The criterion of Spiridon

Such is that all the time wait for some wonderful coincidences, turns and twists of historical time in it.

... Here, for example, when at the twelfth hour of the night on August 20, 1991 I left the Barrikadnaya metro station and under the small, unusually cold for the Moscow August, I rained with a rare chain of people (I realized that they were moving there !) Ignorant to me to the White House (I honestly say - they did not get me out of the house; but they pulled me out of the house, insulting the commandant’s time, insulting me, insulting me. - Pointing to me, Muscovite, until what hours I have the right to walk around the hustle city! ..) - then, having reached, I got up as if dug. I saw freshly laid barricades, and nearby - a monument to the revolutionaries on the barricades of 1905! And the red carnation was already embedded in the hand of a sculptural girl ... Yes, and the Barrikadnaya metro, and the cinema "Barricades", and in general - the proximity of Red Presnya. Only now we were going here to confront the heirs of these victorious Bolsheviks at this monument - now finally won, but planned to saddle the story again. You can’t imagine this on purpose - only the historical life of Russia turns this.

Solzhenitsyn began to write "in the first circle" shortly after the death of Stalin - in 1955, already knowing everything from his own experience about Stalin's time and without waiting for those who were not aware, the end of February 1956, listening to Khrushchev’s report (as I gasped, second -year student). But the release of the novel was then far.

In 1962, he managed - by the efforts of several people from the New World, first of the head of Alexander Trifonovich Tvardovsky and Anna Samoilov, to print "One Day of Ivan Denisovich." The “Roman Hazeta” (700,000 ”replicated after the magazine (96,000 copies), there were also 300,000), this prinnet's day has become available to literally all reading Russia, the whole union.

Before that, people knew a little about the camps - from the mentioned, never published in Soviet times (only announced in institutions - without the right to discuss!) The report of the first secretary of the Central Committee of the ruling party and from stories - also oral - survivors and returned from there . From the story of the unknown author, the country shuddered (well, not Vertukhai, of course, not the former enkavedeshniki and their wives, stubbornly believed that everything was right - who was needed, they crushed).

In the skeptics and in many orthodoxs, and the simply did not know, when reading this unsurpassed story, the latest doubts about the essence of the Soviet way, thickened in Stalin's long times, until incompatibility with human life. So rarely, happily coincided for the first time with such an unconditional completeness, the material of the country's real , not fascinated socialist life (before that remained unprintable) with the artistic force of the narrative word.

Then, after three stories, it was not possible to print in the Fatherland neither the "cancer corps", nor "in the first circle", and even more so the "gulag archipelago"; In 1974, the author was deprived of citizenship and forcibly exported from his native country. His name was no longer mentioned in it publicly differently as abusive. Moreover, especially informed political formators - emissaries of the CPSU Central Committee, sent around the country - confidentially informed the audience to listen to something unwritten audience of different research institutes and the KB, that this supposedly writer is in fact Solzhenitsker! And then everything became clear (well, like today to many relentless activists of the "faces" forum).

And in the seventies (when the current political so -called "elite" of Russia studied and grew up), the knowledge of non -marginal groups was delayed with marsh duckweed, but - society - about its history, until recently, it seemed unshakable.

The law of entropy acts here as it is nowhere - which is not reminded, then it is forgotten.

And now the Soviet government, as they say, was covered with a copper basin. And Solzhenitsyn returned to Russia - among the few of those who left her under the Soviets. However, he was alone and was not pushed by the pressure of the KGB ("Choose - to the east or to the west"), like many, and physically, repeated, exported. And everything was printed in his fatherland, as he dreamed. And again (in the late 80s-early 90s) it helped comprehension by compatriots with their immoderately watered blood of their close and distant stories.

But entropy does not doze. And the bog duckweed is always here. In the past five to seven years, it has been addicting the space so successfully that it is already difficult to believe: "How? Is this rotten pond really a frisky stream?"

There was a certain new speculation, or rather, perhaps, the towers, which was hopping at least half the country - well, how, the youth, say, a fashion for jeans, torn on his knees covers. No, this is definitely not speculation - since it fits exactly three, perhaps, phrases:

• There was none of this, they didn’t kill anyone in vain, but you can write what you want!

• Stalin is a great man! Thanks to him, we won the war!

• Stop picking Soviet time - this is our story!

And now the history of Russia once again plays with Alexander Isaevich such a thing that again his composition becomes an audit of Russia, directly, for lice. And this is not very roughly said after the above walking replicas.

He is again - what a historical irony! - He begins, with the creative help of Gleb Panfilov, as if from scratch . He again with his work - in completely different conditions, in the absence of Soviet power and censorship - is trying to reach out. Only now, not up to the artificial hibernation, to the half -frightened people of the first post -Stalin years, and to those who have known everything perfectly, but only do not want to know.

What kind of people are behind these remarks-rods? Indeed, today about half of the adult population of the country relate to Stalin positively - and many of them, too, were probably sitting on the TV to watch a new series.

These are people opposite in the warehouse of mind and psychology to those who are tireless, the character behind the character, leads to us by the hand of Solzhenitsyn in his novel and who is on the TV screen according to the solid artistic will of the remarkable director Gleb Panfilov. These current ones, I suspect, do not at all experience any certain emotions to Stalin. But at the same time, they are ready to confirm their location, reverence for him.

I will say a strange thing for many spectators. I don’t care how Stalin will be portrayed today (not counting, of course, if someone dares to take an apologetic image on the Russian screen). Whether Igor Kvasha, more, is there less, whether more, whether there are fewer facts of animation on a breathtaking scale ... There was an undoubted and persistent gap between the completely proven and obvious guilt of Stalin as a ruler before the country and its people - and the attitude to this very half of the country. Just do not say, please, that the people are always right. Otherwise, it will be necessary to admit that the German people were right, praying to Hitler; Even in the post -war years, polls at Germany showed a persistent sympathy for the Fuhrer for many years - stubborn Germans have not yet dealt with this. (In the GDR controlled by the GDR, no one did these polls and, accordingly, was seriously engaged in overcoming Nazi psychology - now neo -Nazism and swells from its former territory.)

So where, we repeat the question, the explanation of these answers -explosives - in contrast to the well -known, seemingly facts?

The explanation is simpler than it seems.

Smart people say that most (!) Of today's people are ineffective moral as an area of ​​the strong -willed sphere. For such people, the choice is any! Even the books on the counter of the book fair are unbearable . It only seemed to us that in the late 80s-early 90s they made their choice. They did not do it. It was made by those who were capable of this - and went to rallies, demonstrations and barricades. And today, sociologists are fingering everyone and everyone - tell me, tell me. And they spoke the choice that did not make and did not want to do - amazing sociologists with answers.

And the psychological nerve, the leitmotif of everything that is happening on the television screen, is, perhaps, to this word - a choice . The heroes of Solzhenitsyn and Panfilov are busy with him as the main thing in life. And some of them are making a choice before our eyes, which seemed to be unbearable. And the actors chosen by the director - Evgeny Mironov, Sergey Karjakin, Igor Sklyak, Andrey Smirnov - are remarkably playing heroes, followed by real people! Really broken destinies and taken life. Real heroic behavior in truly tragic conditions. And I applaud all the actors, mysteriously managed to convey this provision of art - life.

“He was an insignificant irreparable slave. He was sitting for twelve years, but because of the second camp time the end of the prison was not foreseen for him. His wife drove his youth in fruitless expectation. (...) Sologdin never saw her only son: his wife was pregnant. Sologdin passed the Cherdynsky forests, Vorkutsk mines, for half a year and a year, with insomnia, with insomnia, with insomnia, with insomnia, with insomnia. The exhaust of the body has long been trampled by his name and its future The top ten still received it directly from the court to the hospital.

It was a day when he was dumped on a stretcher and carried into the morgue - to break his head with a large wooden hammer before taken to the burial ground. And he moved ... "

This is not an idea. The prototype Sologdin Dmitry Panin, a descendant of an old noble family, amazed people with beauty, the safety of the breed. The resistance corresponded to this. In the second investigation (after which he received the second ten) to the question whether he confirms his monarchical views, answered as follows : “... sometimes in my beliefs I was inclined to monarchism, because I believed that the Russian state would be the most stable in the monarchical system. I negatively referred to the Soviet -Soviet spirit about individual events.” And this is not under torture, not under pressure, but because he considered it necessary to say - regardless of the consequences that were not slowed down.

And when engineer Gerasimovich on the television screen refuses freedom - forever sacrificing not only his fate, but the fate of his wife! - And yet, not able to keep silent, explains his refusal: “I am not a catcher of the people! Enough that we were put up ...”, and we know that it was so, and not with him alone - I just can’t imagine what kind of eyes the country is looking at the public psychology of which is clearly washed (I hope, temporarily!) Such a thing as a moral choice.

Panfilova-Solzhenitsyn television movie that not being determines consciousness . This was halved at the institutes by several of the living generations (dissent on this subject was excluded), and today they are tirelessly repeated by those who justify themselves and other hardships of modern Russian life. The film about how the consciousness of people for whom their consciousness is value determines the actions against being.

... In the distant years, the writer Boris Balter gave us Alexander Chudakov to read the novel - several packs of bad prints in the photo paper, in the size of a conventional photograph. When, after reading, they began to return, Boris said: let it lie down!

We all understood without explanation then what this means: in any house, the storage of the novel was dangerous, but he, therefore, at this time is more dangerous.

So he has since lies in our house - in a folder with a sticker of "lecture on dialectical materialism": he placed a “conspiracy” pile of photographs of my school friend, who was given to honor to read in it.

Then the novel really worried us, but as philologists, historians of Russian literature, it seemed (and not in vain) old-fashioned-classical, traditionally constructed-in the forms of, so to speak, of life itself.

Today in the television series this quality was Nanovo - as a fresh, pressing necessary.

Everything was already, so to speak,; Modern and postmodern have passed; You can’t get anyone anymore. And when Igor Sklyar and Inna Churikova are sitting against each other and, without lousing for a second, play a fullest that was in Russia, - representing the tragedy of millions in a single embodiment, separated for many years about anything, then I want to exclaim: so play! And if those who saw this amazing scene will not find another response in themselves except the ... internal obscenity of the Internet forums, which means that Russia is indeed plunged for a while in an ethical black hole. And Dostoevsky is time to burn in the squares, and not to boast of them in front of the world, having lost all right to it.

And all the currently seemed compassionate, but in fact, only evil -sulfuric shouts about the suffering of folk ones brought by "democrats and oligarchs" are outweighed for me by one Spiridon - a gigantic symbol of the people both in the novel and in the series. He did not measure, like current people from the people, positive and negative in Stalin and in the Soviet system. He outweighed all the worldview torments of Stainless with his own formula, overwhelming the young interlocutor:

"Wolfhound is right, but a cannibal - no!" And - all!

When it was still said by Alexander Isaevich - more than half a century ago. And I want to ask, paraphrasing the last lines of the Bulgakov "White Guard": so why do we not want to turn our eyes to these words? Why?