Interview with Evgeniy Golovin

RA - there are a lot of words under your photo - magician, founder of a new tradition, and so on - please comment on these words

This is just some strange statement, which obviously has nothing to do with me, because I’m just a fairly modest lover of alchemy and hermetics, magic and mysticism. True, I am a passionate person, but to say that I am a discoverer of new horizons is impossible, because nothing new can simply be discovered in sealants. Another thing is that you can simply open up new conditions for practicing alchemy in general and hermeticism in particular. New conditions that are absolutely necessary, since we live in a very strange and completely incomprehensible era, from the point of view of life on earth. Therefore, it is simply impossible to say that I am some kind of discoverer and beginner. Therefore, I don’t even know who could have written such words. Because I'm just a humble seeker of this kind of horizon.

RA - You write that there is a person and people. I have always had a division between personality and individuality. That is, there is an individual that is somehow different from the rest and it’s good that it’s different. But the difference is rather external; and there is a personality with a developed spiritual core.

This is generally a correct division. It’s just customary to divide things a little differently. An individual, an individuality, is precisely what a person is called. And individuals can be people - that is, a person in his social aspect, in his meetings and contacts. An individual, an individuality can be a person, and a person can be just people, that is, a person in his social aspect: in his meetings, in his contacts with people. In a word, when a person lives in society, he can be a person, or he can be impersonal. He can be a mediocre person, or he can be outstanding. But he is still a person, because he lives in society. As for the word individual, it is much more important for people who engage in alternative disciplines - magic, mysticism, alchemy and others. Because in translation, “individual” will be “indivisible” - this means that this person is not divided into an individual person and a social person, that is, of course, he, to a certain extent, participates in the life of society and manifests his personality in this very society, but this is not the main thing in his life. The main thing for him is to be an individual. That is, in a certain sense, there is a certain border between him and society, which he does not cross. This is a very important condition for studying sciences such as magic or alchemy.

RA - But this is an important condition simply for the normal functioning of a person, so that he lives and does not disappear into the crowd.

All this is correct, but this is only a preliminary stage. Of course, it’s bad to disappear into the crowd, especially in our time, when the crowd plays a major role in our lives and wherever we go, wherever we work, we are always surrounded by a crowd. This crowd can be divided into groups, into some organizations, into some mafias, and so on, and so on... The fact is that if earlier the crowd was a fairly gray mass (let’s say in the 19th century, when there was an estate society), now, when there are no estates as such, the crowd is divided into a lot of categories: the strangest, the darkest, sometimes. Therefore, the question of the individual and the crowd is more acute now than at any other time. The point is that why I emphasize that it is very important to develop your individuality when you are engaged, relatively speaking (I don’t like this word) in the occult or magic. Let's say more broadly: why is it necessary to cultivate your individuality, precisely in order not to allow yourself to be contaminated, not to allow your soul to dissolve in this external social life, which from the point of view of magic is worth nothing. And in this case, it does not mean that the individual should be such a lonely person and live very lonely - this is not at all necessary. As you understand, you can be alone in any crowd and even during rush hours you can feel extremely lonely. That's not the point. The fact is that the problem of the individual, in this case I emphasize why it is so important, the fact is that the individual can discover the world completely anew and look at the world with completely different eyes than other people look at it. In this sense I emphasize the individual.

RA - Emphasizing that all social life is worthless is the foundation of any religion...

All this is true, but religion, including religion, can be practiced in different ways. You can actively promote religious doctrines and be a public lecturer, theologian or priest. And in this sense, he still works with the masses and can be called the word “personality”. That is, it can be a good priest or a bad one. A good theologian or a bad one. The fact is that he does not discover the world for himself the way a magician discovers it. And the point is this - no matter who we are by profession, anyone, practically. If we have a profession, the world is largely closed to us. Well, imagine what is needed to practice magic in general and, more precisely, to practice natural magic. An individual is surrounded by a sphere - a sphere of space and time that belongs only to him. Just imagine this sphere - 360 degrees around you and you are the center, to make it easier to understand this, let’s give the famous image of Paracelsus: Paracelsus said that a person is a grain, and the universe around him is the pulp of an apple or an apple. What is clear in this statement is that his individual world, subject to his activation as an individual, grows around him and is limited to his own sphere, into which he, in principle, does not allow anyone. In this sense, a person should be free - free to do whatever he pleases. Don't you agree?

RA - I absolutely agree. This is the principle of hermitism. To a greater extent, of course, oriental.

There is such a difference here - a hermit, in principle, in our comparatively poor understanding: we do not know, in essence, how true hermits live - in our opinion, this is a person who is occupied with a monoidea. He is busy with his God, he is busy with prayers, he is busy with fasting, he, in principle, does not pay much attention to the outside world. A magician is a different matter - he must constantly study the outside world, but the subtlety here is this - he must study it not like a botanist, not like a zoologist, not like a naturalist. He must first contemplate it and forget everything that, say, he was taught at school or at the institute. If you are a zoologist or ornithologist by profession, you must, in order to live with birds and animals in the forest, for example, or live with plants and trees, forget absolutely everything that you once learned on this topic. This is a necessary condition and it is very difficult because it is hard work - to get rid of preliminary knowledge, from preliminary impressions that have already passed through the filter of a certain specialty. This is how and only this way, you can become a person who wants to study natural magic. Let's imagine that we are going into the forest and it will become clear what I mean by freedom - we are going into the forest, but not for any practical purpose: not to pick mushrooms, not to cut down trees, not to pick berries. We're just going into the forest. For such a completely neutral walk. Let's say we sit down on a tree stump and watch the following thing: a heavy and very beautiful bumblebee suddenly sat on a dandelion and is swinging on it. If we are entomologists, that is, we study insects, it will be clear to us that a bumblebee has nothing to do on a dandelion - practically there, but we project our own practicality onto the entire surrounding nature, we think that animals are the same practitioners as we are, that they are exclusively engaged in searching for food, that a bumblebee there begins to drink nectar from some flowers, and so on, and so on, that a bee is also very businesslike and you understand that I I mean by bias, so this bias should not exist. That is, we have to go into the forest, without any thoughts, without any practical goals - we just go in order to learn to contemplate and when we look at why a bumblebee, which has practically nothing to do on a dandelion, why does it continue to swing, why does it continue to be angry with it, and then, once and again, jumps from it to some other flower, and then - once and for all, soars up. We understand that the bumblebee knows how to play, that he loves to play, that he and the dandelion, which has practically nothing to do with him, have their own conversations. This is where natural magic begins. We begin to understand that in the surrounding world the connections are very incomprehensible, very strange and are not at all limited to practical connections, that is, a bee - a flower, then a hive, then honey and so on... We must really see in nature, and now, we are talking about living nature, an element of play, which in the opinion of, so to speak, a natural magician, is the main thing, that is, it means that animals, birds, and insects do not think about tomorrow at all. And all sorts of fables like “Dragonfly and Ant” or as it is called by La Fontaine (Krylov translated it as “Dragonfly and Ant”) it is called “Grasshopper and Ant” - because there, according to the logic of the fable, it is clear that we are talking about a grasshopper. When the fabulist teaches us the wisdom of the ant, who says that you are such and such, the red summer has sung, and now you have nothing to eat - we all bring into nature something that simply does not exist in it. We bring into nature our narrow, pragmatic, wild view of things - I mean ours, because I mean specifically our time and the specific people who surround us, and, in a certain sense, we are like that too. That is, all these expressions are a concern for tomorrow, about the fact that people never live in the present moment - they live either yesterday, when they are resting, a year ago, when they remember something, or they are making plans for the next day, for the next month, or they think what will happen to them when they graduate from such and such an educational institution or they are kicked out of work - what will happen next. That is, what happens is that the present moment constantly eludes their attention. They don’t live in the present moment, and when I say that you need to go for walks like this, I mean that it is this kind of exercise that helps you live in the present second, which does not know the past and does not know the future, and only then the world becomes open, and not closed as it usually is.

RA - Certain Christian personalities nevertheless saw a game in the world - Francis of Assisi, for example. He preached to the birds and taught his followers the same.

Yes, he preached to the birds, but let’s not take him as a Christian saint. It is obvious that this man - Francis of Assisi - was well prepared for divine contemplation. Divine contemplation does not mean that you contemplate God - it is precisely the contemplation of this present second. Probably, before preaching to the birds, this man studied a little the life of these birds and the life of the forest in general. Just as I said about the bumblebee with the dandelion, you can also study the life of birds. You also go for a walk along a forest path. Here are two birds - they sing very beautifully. They don't like each other. Usually they never nest nearby. Every ornithologist always expects them to start quarreling. Sometimes they start a duet - a very unusual one. It's very similar to any operatic duet. Imagine any Puccini opera where two women argue either for their lover or for something else. A very funny duet begins, in which the intonations can be very different and sharp and completely insinuating and anything you like. This is where what in hermetic literature is called the language of birds begins. And your example about Francis of Assisi only says that Francis of Assisi knew this language. This is a very high level of comprehension in magic. Therefore, this is a good example, because we may not know Francis of Assisi at all as a Christian saint, but what is very characteristic of him and what Christian saints did not suffer at all is the knowledge of nature in this present concrete moment.

RA - Great! For me, magic has always been the embodiment of pragmatism. A magician always wants to achieve something, to turn some natural movement in his favor.

As I said at the beginning, in order to learn magic, you must first learn to be an individual. Learn to be completely separated from people and their interests. If you have noticed that magic has a practical application, then everything in the world can have a practical application. If you write poetry, you can put it on the table and read it only to yourself and friends, but you can print it and get paid for it. It’s the same with magic - knowing well the so-called vegetative magic, you can prepare some effective medicine. Another question is how you will manage it. Every practical application is an exit to the outside world, but it is not necessary. You can prepare a specific filter. In magic, a filter is a drink or ointment that is used for all kinds of diseases. But it is not at all necessary that you go out to sell it and place an ad in the newspaper. One should not confuse magic with the application that not only magic, but everything in the world can have. You can be a financier, but only for yourself. You can make a ton of money, put it on the table and lock it. Say: very good, now I will forget about this money and go earn others. Even such an incredibly practical thing as money may not have the slightest practical use.

RA — When I read one of your articles, a serious rearrangement of terminology occurred in my head: You write about neglecting the concrete for the sake of the abstract. The funny thing is that all my life I considered the abstract - lofty and beautiful - as an “abstract idea” - this is good, and the concrete is thoughts about tomorrow’s salary.

You see, any human conversation suffers from one main drawback - when we use certain words, we often simply do not understand what they mean. So you say the word “specific”, “specifics”, but the fact is that in translation from Latin it will be an intersection in the form of a cross. Here is the literal translation - in Latin, it sounds “concrescor”. That is, imagine that you are crossing something - let’s say you are crossing the street while a car is moving. This is dangerous, but you cross it and this is called a specific action. That is, you cross vertically through the horizontal of the street, you understand what is specific, but this is not necessarily the case. Specific is anything that attracts your attention. The more something attracts your attention, the more specific you become about it. “Abstract” - if we translate from Latin as “abstractum” - this means that we turn our back on something, that is, we do not want to face it. And then the conversation takes on a different character. A person who wants to live concretely is not afraid of anything. He goes absolutely boldly against these obstacles and then he really has no abstract ideas. Let's translate the word abstract by its third meaning - abstract. What does it mean? That you seem to turn away from this particular reality. Not in the sense of reality, but from those obstacles, from the difficulties that it presents to you and you make a diagram. You don’t pay attention to a lot of things and say, well, this has nothing to do with me personally. When you say that, you are living an abstract life. When, on the contrary, you walk and are not afraid of any difficulties - let's say, if you give an example about the forest - you go into the forest and are not afraid that you will be bitten by mosquitoes or when you are bitten by a mosquito, you do not get angry with it, but begin to think - what the hell is this mosquito life, then you live a concrete life!

RA - Thank you! They write about you that you brought the ideas of European traditionalism to Russia.

Russia is an incomprehensible country and abstract Western thinking does not work here. There were many people here who tried to translate Western esoteric doctrines into our language. I remember when I started doing all these things - I was 16-17 years old and I knew only two languages ​​at that time. And I realized that I had to study languages ​​myself - otherwise I wouldn’t learn anything. And I realized that the terrifying translations into Russian do not teach anything - they only lead in a completely different direction. In my opinion, you cannot read any author in translation and this is a magical attitude towards language. Thanks to Western countries, they taught us that it is generally accepted that language is a sign system, the same sign system as road signs. The same thing - you cannot find a more anti-magical approach to language. In this sense, we cannot read anything in translation - not even Dickens. With one caveat - there are very good translators who produce very good text. We understand the plot, but we do not understand anything about the writer - the creative person; as for poetry, you will easily agree with me that it is simply impossible to read it in translation. And everything that concerns such things as magic, alchemy, hermetic, then, unfortunately, and this is an objective difficulty - it is necessary to study certain languages ​​in order to read the same Rene Guenon in the original. My situation was different - I was not one of the young people who, tired of the Soviet drudgery - of Marxism, of other things, rushed, literally rushed, into alternative disciplines. Everyone understood that Marxism was bad and boring, and everyone understood that magic, esotericism, and so on were very good. I began to theoretically study these things after spending more than a year with two witches and when I saw some concrete things, in the sense of the word “concrete” that we have discussed. It was when I saw things both terrible and very interesting that I wanted to read books about what was written on this topic in theory. Moreover, these practical studies gave me direction in the study of this kind of science, that is, I did not read everything in a row and did not draw vague conclusions that with the help of magic I can acquire a certain power and can make my career with the help of magic. That I can, for example, subjugate another person or, let’s say, I like some girl and with the help of natural magic…. All this nonsense must be immediately dismissed, and in my opinion - I’m only talking about myself - in my opinion, it is best to engage in practice, that is, live in the village with some curious old women, with some curious old men. It is in such a concrete life that you can learn something. That is, they taught me to at least walk in the forest, at least listen to birds, at least look at how an anthill lives not from the point of view of an entomologist, but from the point of view of an ordinary person. The main thing in magic is to forget that you are a man, that you are the king of nature, and so on, and so on... You yourself understand what this very king of nature has brought this nature to. Of course, you must immediately imagine that you are a link in the living chain of nature, and only then can you begin such a dangerous thing as books on alchemy, esotericism, and tradition.

RA — Is it possible to learn from books? Or, in other words, can a certain number of alchemical treatises read lead to the internal transformation of a person?

As far as I know people and read about people, reading books never leads to anything other than the accumulation of so-called erudition. Therefore, the very reading of books is an extremely dangerous thing, I want to remember how in Victor Hugo’s novel “Notre Dame Cathedral”, Archdeacon Claude Frollo, the tragic hero, came to King Louis and began to ask him about alchemy and saw one of the first printed books on his table. Claude Frolot said that, unfortunately, this square object, consisting of sheets of paper on which all sorts of texts are printed with printing ink, is destined to conquer the world and this is very sad. He said an epochal phrase - this will kill that. “This” - he meant a book, and by the word “that” he meant architecture, a Gothic cathedral, that is, he wanted to say that that information, as they say now, leads to nothing except the accumulation of completely unnecessary erudition. Another thing, we talked about contemplation, when a person like Claude Frollo or someone who studies hermeticism looks at the cathedral, he finds everything he needs - he reads everything he needs in these ornaments, these symbols. He understands how and why this cathedral lives and why it exists more than any book or even a dozen books on this topic. When we look at the cathedral, we learn to contemplate. When we see in “Notre Dame Cathedral” a blindfolded bishop pointing his finger at some corner in the room, we inevitably begin to think, but not to think like practical people. And where is he pointing? According to legend, the place where he points, if you lift some kind of slab in the room, the philosopher's stone is buried there. This is the most important thing for people of the modern commercial spirit, and then this person will never be an alchemist. No - we look where he points, with which finger and what geographical orientation the direction of his finger carries. We look to see if his facial features are distorted under his bandage or if they are very calm. In short, we look at a lot of details. There are many of these statues. And we can study this for a long time without taking any book. Studying books is a very dangerous thing, but since now there are very few people who could be our teachers in these subjects, we have to turn to books. And then the culture of reading books begins. That is, on alchemy, if we take alchemy, thousands of books have been written and most of them are worthless. Most of them are written in such a dark language that you can read them for a year or two and still cannot understand anything. Therefore, when we first encounter books of this kind, we immediately understand that we need to understand the language in which they are written. Language, not in the Latin sense, but the language of the symbols in question. The last thing to think about is the goal. In alchemy it is death. That I will achieve some success, learn to transform metal or transmute metals, and so on... This is the last thing that should come to mind when we enter into a subject such as alchemy or hermetic, we begin to understand that life is short - art is eternal. In the sense that we are entering into some kind of strange knowledge that has no end and which can be studied throughout our lives.

RA - You speak so beautifully!

Come on…

RA - What is frivolity - is it detachment from oneself, self-irony, the understanding that you will still never be able to comprehend this secret language and what is about to happen to you?

This is a funny question - it all depends on the elements in which we live. Hermetica considers the four elements in which we exist and of which we are composed - these are fire, air, water, earth. As you understand, fire is the funniest and most mobile element. The air is the freest, because it is everywhere and the wind flies wherever it wants. Water is the element of life, from which life can arise. The earth is the foundation on which we, so to speak, stand, what is seriousness in this sense. Well, can you imagine if we, having four such elements, only lived on the element called earth? We would build a house and limit ourselves to one foundation. They would put pillars there so that everything would be solid - that’s serious, isn’t it? Yes - this is serious. If we transfer the aspect of the earth element into our mental life, this means that we would be such phlegmatic, very thorough people who would carefully think through every thought, every concept, moreover, we would carefully think through every step along the street. This is what is called being a serious person. That is, to be under the main influence of the earth element. And further, the higher the element, water is more subtle and lighter, and most importantly, you can swim there, in the sense that you will agree that water allows freer movements and allows you not to think about the foundation - about the bottom on which we stand. When we swim in the river, we can swim. At first little, then more and more. You will agree that the thoughts of a swimmer are very different from the thoughts of a person standing on the shore. And even more so, the thoughts of a flying man. Imagine that, having studied natural magic well, you learn to swim first in water and then in the air. Apparently there will be even more freedom and thoughts will be different. And if you, like a salamander, learn to live in fire, then there is no need to say what kind of cosmos will appear before you. Certainly not the one we can contemplate now - completely different. And when alchemy is called a cheerful science, this is what is meant, it is meant that the alchemist strives for these more subtle elements, he strives to live in water, then in air, then in fire. Fire, from a psychic point of view, is also a very curious element, because it is what religious people call ecstasy. The element of air, for these people, is that sphere in which they can fly freely and think about God and praise God like the birds of the air. This means that it is completely clear that there are disciplines in which the earth element is necessary - the organization of personal life, a good assimilation of some sciences. And there are activities in which this element is not only not necessary, but it pulls you towards the earth. With the earth element we associate feelings such as hypochondria, melancholy, and so on. That is, it is black, oppressive, leaden. That is, each element has its own good and, relatively speaking, bad qualities. In this sense, there is such a thing in alchemy as quintessence. According to Aristotle, planets and constellations move quintessentially - that is, in circles. Aristotle did not then know Kepler and the elliptical motion of the planets. This circular movement brings all three disparate elements into harmony. And thus, imagine when the four elements: water, air, fire, earth begin to come into a certain balance in a circular motion, they become lighter in themselves than earth alone would be. That is, a person who has this quintessence within himself can move freely through these elements. But, as they say, in tradition, this is a very high level of development, which we have not achieved and will achieve with great difficulty, if it has been a long time since we reached it. So, fun, which is the opposite of seriousness, is absolutely necessary in such disciplines as magic and alchemy. And here's why: imagine that a person who is entirely directed by the element earth, as they say, is a pragmatist, what will he do when he sees an unknown plant or hears an unknown bird? Yes, he will dig mountains! He will begin to study all sorts of textbooks: he will begin to read a textbook on botany, ornithology, and finally, let’s say that it was a plover or a repolov who sang. He will say: oh, how good it is, what a scientist I have become! I used to know one bird - a sparrow, and a crow! And now I know such beautiful birds as the plover and the raptor. This is a consistent person who has achieved his goal. In alchemy and magic one never gets one's way, for one simple reason - one does not have one's own. You just surrender to it, like a swimmer surrenders to the water. You have no foundation, nothing. If you hear an unfamiliar bird in the forest, and if you want to learn magic, you will say to yourself, yes, this bird sings well and move on. You won’t be interested in what her name is, what her habits are, or when her flight time is. This is completely uninteresting. Why? Because the world for such a person has total interest. He throws one bird. He walks, he is interested in a flower, after the flower he will be interested in asphalt - what is asphalt made of? You tell me, but this is a frivolous person. But it is frivolity that is the quality that is necessary in the study of esoteric disciplines.

RA — What is the relationship between a transformed person and the world?

With society, both before and after he achieved it, he is in exactly the same relationship. As they say, he lives among people, but he is lonely - and the fact that he has a passport and a place of work, and the fact that he is an ordinary person - he remains that way. This human behavior is reminiscent of the hero of Borges’s poem “Blind Hugh.” This refers to the blind hero of “Treasure Island”, the blind pirate - an unsympathetic person, rather threatening. But Borges presented him this way - that an unfortunate blind man walks along the roads of England and he steals, robs, kills so that they can give him something to eat, so that he can buy food and drink for himself. But he knows, this poor blind man knows, that somewhere there is an island full of buried precious stones. He alone knows this and no one else knows or will know about it. Same idea here. An alchemist like this Hugh could be a vagabond or a chief engineer, or - I'm not sure if he could be a minister - although there have been such cases. On the social ladder, he can occupy a fairly large number of steps, moving here and there. But at the same time, his individual life takes place in the sphere of freedom that we talked about at the beginning. That is, the only rule is that if he is an alchemist and he managed to convert a certain amount of mercury or lead into gold using transmutation, it is better for him not to use this gold for his own personal purposes. And not because it is reprehensible. No, simply because it can distort the fragile virginity of his individual search. Because no matter how developed a person is, no matter what degrees he achieves in science, he still remains a person who is subject to any vices and passions. It is believed that this is not necessary, it should always be concentrated. As you can see, this type of activity involves certain disciplinary matters.

RA — That is, the internal changes of a transformed person are not noticeable to an outsider? Is it completely hidden?

Yes, it can, of course, change. And with the help of esoteric disciplines, he can acquire certain capabilities that people do not have, but, as a rule, this is strongly condemned. A yogi who gets tired of many years of work becomes, as we know, a fakir, that is, in the first few years of training he acquired certain qualities, and can use them while earning money. This is what they say about ordinary gypsies, that they were once expelled from India because they violated the law of their caste, and they, using what they were taught in elementary school, wander around the world, tell fortunes and do all sorts of such things. This is considered reprehensible. What does it mean in alchemy to transmute one metal into another - it is only to test the substance on which you are working. If you have a certain projection powder—a certain powder that can transform copper into silver—it has nothing to do with that copper or that silver. This means that you are simply on the right path in your search, that you can work further. It means only that, and means nothing else. These people live by a principle called counterpoint in music. When two melodic lines are not in unison, sometimes they intersect, sometimes they move away from each other. This is how the hermetic, the alchemist, lives with the man of the crowd, the man of society. He can intersect with him and, since counterpoint is based on the laws of harmony, this person - the alchemist - does not want and will not violate social laws in order to enter into a sharp dissonance with society that cannot be resolved. He, also understanding the art of counterpoint, will move away from the line of society, then cross it at one point, at another, at a third. Thus, he lives in society, and, at the same time, does not. He is individual, and, at the same time, he is some kind of citizen of some state. Well, how does it intersect with society? He is sitting in his alchemical laboratory and suddenly he is called to the passport office - he will not speak - go to hell with you all, you are all bastards, with your low worries, I am a person of this and that and am engaged in a great operation, a great magisterium, and you call me to some kind of police. No. He, according to the law of counterpoint, will simply cross this very section and so on... Without feeling anything. In this sense, every magician, mystic and alchemist must, according to the laws of harmony, live with the environment in which he lives.

RA: Like hippies, they lived quietly according to their own laws. Without fighting with anyone.

On the one hand, all these youth movements of the sixties were positive. A protest against the terrible, sketchy laws of society in which everyone was forced to live. On the other hand, as you know, many hippies and punks became respectable, started their own businesses, became bankers or headed some companies. It doesn't cost anything because it was a youthful impulse. It was a natural rebellion of youth against environmental conditions. Now, if one of them - such cases happened - remained a hippie until the end of his days. I took this ideology from the great American writer Thor, who actually inspired the idea of ​​hippieism as such. Then it would be possible to say about these people that they follow the law of counterpoint, that is, they do not interrupt their melodic line and follow their own vocals - whether it is good or bad is another matter, but they do not mix with the general polyphony of the crowd. And in this sense, he is already the kind of person who breaks with his surrounding society, with his family, with his city and goes off to be a hippie, even if he gets carried away with all sorts of dangerous alkaloids and drugs, it doesn’t matter in the end, and if he, unlike the majority of such youth, ultimately finds the strength to no longer live by the laws of this society and develop his melodic line, then this person is really suitable for studying natural magic. If this is just a young impulse, then nothing, it will come back and everything is fine. This is necessary for the dynamics of society - youth should always rebel. Otherwise, what kind of youth are they?

RA - Well, yes - it’s just included in some social patterns...

Well, yes. It's impossible otherwise. Human society will lose its dynamism. This is as funny as requiring a schoolchild to sit at his desk continuously for forty-five minutes. So that he doesn’t misbehave and don’t act outrageously. Then there will be no lessons, no studying, nothing. What is the progress of science is when someone, like a schoolchild in class, begins to sharply express an opinion opposite to his teacher. This is the only way science can develop. There is a paradox here - ordinary science is developing. In alchemy, there is no progress, but here we cannot say that in poetry, or in painting, or in music - there is some kind of progress. Да, есть прогресс музыкальных инструментов, безусловно, но не прогресс духа музыки — это невозможно. Тоже самое алхимия, почему ее называют искусством или даже королевским искусством (почему королевским — длинное отступление — не будем), но то, что оно искусство — алхимия, магия, мистика — безусловно, потому что там нет прогресса как такового. Мы не можем сказать, что великий алхимик Ириней Филалет 17 века, более прогрессивен чем Зосима Панаполитанский, греческий алхимик 4 века. Также, как мы не скажем, что Шарль Бодлер более прогрессивный поэт чем Гомер — понимаете, это нонсенс. Все это значит, что традиция, как таковая, живет вне времени, точно также как искусство. Это значит, что она — традиция, оно — искусство, требует от тех людей, которые этим занимаются, того же самого условия — чтобы они жили вне времени. Чтобы они жили не в ногу со временем, а вне времени.

РА — Вы, в свое время, пересекались с разного рода рокерами, певшими песни на Ваши стихи. Сейчас поколение этих людей почти исчезло — ну или куда-то делось, растворилось. То есть, не сохранили они верность идее контрапункта?

Очень трудно сохранить верность такой идее. Во-вторых, эти люди — я не хочу переходить на личности — в конце концов, они не могут жить вне времени. Они должны жить в ногу со временем. Особенно рок-музыканты. Особенно концертирующие рок-музыканты, которые живут в среде конкуренции бесконечной, в среде — особенно здесь в России — где очень мало денег. Где они получают гроши за свои концерты. Понимаете, чем ужасен социум и эпоха, тем, что они тихо-тихо, незаметно незаметно уводят человека в пропасть, где он просто погибает. Он погибает для вечного искусства — не побоимся это сказать выспренным тоном. Если мы занимаемся музыкой — в нас должен жить дух музыки, который нас никогда не пустит в этот социум. Это не значит что мы должны брать свою гитару и идти и продаваться в толпу просто так. Что значит продаваться — это значит не то, что мы каким-то недостойным людям, которых мы не уважаем — поем какие-то песни и играем какие-то композиции — нет это нормальная вещь. Продаваться — это значит изменять своим художественным принципам. Вот это значит продаваться. Что значит изменять своим художественным принципам? Когда художник или музыкант работает на заказ — когда он думает, что для того, чтобы ему чего-то заработать, ему надо не те песни сочинять, которые бы ему хотелось, а те, которые понравятся публике, то есть он становится — я не хочу употреблять такого рода бранных слов — он напоминает женщину, которая для того, чтобы заработать деньги, тоже обращает слишком большое внимание на окружающую публику. И в этом смысле, конечно, это есть определенная продажность. И дело не в деньгах и не в концертах. Можно на мусорной свалке устроить отличный хэппенинг вместе с хорошей рок-группой. Я не знаю, если бы я был Миком Джаггером , простите за такие слова, и приехал бы сюда с такими замечательными музыкантами, то вместо бы Лужников спокойно бы пошел на городскую свалку и там устроил бы концерт — нравится это кому-то или нет. Это нормальное отношение к жизни. Я не говорю, что Мик Джаггер плохой музыкант, но он работает по традиции рока — то есть, он должен выступать на стадионе, где очень много народа. Но опять же, подчеркиваю, с точки зрения художественного события, было бы лучше, если бы он выступал именно у нас, именно в нашей стране, просто на свалке. И тогда люди поняли бы его гораздо спокойнее, чем со всей его бесконечной электроникой, бесконечными трейлерами, бесконечными эффектами, лазерами и прочее, как на стадионе в Лужниках. Я хочу сказать, что есть действительно стилистическая линия искусства, от которой нельзя отходить и каждый художник, каждый музыкант это знает. Через какие бы трудности не пришлось ему проходить, все эти трудности он должен встречать конкретно, в том смысле, в котором мы говорили об этом слове. Ни в коем случае он не должен идти на поводу у социума, потому что, таким образом он пропадет сам и станет просто игрушкой этой толпы, которая поиграет им, поиграет, а потом выкинет.

РА — А Вы сейчас поддерживаете какие-то отношения с рок-музыкантами?

Практически нет, потому что мне не нравится все, что они делают. Не потому, что я такой сноб и потому, что мне нравится, что делаю я. К музыке можно относится по-разному. Я всегда любил музыку, как это ни смешно звучит, за ее теорию. Я с большим удовольствием занимался задачами по гармонии, а потом, где-то лет в 18, открыл для себя Шенберга и, с большим удовольствием, открыл для себя его учебник по гармонии. Также было и с другими композиторами, которых я для себя открывал. То есть, я всегда чувствовал, что музыка есть то, что — как сказал бы Хайдеггер — музыка, есть структура этого космоса нашей вселенной. Я не случайно выбрал примером контрапункт, для того, чтобы набросать схему взаимоотношений человека и социума. Также точно можно взять музыкальную гамму, в которой тоже можно много выводов сделать и философских и социальных. То есть, меня всегда это интересовало. И для меня инструментальная музыка является вторичным моментом и я никогда не мечтал стать музыкантом. Более того, когда меня в детстве повели в музыкальную школу — меня очень быстро оттуда выгнали за то, что у меня нет слуха или чего-то там еще. Я был обижен и все такое прочее и только потом, много лет спустя, я прочел книгу очень знаменитого музыковеда прошлого века Гельмгольца, где этот автор объясняет то, что я смутно подозревал — о том, что у всех нас музыкальный слух испорчен с детства, о том, что темперированная система есть насилие над натуральным слухом и что нет людей без музыкального слуха. Есть люди, близкие к стихии звука и близкие к натуральному звукоряду и есть люди, совершенно автоматически подготовленные с раннего детства, чтобы иметь эту самую, в голове, темперированную гамму, которая неприродная, которая совершенно искусственная и поэтому, говорить о том, что есть какой-то слух или нет какого-то слуха — это совершенно непрофессионально. Эта мысль меня очень утешила. И я стал продолжать свои теоретические изыскания.

РА — А нет у Вас ощущения, что рок-музыка ушла из жизни вместе с уходом или распадением определенного поколения людей?

Я думаю, что она безусловно ушла. Это можно сказать утвердительно — без всякого предположения. Есть серьезная книга о рок-музыке и там высказываются серьезные предположения — на мой взгляд, правильные,если мы отвлечемся от того, что мы живем в христианском мире — мире христианской религии. Тем более, если человек артист, он склоняется скорее к язычеству, чем к официальной монотеистической религии. Высказывается такое предположение, что языческих богов много. Вот греческие боги и каждый из них время от времени берет на себя власть над миром и вот эти двадцать или тридцать лет расцвета рок музыки, как считалось, это был взрыв дионисизма — когда Дионис пришел в этот мир. Конкретно, в Западную Европу, Англию и так далее. То есть, когда он полностью всколыхнул молодежь. Но бог не просто так является. Бог, который приходит — он диктует все : манеру поведения, костюмы, язык. И главное, он приносит музыку, совершенно другую, не ту, что в прошлом. И в этом смысле, рок музыка, которая одушевила, я говорю нашим рабоче марксистским языком, затхлую цивилизацию — она действительно гниющая и затхлая — когда это все перевернуло, когда люди увидели, что жить можно совершенно другой жизнью, конечно трудно чем-то, кроме божественного вмешательства, этот процесс объяснить. Но это божественное вмешательство длится, как правило, не очень долго и потом, когда оно уходит, уходит все, что бог приносит с собой. Точно так и с рок музыкой. Вы посмотрите, что было и какой был апофеоз и потом как эта рок- музыка стала медленно медленно сходить на нет. И мы можем сейчас повторить обрядовую сторону великих групп 60-70 годов. Мы можем одеться в те же костюмы и попытаться играть ту же музыку и также петь, но у нас ничего не получится. Точно также, заметьте, как если бы мы сейчас возродили культ Озириса и Изиды и спросили бы у историков как все это было и они бы нам все сказали. Вы же понимаете, что мы даже арендовав целый Египет, купив у арабов все эти пустыни — ну так месяца на три — я думаю, в нашей стране денег на это хватит, и устроили все эти великие религиозные культы. Вы же понимаете, что ничего бы не случилось. Nothing. Не та эпоха. It's not the time. Вот, то же самое я думаю о рок-музыке…

РА — Наверное достаточно

Да, я тоже так думаю, а то я устал уже немножко.