Translated material
Pain Solovetskaya
Tourists and pilgrims come to Solovki, as a rule, for a short period of time. And they immediately fall under the spell of the unusually bright northern nature and the great Russian Middle Ages - Solovetsky architecture, the glorious history of the monastery. However, during such a visit you will not see much and you will perceive Solovki exclusively in a rosy light. Buildings in scaffolding means restoration is in full swing. They dig trenches and lay communications that are so necessary for civilized life. Services are going on in churches, new iconostases are shining with gold, and spiritual life is being revived. Archaeologists are conducting excavations - clear evidence of concern for preserving the cultural heritage of the ancient monastery. New exhibitions have opened - the reserve is actively functioning, promoting and protecting the great cultural heritage, etc. Someone will ask: “Isn’t that so?” I will answer: “Everything is so, of course, so! But... only partly.” I offer a different view of Solovki - a man who worked here in restoration in 1975-1978 and annually comes on an archaeological expedition for the entire summer, starting in 1996. Such an abscess has matured on Solovki that there is concern for their future fate.
In recent years, Solovki has become a complete pain for me. And this pain squeezes the heart, does not subside and does not let go. It is the stronger the more I hear loud phrases about the coming revival of Solovki, the beginning of the revival of spirituality, the need to preserve the great cultural heritage and preserve the unusually rich nature of the archipelago. Round tables are held, conferences and seminars are held... Meanwhile, Solovki suffers irreparable losses every year.
Four years ago, I felt the first alarming symptom of the unfavorable state of affairs: for the first time in all my time, I was left here with peace of mind, which saved me even in the most monstrous years of the 1990s. Nowadays, wherever I look, everywhere I observe the growing process of destruction of Solovki accompanied by bravura phrases about creation. The construction of wild capitalism has taken over this blessed island. Completely different ideas penetrated here, completely different people came, a completely different economy. But I'll start from the beginning.
The eyes of foreman Pavel Lyapin radiated light when, with inspiration, he made the characteristic gestures of a man counting money with the fingers of both hands, and, smacking his lips, said: “Grandma! You have to earn money!” This was at the end of June 2004, just a few months after the previously unknown and unproven Limited Liability Company “Institute of Design and Restoration” - IPIR (Arkhangelsk) won the tender for the general contract for restoration and carrying out all work on the monuments of the Solovetsky Monastery. The word “won” should be put in quotation marks, because everything was arranged in such a way that neither the former Soyuzrestavration (now TsNRPM, Moscow), nor the cooperative of Solovetsky restorers “Chamber”, which had extensive experience in restoring architectural monuments of the Solovetsky Monastery, could not even submit documents for the “competition”. The rights to restore the entire Solovetsky complex were given entirely to a specially created company. And this despite the fact that the TsNRPM archive contains thousands of measurement drawings, certificates, studies and other documentation developed over decades, and the organization itself had experts in their field. How did the Institute of Design and Restoration, which suddenly appeared on the horizon, prove itself so well in order to acquire monuments of world culture, so that it was entrusted with no less than the most complex objects for SCIENTIFIC restoration?! NOTHING special. All he had was a small wooden church. In my opinion, entrusting the restoration of the outstanding architectural complex of the Solovetsky Monastery to IPIR is like putting a driver at the helm of an airplane. To complete the picture. The chief “restorer” of IPIR, engineer D.A. Agapov, who visited Solovki for the FIRST time in his life in the summer of 2004 and saw the wooden roofs of the refectory restored back in the 1970s, was amazed: “Why do they live so poorly on Solovki?! The roofs are wooden. If there is not enough iron, then they would cover the roofs with roofing paper!” This is a typical reasoning of a driver who finds himself in the cabin of an airliner and is surprised by some strange panels with light bulbs.
In July–September 2004, the first contact of our Solovetsky (medieval) archaeological expedition, which I head, took place with IPIR. The latter carried out a project for laying electrical cables on the territory of the monastery. By preliminary agreement, it was assumed that our expedition would conduct excavations and observations along the route of trenches with sifting of the cultural layer. As many years of excavations have shown, the earth here conceals numerous objects of monastic life. The territory of the monastery is an archaeological monument; any excavation work must precede archaeological excavations. This is a truism.
The route of the trench was supposed to pass under the loophole of the foot battle of the fortress at Sushil, and then along the mill yard with access to the courtyard of the monastery - along its perimeter. Upon reviewing the electrical network project, drawn up on smooth paper in the quiet of an office (and at a considerable cost), it became clear that it was completely incompetent and unsuitable. IPIR on site suddenly discovered amazing things: a) a storm sewer has already been laid under the loophole to the west of Sushil, which is not compatible with high-voltage electrical cables; b) the mill yard had three tiers of cobblestone and boulder paving; c) the passage of the route through the courtyard of the monastery with a thick cultural layer must necessarily be accompanied by full-fledged excavations, and this increased the cost of the work itself. As a result, the entire project was radically revised on the fly, and a significant part of the network was moved outside the fortress.
It also turned out that the project developers, work performers and IPIR management did not have even the slightest idea about the complexity and specifics of the object - the Solovetsky Monastery as a monument of great cultural heritage. It is significant that when the trench route unexpectedly reached the arch of the mill canal, the gathered leaders of the IPIR began to discuss overcoming it. I quote it verbatim, since I was nearby: “We break through the arch of the channel from both sides and stretch the cable.” To my words that this is an architectural and historical monument, I heard in response from the “restorers”: “You have monuments everywhere here!” It is WE who have the monuments, not THEM. For them, i.e. IPIR is just an ordinary facility where they make money.
Or another example. We are discussing moving the route outside the fortress wall. In the new plan presented, I see a line crossing the granite porch at the Holy Gate. In response to my bewildered exclamation that there is an 18th-century porch here, foreman P.E. Lyapin instantly finds a solution: “We bring in a crane, lift the slabs, dig a trench, stretch the cable, then restore the porch.” Of course, it’s a trivial matter to dismantle an 18th-century porch. Only with all this, archaeological research showed the presence of a still powerful boulder cushion under the slabs. And here we had to make an adjustment by going around the porch.
From the very beginning, I asked not to touch the loophole of the fortress’s foot battle, since it is necessary to carry out full-scale excavations there to study the remains of wooden flooring for cannons. As a result, without any notice, a trench was dug in the loophole, and thus not only the remains of the wooden flooring were destroyed, but also the complex of glass collapse and accumulation of mica inserts in the windows of the 17th - early 19th centuries.
In the first hours of work, as soon as the team of excavators arrived on the territory of the monastery, and as soon as I began to explain the method of excavation with inspection of the ground, the foreman, who had not objected to the excavations the day before, in violation of the agreements, suddenly gave a completely different instruction to the workers in front of me: “The archaeologist is not listen, dig a trench! (here it is great and modern: “Grandma! You have to earn grandma!”). I had to urgently turn to the museum for support, telegraph the cultural heritage protection authorities in Arkhangelsk, and call the leadership of IPIR to stop this outrage. Half the day was lost. After appropriate explanations about the violation of the Law, sifting of land began in the most important areas. Subsequently, the sifting was repeatedly disrupted and contested. It was necessary to draw up a plan of the areas where sifting of the layer was to be carried out when backfilling the trenches.
At the same time, IPIR ordered another organization to study the foundations of the Laundry, Novobratsky buildings, and the Philippov Church. For this purpose, without the consent of the archaeologist, engineering pits were dug, essentially, like pirates. They were dug up and... abandoned for a month. Contrary to all instructions, the foundations stood exposed and not buried for such a long period of time, provoking an emergency situation. And only after I raised the question of the order, the pits were filled in. These events showed the complete irresponsibility of IPIR for the fate of archeological and architectural objects.
After the first experience of interaction with IPIR, which cost me the greatest unjustified hassle, I refused to further work with this organization.
In 2005, IPIR entered into an agreement with the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences to conduct archaeological excavations and supervision along the route of laying sewerage and water supply on the territory of the Solovetsky Monastery. Archaeologist M.E. Vorozheikina was sent to Solovki. She immediately encountered disorganization of work. A small number of workers were allocated or they were not given at all, or for a long time sections of the trenches were simply not marked out under the pretext “we don’t know where they go” (and this is in the presence of a drawing with an approved route!). An attempt was made to confront the workers with the archaeologist when the workers were told that their wages should be paid by M.E. Vorozheikina, although according to the contract it was paid by IPIR. There were cases of other outright lies. For some period of time, no work was carried out because there was no excavator (its use was permitted on the site near the Northern Dry Ditch). When asked from Moscow, from the Institute of Archeology, to the management of IPIR why the work was suspended, they answered that Vorozheikina was simply not there, she had gone into the forest, and the excavator was working. When IPIR reported that the deserted work site could be seen via the Internet using a video camera installed at the St. Petersburg hotel, the response was silence, then a “break” of communication. I am sure that at that moment no one in IPIR even blushed from the outright lie.
Another case is indicative of the white stone tombstone of the Solovetsky archimandrite of the early 18th century, identified along the route of one of the trenches under the fortress wall. After IPIR’s refusal to remove the unique slab with the inscription in ligature, we were forced to send a letter to the museum-reserve and to the authorities for the protection of cultural monuments of the Arkhangelsk region. Only after this was the slab removed. But in violation of the agreements, the archaeologist was not called for observations, and the slab itself, when pulled out ineptly, was split into two parts, since they did not think to substitute logs. One of the witty students described this situation as “IPIR’s victory.” I would make this phrase an epigraph to all IPIR activities on Solovki. The IPIR's indifference to the monuments of the Solovetsky Monastery became completely obvious.
By the end of the 2005 season, in the fall, due to the lack of equipment, an agreement was reached that archaeological observations in the trench running along the southern part of the village would be postponed to the next year, 2006. But IPIR would not have been IPIR if it had kept its word and I wouldn't cheat. After Vorozheikina’s departure, this part of the route was dug up without permission and a pipe was laid in it. The archaeologist was forced to urgently fly to Solovki to draw up an act. I insisted on transferring the case to the prosecutor's office, since there was a blatant case of cultural violation. This was the last straw. Apparently, only the threat of litigation forced the IPIR to reconsider its position on archeology. And in 2006, there were tangible positive changes in the IPIR policy in relation to the archaeological heritage of the Solovetsky Monastery. The archaeologist was given the opportunity to conduct the necessary observations and research. I explain this simply: in the third year (!), the “drivers”, under pain of legal proceedings, finally deigned to open the instructions for driving an airplane! Thanks to this, M.E. Vorozheikina obtained the most interesting materials. Numerous weapons were found, including arrowheads, arquebus barrels, cannonballs, fragments of medieval grenades, and reeds. Objects of monastic life were also discovered: tools, shoes, pottery, etc., etc. But perhaps the most important find, in my opinion, was a rotted wooden sled with a boulder placed on it. Now it has become clear how the stones were delivered for the construction of the fortress!
But even 2006 did not go smoothly. Once again, the designers' neglect of the preliminary archaeological survey of the route had an impact. As a result, near the Assumption Tower, only during the actual digging of the trench, unexpectedly (as always) a powerful multi-tiered backfill of boulders was discovered, which strengthened the base of the tower from sliding into the sea. This required once again an on-the-fly review of the project itself and the depth of the pipes. The antediluvian technology used was still depressing. It was clear even to a non-specialist that laying a 2-meter-deep trench in an extremely narrow passage between the cells and the fortress constantly created an emergency situation for the walls of the buildings.
IPIR also did not prove itself in the restoration of monastery buildings. Restoration requires special knowledge, a lot of practice, and, finally, love for the object itself. But where does the knowledge come from for builders who first saw Solovki three months after receiving the tender? SCIENTIFIC restoration (and there is simply no other way, otherwise it is not restoration) is comparable to a surgical operation. I can imagine what will happen to patients if the practice of tenders is introduced in surgery for all indiscriminate organizations that submit applications. But in the restoration this turned out to be possible.
On Solovki, in ignorance of the issue, IPIR showed itself almost immediately. For the 18th century bell tower, which was in a state of disrepair, engineer Agapov carried out calculations and made a diagnosis that shocked the newly minted restorers: the bell tower was already dead in all respects, it should have fallen long ago, it is unclear why it is standing at all. Of course, if we proceed from the quality of modern brick, and do not take into account old structures and other specifics known to professional restorers, then a gloomy prognosis is inevitable.
The bell tower is the first priority object handed over for restoration to the IPIR for slaughter: it became their first victim. At first everything went well. The bell tower was covered on all sides by first-class (really very good) scaffolding. And then a huge sheet of paper appeared in the museum, hung to the full height of the wall of the room, with a project for the restoration of the bell tower. In the lower right corner, as expected, the author of the project is indicated - IPIR. The speed of creation of this project could be envied if it did not turn out to be an almost complete copy of the project previously developed by Moscow restoration workshops - TsNRPM. Even mistakes that were previously made and uncorrected remained unchanged on the sheet. As you can see, IPIR immediately mastered the method of re-gluing stamps and assigning authorship. I wonder if the government paid for this paper again?
From observations about the work of IPIR. To understand the quality of the “restoration”, it is enough to go up to the gallery of the fortress wall and look at how its roof was made to the north and south of the Assumption Tower. In the northern part, where Soyuzrestavratsiya (now TsNRPM) worked in the 1980s, old structural elements of the roof have been recreated, conveying the spirit of the era. Everything here breathes the past. And to the south of the Assumption Tower there is outright hackwork: boards nailed down, albeit with forged nails, poorly sawed off at an angle, without the use of old structural elements. This is how cowsheds and sheds are built. It is better to interview specialists about other matters of the “restorers” from LLC IPIR, who have limited responsibility for their work. However, you should first look through the book of architectural supervision, the pages of which are replete with numerous comments.
The question arises: where is the customer looking? Why is he silent? The answer is hard to believe. But literally until recently, in violation of all conceivable norms, the customer was... IPIR itself. I do what I want. Since 2006, the rights of the customer have been transferred to the museum-reserve. Has anything changed for the better? Don't think. The museum’s design and restoration department is headed by A.F. Gorbachev, who previously worked at the same IPIR. And his attitude towards the monuments of the Solovetsky Monastery can be judged by the fact that he proposed not to straighten, but to dismantle (destroy, in fact) the heavily tilted stone pillar of the 17th century vestibule at the Holy Gate. He also raised the question of completely dismantling the cobblestone road that runs along the monastery from the sea. The reasoning is that walking is inconvenient, cars do not drive on it, but on the side of the road, which is all broken up. Familiar IPIR approach. At the same time, removing the cobblestone paving from the Gulag era, which had become part of the historical and cultural landscape, and a complete ban on the passage of vehicles shaking the walls of the monastery were not even considered at that time.
In 2006, the Solovetsky Museum-Reserve nevertheless decided to put up one of the objects subject to restoration - the fortress of the Solovetsky Monastery - for another competition. By this time, it became clear that IPIR had missed all deadlines for the delivery of not only the bell tower, but also the Laundry building. The competition was conducted by A.F. Gorbachev. The Creative Workshop of Restoration and Decoration (Arkhangelsk) won. When I asked how many participants there were in the competition, I received the quite expected answer - only one participant, who is also the winner. This is simply unheard of! The only unique boulder stone fortress in Russia, the highest achievement of fortification of the late Russian Middle Ages, a monument of European and world culture, was entrusted to a workshop previously engaged in the restoration of wooden architecture (original name GIPRODREV). Nowadays, if I’m not mistaken, this workshop earns money by installing grave fences, which are modestly called “decor.”
I ask A.F. Gorbachev another question: “What kind of competition is this if there was only one participant? There was no competition at all!” As a comparison, the famous story of the 1850s with the competition for the monument to the Millennium of Russia immediately came to mind. Then not one, but several competitions were held, there was discussion in the press, there was a lot of arguing before such an important object was entrusted to the sculptor Mikeshin. And now it’s a purely formal procedure, and the UNESCO monument has been handed over to a strange organization for restoration.
But it turns out that legally everything complies with the regulations on competitions developed by the ministry. The competition is considered valid even if only one organization took part in it. “But you can give a contract or subcontract to another organization,” A.F. Gorbachev reassured me. Yes, our officials know how to write laws and for whom to write them. In other words, the main money is received by the one who received the object, and the remaining crumbs can be distributed to invited professional restorers who know their craft. Such a feudal system of multi-part feeding, allowing incompetent people to fatten, will ultimately ruin the restoration.
True, I still asked why the Research and Production Cooperative of Solovetsky Restorers “Chamber” did not apply for the competition. And I received an answer from its leader V.V. Soshin, who has been working and living on Solovki since 1974, a man with 32 years of restoration practice behind him. He said that everything is so bureaucratic that it will take six months to complete and collect the required piles of papers with stamps and approvals at different levels, that all this is simply not realistic.
As for GIPRODREV, who won the competition, this is his second victory. The first object handed over to him was the museumification of the stone ruins of cells from the late 17th century, which our archaeological expedition was excavating. I observed the work of the Hyprodrevtsy in drawing up the project. Two young people arrived from Arkhangelsk for just a few days (there was no time for more) and for the first time saw the incomprehensible intricacy of the most diverse and multi-period structures. It all ended with V.V. Soshin being sent for. He, out of “love for architecture,” began to explain to them: this is a later window, but this is a trace of the original window opening, there was a door here, etc. and so on. Moreover, he even began to give specific outlines of the project. The question is, what are these people doing on Solovki? And are such specialists needed here? Isn’t it easier to give the museumization of the cells to the same V.V. Soshin, the “Chamber”? I was forced to write a memo to the directorate of the museum-reserve. And it seems that this issue was resolved positively, there will be a SUBCONTRACT.
We should take these competitions and cancel them! It's time to stop playing with the fate of this outstanding ensemble of ancient Russian architecture. I just want to ask the directorate of the museum-reserve and the Ministry of Culture: do they realize that the tenders and competitions held on Solovki have discredited themselves? That, based on the results of the “restoration” of recent years, the Solovetsky ensemble can be deleted from the lists of world heritage monuments?
Is there a way out? There is always a way out. And first of all, it is necessary to cancel the results of all competitions, including the IPIR general contract for all monuments of the Solovetsky Monastery. Until it's not too late. The past two years have shown that this limited liability company, like the former GIPRODREV, does not have the necessary personnel for the restoration of monuments under the protection of UNESCO. These organizations do not have even a remotely competent architect-restorer capable of managing such complex objects of world culture. It is necessary to attract organizations that have qualified personnel of restorers - TsNRPM and the “Chamber”. IPIR should be given secondary objects, and its activities should be placed under strict control.
Perhaps support in matters of scientific restoration and protection of cultural heritage monuments should be sought from the existing Spaso-Preobrazhensky stauropegic monastery? Perhaps the monks (there are about 30 of them), as they claim full ownership of the entire complex of the monastery and stand for the removal of the existing museum-reserve from the monastery walls, are most interested in this? It turned out not either. The work of a monk is the salvation of the soul. Everything else is vanity of vanities. And this position explains a lot. The main thing for the monastery is that everything is CLEAN AND BEAUTIFUL.
In 2003, despite all the restoration projects of the 16th century Spaso-Preobrazhensky Cathedral, the main shrine of the Solovetsky Monastery, a new splendid iconostasis was installed in it. True, the abbot of the monastery hesitated a little, but still could not refuse the rich sponsor, who decided to atone for his sins in this way. And the museum, by the way, gave the go-ahead to such an initiative, thereby departing from the original project to reconstruct, on the basis of historical data, the ancient tyablo iconostasis of the era of Philip Kolychev. From the ancient iconostasis, as it was established, all the original iron structures were preserved on the eastern wall of the temple. But all the hardware was cut down during the installation of the new model in 2003. At the same time, under the fastenings of the base of the iconostasis, the walls were hollowed out - original masonry of the 16th century, and under the bottom of the central pillars on the salt, workers hurriedly poured wet sea sand, taken right on the shore of the bay (it’s a long way to get dry sand). The floor in the altar has always been white stone, but modern monks wanted a warmer, wooden one. The boards had to be laid on logs, which began to be hampered by the sandy bedding that covered the vaults. As a result, without any notification, this bedding was thrown into a landfill, and with it, as it turned out, fragments of tiles from a colored irrigated floor. Two members of our archaeological expedition then crawled through the heaps of the island dump, selecting these fragments. But not everything was collected. In December 2006, these fragments were presented at the exhibition “Heritage of the Solovetsky Monastery”, held in Arkhangelsk. It is a pity that the exhibition catalog did not indicate their true origin: they were found in the Solovetsky landfill. What kind of scientific restoration and preservation of the spirit of the era is there? And we are talking about the cathedral - the brainchild of Abbot Philip, then the Metropolitan of Moscow, into every stone of which he put his soul.
In the monastery, where the cellarer Father Gerasim is in charge, the utilitarian approach won. In the northern courtyard there is a single-pillar Tailor's Chamber from 1645 - a construction from the time of Abbot Markell, another Solovetsky saint. What do you think the monastery could use it for? It turns out that it’s very good to store potatoes in the ward! To my sincere amazement, Fr. Gerasim was also sincerely amazed: “Where else should I store it?” The initiative is wonderful. It can be extended further, say, to the Faceted Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin. It’s as if there are no other rooms at all. But just a year before this, the monks broke down an old stone cellar in the northern courtyard literally a few meters from the same Tailor’s Chamber.
But the state museum-reserve does not react in any way to the non-functional use of the premises by the monastery, although it is obliged to do so. Why? Probably because this will once again be regarded by the monks as an encroachment on the activities of the monastery, interference in their affairs. And once again this will be presented to the public and the patriarchate as a conflict between the monastery and the museum. Hand on heart, I can attest to the often-found anger towards the word “museum” among pilgrims. Everyone is tired of this unnecessary and soul-destroying confrontation. Unfortunately, the monastery also has strong counterarguments to oppose the museum-reserve. The monks repeatedly reprimanded the museum for the condition of the Refectory Chamber, a masterpiece of ancient Russian architecture of the 16th century, the walls of which continue to be covered with a crust of yellow mold from year to year. The monastery is disgusted (and quite rightly so) by the plans of the museum-reserve to turn Solovki into the largest international tourist center with numerous hotels, restaurants and other objects incompatible with the monastery. But for me, the existing private beer stalls on Solovki are inappropriate, not to mention the round-the-clock sale of vodka.
Thanks to sponsorship, the monastery began repairing the facades of the northern courtyard buildings. The work is being carried out by the restoration cooperative "Chamber". It would seem, why not take advantage of the successful situation and restore the southern façade of the ancient Rukhlyadnaya Chamber. The former arched window openings have been preserved here, which in the 19th century were simply covered with bricks, breaking through the official rectangles of windows nearby. Using P.D. Baranovsky’s measurement drawings from the 1920s and O.D. Savitskaya’s survey materials from the 1970s, it would be entirely possible to recreate the destroyed pillar on the second floor. There would be one more single-pillar ward on Solovki. But the monastery cellarer did not give in to persuasion: “We live here! It will be dark in the room." As a result, everything was left in its place, the inside of the chamber was renovated in European style. But the electric light still burns inside constantly, illuminating the monastery shop located there.
As for archeology, cellarer Gerasim has a special relationship with it. She, according to his reasoning, is not needed at all. All these pieces of iron, shards... Therefore, we repeatedly had disputes when he ordered workers to cut away the soil without archaeological supervision. There is only one argument: what cultural layer is this? This is a garbage dump. At the beginning of October 2006, on his orders, an excavator was driven to the northern courtyard, which with a bucket began to scoop out the earth from the loophole of the fortress’s sole battlement. To stop this disgrace, I had to climb onto the arm of the bucket in front of the cabin. And the monastic brother Gerasim standing next to me, smoothly waving his hand, calmly continued to give instructions to the excavator operator under my shouting: “Dig! Dig! They barely managed to drive out the equipment when Gerasim instructed the workers to remove the land next to another loophole on the site of the famous Nikolskaya prison of the 16th-18th centuries. And only my words that I am now calling the police, drawing up a report on violation of Article 61 of the Law on the Protection of Cultural Heritage and opening a criminal case against him personally (and not the monastery) finally had an impact.
I repeatedly asked cellarer Gerasim the question: “Why do you need Solovki? They would take some other monastery and mutilate it to their health, if only they allowed it! You don’t understand what a great monument you have received! In Western Europe, you wouldn't be allowed to drive a nail into a wall without permission from the cultural heritage protection authorities. And here you can do whatever you want!” The answer was sincere, indeed sincere, bewilderment. What is this – ignorance, stupidity, hopeless lack of culture? But then their size is amazing, especially since Gerasim himself is an intelligent man - a former philosophy student. Or maybe the fact is that the monks are newcomers, most of them are from Moldova, Ukraine, the Russian hinterlands, and they don’t care about any historical and cultural monuments of the Russian North? Everything is more complicated. Perhaps, the representative of the monastery dotted all the i’s in his speech at the Round Table, held in St. Petersburg in November 2004. The divide in the understanding of the Solovki by secular and spiritual authorities was clearly marked. “The main thing for the monastery,” he said, “is spirituality, and for the museum – dead, soulless monuments.” Here it is - a “soulless monument”! At the same time, it is completely forgotten that the words “monument” and “memory” have the same root. The memory of the past cannot be soulless. It seems that modern Solovetsky monks, who care mainly about the external cleanliness and repair of buildings, have monopolized the rights to spirituality: spirituality can only be religious. The soul, the soul must be saved! - say the monks. I agree, it is necessary! But for this, one should do only good deeds in everything, at least without breaking the current law, and not forget that the Solovki, prayed for many centuries, are permeated with the spirit of the great past. And cultural monuments, as evidence of this past, must be protected and preserved for ourselves and our descendants.
There are other monasteries with other brothers, with a different – reverent – attitude towards cultural heritage. In December 2006, I had a chance to visit the Anthony-Siysky Monastery on an excursion. Its abbot himself invited a local archaeologist to recreate the destroyed building of the 17th century using excavation materials. How much love for the restored church-bell tower sounded in the mouth of the local guide! Or take the island of Anzer, where there is a completely different attitude towards all objects of cultural heritage, where a real desire to recreate all lost shrines as reliably as possible is clearly present and implemented (not without difficulties, of course). The role of the individual is still great here.
Meanwhile, the Solovetsky monks have already openly declared their claims to all the buildings of the monastery and all of Solovki: “Give us back everything that the godless Soviet government took from us!” But first of all, there is no law on restitution. And, secondly, the twentieth century brought such global changes in public consciousness, so many new things were discovered and rethought in the history of Solovki and Solovetsky architecture, that the Solovetsky Monastery became a world heritage site. It cannot belong to a specific monastic community (its number is 30 people), employees of the museum-reserve (200 people), Ivanov or Petrov. Solovki is a treasure of the world! No matter how pompous it may sound, Solovki are indivisible! And it’s high time to understand this. This is how it happened historically. It is also impossible to erase the Gulag from the history of Solovki. Who will protect and study its monuments, reminiscent of the greatest tragedy of the peoples of Russia in the twentieth century? (In passing, I note that the museum-reserve urgently needs to abandon its hasty plans to dismantle the extension to the building of the monastery power plant from the Gulag era.) In addition, the Solovetsky archipelago is a natural reserve, the protection of which and the study of nature are not the lot of monks.
If, nevertheless, the transfer takes place, as on Valaam, then, as realities show, the scientific and unnecessary restoration of Solovki can be finally put to rest, as well as archeology and science in general. And this is clearly not happening without agreement at the highest level. The first sign of the museum's withdrawal (so far only from the territory of the monastery) is already evident: in 2006, the huge three-story ruined building of the Preobrazhenskaya Hotel was given to the museum. It stands outside the monastery walls on the shore of a sea bay. Considerable funds have been allocated as a separate line in the budget for its restoration. I believe that the withdrawal of the museum itself from the territory of the monastery is now a matter of time. And that would be a huge mistake.
There is a noticeable economic component in the monastery’s desire to displace the museum-reserve. No one speaks or writes about this out loud, but it is obvious. The museum is a competitor; it intercepts large flows of tourists. At the same time, the monastery reproaches the museum for commercial activities, although it itself earns a lot of money so far only from pilgrims. For just one trip on the monastery boats to Anzer, a fee of 700 rubles is charged. Huge, economically unjustified money. Not all pilgrims can afford such luxury.
The brethren insist on the transfer of individual buildings on the territory of the monastery. And the museum is gradually giving in, which is not always justified. Thus, in the near future the building of the former monastery pottery factory should be transferred to the balance of the monastery. It’s a pity, because it could have housed a unique exhibition, needed by both pilgrims and tourists, about the pottery production of the Solovetsky Monastery of the 19th – early 20th centuries. But the building will be renovated and adapted for housing.
Another Solovetsky pain is the accelerating urbanization of Solovki. Solovki are beginning to actively lose their charm and spirit, previously imbued with antiquity and northern flavor. There are no longer any unique echoing wooden sidewalks. They have been replaced by paths made of concrete slabs or, as in the best cities of Europe, neatly laid stone tiles, in no way compatible with ancient architecture. With these tiles, the museum and the monastery paved not only the path along the western wall of the medieval fortress, but also part of the northern courtyard, as well as the path in front of the cells.
For a small island there are too many cars, especially personal transport. Driving through the village, they shower passers-by with a trail of dust. Jokes aside, I wouldn’t be surprised if a traffic light is soon installed on Bolshoi Solovetsky Island.
Where are the smooth picturesque roads on the island, once lovingly paved by monks? There is nothing left of them anymore. The roads were either paved with concrete slabs, like in the village, or they were simply left to the mercy of fate and broken down into deep ditches by modern trucks. They are finished off by multiplying passenger cars. At the same time, the pits are filled with all sorts of rubbish - broken bricks, sawdust - whatever they need. Amazingly, no one is bothered by the fact that all this is located on traditional walking routes - towards Muksalma, to the Filippovskaya hermitage. Last summer of 2006, tractors “conquered” one of the most picturesque roads - to Berezovaya Tonya. And on the road to Rebolda the potholes are not filled at all due to hopelessness. A trip by minibus towards Glubaya Bay, to the pier, turns into a considerable challenge, comparable only, probably, to a trip on a rover on a wild planet.
Another problem is the airfield. He was on Solovki back in the 1970s. We have used aircraft services several times. It was convenient to cover the 300-kilometer distance from Arkhangelsk to the archipelago in an hour. But then the airfield was small, it was intended to serve a local airline. It's a different matter now. The desire of officials to drive as many tourists, especially foreign ones, through Solovki as possible, and to make money from it, led to the idea of building a large airfield on Solovki for large aircraft that could cover a distance of a thousand kilometers without intermediate landings. The runway was expanded and lengthened. The result: long-distance planes fly extremely rarely, but the remains of the botanical garden planted during the Gulag era were destroyed, and the ecology of the island was disrupted. Now, without shuddering, one cannot look at what was done to the once miniature picturesque lake near the Filippovskaya Hermitage. Its banks on the side of the airfield are covered with earth, which the bulldozer raked to the very edge of the water space to maximize the length of the strip - directly into the water. On the opposite side, iron posts with signal lights are stuck directly into the lake, between which an electric cable hangs. A sad spectacle of a dead “zone”. And even further to the east, on the continuation of the runway, a wide clearing is all that remains of the forest that grew here. This place is gradually turning into an unauthorized village dump, located under the wing of an airplane. Saint Philip, the zealous ruler of the Solovetsky Monastery, did not know what would be done to nature near the place of his desert habitation.
With the uncontrolled influx of visitors growing year after year, the problem of increasing amounts of garbage on Solovki, especially along traditional pedestrian and water routes, is becoming more and more acute. Bottles, pieces of paper, bags are lying around. The museum is forced to organize constant environmental raids to ensure cleanliness. Even on the shore of the Holy Lake, where a container for waste is specially installed, our wild tourist, and even the local residents who have picnics here, do not particularly feel the desire to fill it. The village landfill is growing. And how can it not grow in size if, over time, all the packaging in which food and used items are delivered to Solovki will end up here? It's basically film, non-rotting plastic. But crows, seagulls, and animals are happy with the landfills. I constantly saw scattered packages of yogurt and mayonnaise in the forest thickets. At first I scolded the tourists, until someone suggested that this garbage was carried from landfills by birds. With water, all the rubbish from landfills falls into the ground, polluting it, and spreads like a stain around. But the question of recycling waste is not even raised.
The old power plant, which exhausted its resources in the 20th century, continues to provide the village with light and heat, so necessary for normal human life. But the 21st century cannot help but make new demands on it. The silence that the soul of a city man strives for on Solovki finds no peace. Noise, a constant hum over the waters of the Holy Lake. This rattling haunts me day and night. There is no escape from him. He hovered over Solovki. The power plant has been operating on diesel fuel for decades. All emissions go into the purest atmosphere, and then all pollution, including heavy metals, fall into swamps, lakes, and garden soil. Can anyone answer the question of how much nastiness Solovki absorbed from the breath of this “brontosaurus” and how long will this continue? It seems like a long time, because there is no money in the local treasury for its modernization or replacement with wind turbines. In addition, with the liquidation of the Solovetsky district and after Solovki was added to the Primorsky district, the already modest budget of the Solovetsky village was significantly cut.
Nature bears the losses, which is especially noticeable near the village. A hundred birch trees were cut down in Shkolnaya Bay on the seashore for the representative office of the administration of the Arkhangelsk region (are we supposed to atone for sins?). However, after public protest, accompanied by rallies and the collection of signatures for a letter about illegal land acquisition, the construction site was moved to the northern shore of the Holy Lake. Now the forest there has been cut down. Governor A. Efremov began to build huge mansions, but after his re-election the new governor suspended construction as the representation itself was unnecessary.
Tree felling may continue in accordance with the disastrous plans for the expansion of the Solovetsky village. The proposed new development will methodically destroy the existing historical landscape of the village. There are even plans to build cottages on the sacred Anzer in Trinity Bay... In a word, even bigger changes await Solovki, and not for the better. The knot of problems is only tightening, and their resolution is not expected in the coming years.
But outwardly, at a quick glance, everything is in order. Buildings in scaffolding means restoration is in full swing. They dig trenches, lay much-needed communications - finally, civilization arrives. Services are going on in churches, new iconostases are shining with gold, and spiritual life is being revived. New exhibitions have opened - the museum-reserve is actively functioning, promoting and protecting the great heritage... Someone will ask: “Isn’t that so?”