I married his daughter.

Viktor Shenderovich: “A fourteen-year-old boy went to prison” - is this dedicated to him?

Yuliy Kim: This is dedicated to him. And around the same time that I met him, a series of my so-called seditious songs began, my feuilleton responses to all sorts of miracles of Soviet reality. And the first, by the way, was a response - in March 1963, when I could not stand it and composed the so-called “Spring Song” after Khrushchev’s historic meeting with the creative intelligentsia, where Nekrasov, Ehrenburg and so on got it. Here was my first such - semi-seditious - song on this topic, somewhat sarcastic. If you sing it now, without commentary it will be completely incomprehensible to the people of today.

Viktor Shenderovich: This is the most interesting thing; all Slavists study the history of the Soviet Union from anecdotes. - based on jokes and your songs - of course, also with comments.

Yuliy Kim: I had a friend who wrote a short story where he analyzed this song (it’s called “A Simple Song”). And he, with the academic apparatus, approached it academically - he designated each line with a number and then deciphered this number. Let's say: "Oh, what a time, not a time - a dream, as the kochet crowed everywhere." Then there is a footnote: ““Kocheta” is an allusion to Vsevolod Kochetov, who was the editor-in-chief of the magazine “October”.”

Viktor Shenderovich: You know, in general, not only hints - but also just the use of words... I recently remembered a stanza from Vysotsky - I remember that today, literally every word - needs to be explained: “Here is the home-based dentist Rudik, he has a “Grundik” receiver, he plays it at night - catches it, counter, Germany.” Literally every word needs to be explained here. “Rudik”, “contra”, why at night - everything needs to be explained.

Yuliy Kim: I had a line there that even you can’t explain now: “Everything is boiling and foaming, as if old rum.” Go ahead, explain! This means Romm. He gave some short, very energetic lecture - somewhere in VGIK - about Soviet censorship, and this speech was well recorded by someone, instantly ended up in samizdat - it was free speech.

Victor Shenderovich: When did you first pick up something samizdat, and what was it called then and who was it?

Yuliy Kim: In my opinion - “samizdat”. It is believed that Glazkov invented this word: first, “self-publishing,” and then it shrank into “samizdat” and began to mean much more than the wonderful poetry of Nikolai Glazkov.

Victor Shenderovich: When did you first pick up...

Yuliy Kim: Samizdat, the first real memory of it is the work of Alexander Ryazansky: “Sh”, then comes the number - what later became known as “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich”.

Viktor Shenderovich: “A. Ryazansky” is a pseudonym?

Yuliy Kim: It was written “Alexander Ryazansky”. He taught physics and mathematics in Ryazan.

Victor Shenderovich: Have you read this?

Yuliy Kim: I read it in typescript, and not in the first copy.

Viktor Shenderovich: Did you have the feeling that there might be something for this, for reading?

Yuliy Kim: No, there was no such feeling, since samizdat had already somehow entered everyday life. It was only when - later - that "Archipelago" came across, or when "tamizdat" things began to arrive, like Avtorkhanov's "Technology of Power", there was an awareness that they could be given a sentence for this.

Viktor Shenderovich: We began to remember the beginning of that stagnation. It would be a sin not to compare to the beginning of this. What is common, what is different, what does time feel like? Moreover, you taught history, as I understand it.

Yuliy Kim: Yes, I taught history. I must - with my usual modesty - say that I taught it well for the reason that during the "thaw" a lot of interesting documents appeared. Liberal writers and publishers printed and published them at the slightest opportunity - and censorship had greatly relaxed by that time. And therefore, let’s say, I read “Raskolnikov’s Letter” even before it was published in Gorbachev’s times. I knew many things then. For example, he taught the history of collectivization from a two-volume book that was published and never saw the light of day - because it was a true story. Edited by Professor Danilov, prepared then by the Institute of History of the USSR, if I'm not mistaken. I taught collectivization using this book.

Viktor Shenderovich: In Kamchatka - for this?

Yuliy Kim: It wasn’t in Kamchatka, it was already in Moscow.

Viktor Shenderovich: And what, they allowed it?

Yuliy Kim: I allowed myself to talk a lot - based on published and sometimes unpublished materials - in classes, and I never got anything for it.

Viktor Shenderovich: “Song of a social studies teacher” about this?

Yuliy Kim: Yes, but, frankly speaking, it is not addressed to me, but to some of my colleagues. I wrote on their behalf because I did not experience the slightest difficulty in communicating with my students.

Viktor Shenderovich: I wanted to ask, putting aside the question with which I began the second part of our conversation. This feeling of freedom - do you feel it as innate, or was there a moment when you felt like a free person?

Yuliy Kim: In those days, I still could not boast of a sense of my own freedom. Of course, there was a look back, and it only intensified over the years of our stagnation, of course. But such that I feel like an absolutely free person, as Okudzhava once said about himself in one of his interviews: did he feel the change as an artist? He said: “No, I was a free artist both before and after. Both before Gorbachev and after Gorbachev, I felt equally good as a free artist.” Of course, I can’t say this about myself.

Viktor Shenderovich: And then - when? Then there must have been some kind of turning point, a case when it suddenly let go?

Yuliy Kim: I felt like a truly free artist, of course, in Gorbachev’s times, when the need for internal censorship disappeared, but internal censorship still existed. It’s clear why: because I was dealing with a play or a film, where a careless or ill-considered word in the sense of self-censorship could harm others.

Viktor Shenderovich: Our live broadcast was interrupted. Evgeny Nikolaevich from Voronezh, good evening.

Listener: Hello. First of all, I admire your broadcasts. And I want to ask: your attitude towards Putin? And why do some politicians, almost everyone, and most of our people consider him a fool, as if he is not in the know, doesn’t understand anything, doesn’t know anything, someone else is responsible for everything, but not him?

Victor Shenderovich: Thank you for the question, Evgeniy Nikolaevich. Why is Putin considered a fool?

Yuliy Kim: Frankly, Evgeniy Nikolaevich, it was extremely surprising for me to hear such an interpretation of the image of our president. Because no matter how much I interviewed my friends, no matter how much I thought about it myself, in no way does anyone consider him a fool.

Viktor Shenderovich: I think this question is based on an old saying about Stalin: Stalin is good... or - the tsar is good, the boyars are bad. Stalin doesn't know how we live here...

Yuliy Kim: I believe that our leader is well aware of many aspects of our life. As for the attitude towards him, a person must be judged by his deeds. As for his deeds, so far they do not incline me to give him a high rating.

Viktor Shenderovich: This was said by a poet, a kind of poetic exposition...

Valentina Vasilievna from Moscow, hello, you are on the air.

Listener: Good evening, gentlemen. I want to contact Yuli. Just like him, I studied at the same alma mater as him. I entered the institute in 1958, and when I found out that Kim, Vizbor studied at our institute, Ada Yakusheva, Boris Vakhnyuk, I was simply dizzy with happiness. Of course, all the years of studenthood passed under the sign that such wonderful people studied - even Volodya Lukin - at our institute. My second impression is still very bitter. When I worked at the Russian State Library in the manuscripts department, somewhere in the early 80s Irochka Yakir came to our reading room. You know, I really wanted to tell her a lot of kind words, but I was afraid to scare her away, because she was so wary and alarmed. All this is understandable.

Victor Shenderovich: Thank you, Valentina Vasilievna, for your kind words. In general, indeed, the Pedagogical Institute brought together many people - Yuri Ryashentsev was also there. Did you know each other?

Yuliy Kim: Even a name like Pietsukh... is also our person. Veronica Dolina is also our person.

Viktor Shenderovich: The density is enormous.

Yuliy Kim: And Vadim Egorov, if we talk only about bards.

Viktor Shenderovich: Oleg from Moscow, hello, you are on the air.

Listener: I have a question, unfortunately, of a somewhat political nature. They said that you read Solzhenitsyn when he was still Ryazansky, all sorts of things. How do you now feel about the current Solzhenitsyn and the truth of the second stage - so to speak - about what was considered among dissidents not worthy of attention in those years. Let's say, the defense of Tukhachevsky, Blucher - and what is now becoming clear: they themselves were no better than those who repressed them. What's your attitude?

Yuliy Kim: This is a serious question. As for Alexander Isaevich, from the very beginning, as soon as I read his first works, then his next works - especially his great "Archipelago" - I understood that before me was a huge phenomenon in our culture, in our history, in our literature. This is, of course, a master of the highest class, and a thinker too. Another thing is that I did not agree with some of his thoughts and argued internally. Perhaps someday I’ll argue in print. But the fact that this is a huge phenomenon in our lives leaves no doubt.

As for the attitude towards these names, the names of our Red commanders who were repressed during Stalin's time, this attitude is not easy. And to Tukhachevsky, who is known for his victories not only over external enemies, but also for his punitive expeditions - for example, to the Tambov province or against the rebel Kronstadt. And my - now it turns out - relative, distant, and not particularly distant - Jonah Emmanuilovich Yakir was also known for his punitive actions - especially, it seems, on the Don, if I’m not mistaken. But I would like to consider their exploits, their defeats and victories in the specific context of history. And when you consider their actions and their actions in this context, everything becomes ambiguous. And just to name a person: firstly, he is an executioner, and, secondly, a commander... Firstly, he is a murderer, and, secondly, a hero... - so I cannot approach a person with such standards. Like, for example, Napoleon, who, as you know, was a punisher in Spain, a victorious commander in Europe - and other things... First of all, a specific historical approach before judging a person. So it seems to me.

Viktor Shenderovich: Elena Moiseevna from Moscow, hello, you are on the air.

Listener: Hello, Viktor Anatolyevich, hello, Yuliy Chersanovich. I respect both of you very much and love your work, and Yuli Chersanovich - since the time of the play about dissidents “Moscow Kitchens”. There were wonderful songs, plays, and so on. Question: I did not hear anything on Radio Liberty - in the program that is associated with calls from listeners - about the 2008 Committee. I would like to know, if possible, the attitude of both interlocutors.

Victor Shenderovich: Thank you, Elena Moiseevna, for your kind words. I am a member of the 2008 Committee, so my attitude towards it is expressed in the Committee documents.

Yuliy Kim: And I’m in the support group.

Viktor Shenderovich: I think that the goals that we proclaimed and which are the main goals of the Committee are the return of a normal democratic process (not necessarily victory). We understand perfectly well that they will not send us any Havel from Mars and he will not win in 2008. There will be no Vaclav Havel, and neither will Mother Teresa...

Yuliy Kim: Well, Russia is an unpredictable country...

Victor Shenderovich: Of course, anything can happen. But it is important for us that the historical and democratic process continues, so that everything does not end for many decades with the transfer of nomenklatura succession to the throne - so that this does not continue. (Because twice in Russia there were no actual elections, there was an appointment: the power elite agreed among themselves). This is our goal. And what will happen next, if the historical process continues - of course, the curve will one way or another steer in our direction, in the democratic direction - that is unconditional.

Call from St. Petersburg; Andrey, hello, you are on the air.

Listener: Hello. My question is this: what is your attitude towards the work of Vladimir Konstantinovich Bukovsky and were any of you familiar with him personally? In particular, his book “And the Wind Returns”, “Letters of a Russian Traveler”, “Moscow Trial”. This is a man who raised a huge topic in human rights, he raised the topic of Soviet punitive psychiatry. In fact, this is the second wave of the Gulag, more terrible. How do you feel, on the other hand, about the fact that now Vladimir Konstantinovich, with all personal respect for him, it turns out that he is not so much in demand by our liberals. Just like many of the Soviet dissidents, truly decent people, they were not involved.

Yuliy Kim: The question is clear. I’m just at the start of my response, because this topic is extremely close to me. Both the topic of Vladimir Konstantinovich and the topic of the demand for our former dissidents, of course, is what worries me today. I had the good fortune to know Vladimir Konstantinovich quite closely, and I completely agree with you that he was one of our brightest dissidents. And - I would even call him dissident number one, if by dissident we mean a person with outstanding organizational skills. Even the name of Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov pales in comparison to Vladimir Konstantinovich, because he was an amazing organizer of our dissident underground and semi-underground affairs. This is certainly a very talented person. It’s a pity that he turned out to be unclaimed in Russia, but I’ll immediately note that Vladimir Konstantinovich somehow turned sour, looking at these processes going on in our country, and did not feel the point of applying his own forces - that’s the point. I asked him about this. Back in 1990, when he first came here, I asked him: do you want to run for office somewhere, because a lot of people will happily vote for you, and so on... And he said: “I’ll wait.” And when I repeated this question some time later, he said: “I don’t see the possibility of applying my strength.” He explained in detail why - I will not go into these details now; he himself still does not see the point of application of forces in our public political affairs. As for our dissidents, their fates have continued very differently in modern times. Some of them ended up, I won’t say - in power structures, but somewhere nearby, some were a deputy of the Supreme Council of the USSR, then the Duma, some worked in human rights organizations and continue to work, like Lyudmila Alekseeva, some work at Memorial, and have found their continuation in social activities today. Some emigrated, some went to school.

Viktor Shenderovich: I will allow my feelings on my own behalf. Firstly, I must stand up a little for Vladimir Konstantinovich in the sense that some time ago he was not given a visa to enter Russia, that is, this issue was somehow decided for him - about his participation in Russian life. As for the fact that these people are not represented in the current liberal movement, this is a serious problem - both for Russia, and for the liberal wing of this Russia, and for what is called the liberal wing. When before the last elections it turns out that our liberal is Alfred Koch, and the liberals are all with accounts, with offshore companies and in the “six hundredths,” then, of course, you remember Alekseeva, about Bukovsky. And these people are pushed into the margins, they are already called marginals, this has already become a familiar designation: “Well, what can we talk to them? Well - marginals...” So, this is our problem: as long as we have Koch as a “liberal”, and this public will be “democrats”, and Alekseeva and Bukovsky will be “marginals” - so we will be where we are. This is my point of view.

St. Petersburg - Anton, hello, you are on the air.

Listener: Hello. My question is simple: which external enemy did Mikhail Tukhachevsky defeat? If possible, I can also talk about...

Yuliy Kim: Now I remember... Tukhachevsky did not win over the Poles, really. He still won some temporary victories over the Poles...

Viktor Shenderovich: Read Babel, as they say. Anton, let's continue.

Listener: Regarding Bukovsky: I remember well 1996, the presidential elections of Yeltsin, when all of NTV campaigned for Yeltsin, and Lobkov’s teleconference with Bukovsky, when he so actively attacked him, reproaching him for being on the same position as the communists. We had one liberal then - Yeltsin, for whom I did not vote, because I do not vote for people who start a war and hide their children somewhere. At that time, Bukovsky was no longer given a visa. What about the liberals? If liberals are KGB officers, like Kiriyenko, like some Chubais, why are there such liberals?

Viktor Shenderovich: I would like to stand up for Anatoly Borisovich, without having any special personal sympathies - after all, he is not a KGB officer, in my opinion, like Kiriyenko. Kiriyenko is from the Komsomol, and Chubais is from junior research fellow, as I understand it. In a past life, the person was at least quite decent. But, indeed, the war in 1996 (it is important here, as Zhvanetsky said: “we have mastered the general view, now let’s not skip the details”) - it is very important to remember that in 1996 there was a real confrontation - with Yavlinsky, and there was - with democratic people. The real danger to Yeltsin’s power, to that “elite,” was, of course, represented by Yavlinsky, as a person who was further along in the historical movement forward. By removing Yavlinsky, the authorities were able to present society with a rather simple choice: either this is what it is, or here is a life-size model of Gennady Andreevich, one to one: it was taken to Davos, shown to the whole world, and the whole world recoiled in horror, so did we, and that’s it, and voted for Boris Nikolaevich. I think that this struggle was precisely to destroy liberalism. And this is the saddest experience of democracy - not so much economic liberalism - of course, it is still present - but democracy. And the fact that we have what we have - in the Kremlin as a guarantor - I think this is precisely due to the fact that Boris Nikolaevich and his “elite,” as they call it, carefully trampled the democratic field, and this was precisely the subject of effort.

Letter from pager: “Juliy Chersanovich, don’t you think that we will soon have to revive “Moscow Kitchens”, for example, in the Omsk Drama Theater? Alexander Borisovich from Omsk.” Why in Omsk - I don’t know?

Yuliy Kim: The fact is that “Moscow Kitchens” ran the longest not in Moscow, where it should have run the longest, but in Omsk. The Omsk audience fell in love with “Moscow Kitchens” like no one else in Russia. They ran for several seasons. Thanks to the Omsk performance, I found myself in America for the first time, where this performance was invited as part of a theatrical exchange to the city of Melloki. And for a whole week the Americans looked at my “Moscow Kitchens”, laughed and cried where they should have laughed and cried - it was like that...

Viktor Shenderovich: How did they understand, the Americans?

Yuliy Kim: Creeping line. There was a running line, and therefore it was all easy to read and compare with what was happening on stage. As for the revival of the play on new historical material or stage, I think that to some extent this is indeed possible in the current state of affairs and in the current course of events, since, indeed, censorship has become stricter. Although, I don’t think that it came to real judicial or administrative repressions - judicial, firstly, of course - when people were repressed under Article 58 and so on, so that it came to concentration camps and psychiatric hospitals. It seems to me that our society will not return to this kind of terror.

Victor Shenderovich: Why?

Yuliy Kim: We stand on all international winds and are so tied to the world economy, to world public opinion that, I believe, it is impossible to return to Stalin’s times in such a draft. Of course, there are also certain guarantees - already internal guarantees of non-return to this kind of terror. It seems to me that they exist too.

Viktor Shenderovich: Which ones? I ask such simple stupid questions.

Yuliy Kim: Very simple. It seems to me that the bosses realized that a sword raised in this way would reach them - as it did under Stalin.

Viktor Shenderovich: In the last year of life, it was not noticeable that any historical lessons somehow reached them. Maybe they didn't teach history well?

Yuliy Kim: No, after all, things have not yet come to this kind of terror and, God forbid, it will come.

Viktor Shenderovich: Nevertheless, some kind of machine has been launched.

Yuliy Kim: This kind of thing has always been there, such a rollback. This has always been the case. But, I repeat, the level is still not comparable.

Viktor Shenderovich: Well, that’s what I hope...

Nadezhda from Omsk is on our air. Hello, Nadezhda.

Listener: Good evening. What do I want to say? Thank you very much for “Moscow Kitchens”, we watched them in Omsk for a very long time - indeed, it was very pleasant. Thank you very much. I wanted to ask the question: what is Kim working on now?

Yuliy Kim: Now I have a lot of things in the project. To be honest, I don’t like to announce the titles of future works. But the immediate work is very simple, very pleasant. We entered into a contract with the Mayakovsky Theater to write a children's play. I'm rolling up my sleeves and working on her with all my might now.

Viktor Shenderovich: A play in verse?

Yuliy Kim: A play - with - poems, with songs - of course. Gennady Gladkov has been invited as composer.

Victor Shenderovich: This is not the first time for you?

Yuliy Kim: Yes, collaborating with Gennady Igorevich is a pleasure. Quite recently, he and I also finished one work, and the premiere will be released this fall, as I understand it. This is a serious fairy tale, a fairy tale for adults. It's called "The Naked King", although here it will go under a different name - the famous fairy tale by Schwartz.

Viktor Shenderovich: A very interesting question on the pager came from our regular radio listener: “In Russia, who is more totalitarian - the government or the population?” - asks Vlad Sergeevich.

Yuliy Kim: As a rule, the answer simply suggests itself: every people deserves its own government - someone formulated it a long time ago. Oddly enough, this has its own homespun truth, as they say. The word “deserves” may not be entirely correct, because I still wouldn’t like to think that the people don’t deserve something better.

Viktor Shenderovich: Then such a childish question: when? You are a historian.

Yuliy Kim: I believe that time must pass. After a while, as they say.

Viktor Shenderovich: How is it measured?

Yuliy Kim: This is measured, I believe, not in one or two generations.

Viktor Shenderovich: I didn’t wait for you to say... I wanted to call you to account after some time, to say - you promised the onset of democracy!..

Yuliy Kim: In two generations, it will be really difficult for me to answer this question for you, just as it will probably be difficult for you to ask it. But we'll see. Our program will remain on the air, and, therefore, for centuries. And our descendants will figure out who was right. I'm not sure if you disagree with me or if you agree with me?

Victor Shenderovich: In fact, I have to say that for me your opinion, frankly, is more interesting than my own. I also have the feeling that we have hit some winds from which we will not be able to escape. You know, in business there is the concept of playing the short game and the long game... I have the feeling that we lost the short game, but in the long game, I still, in my feeling, win.

Yuliy Kim: Bukovsky once said in an interview that Russia is like a colossus that has one foot in the past, has raised the other and does not know where to put it. But you have to bet.