Revolutionary study

Oksana Shalygina - about his ally Peter Pavlensky, their children, his promotions and fire of ideas

Oksana Shalygina refuses to call herself the wife of Peter Pavlensky and offers to use the word "ally". They have a free relationship and two children.

After the arrest of Pavlensky on November 9 (he was arrested after the “Threat” campaign in Lubyanka) Oksana came from St. Petersburg to Moscow. Now she lives with friends, meets with lawyers, goes to Butyrka and waits on December 8 - the day of the sentence.

For three years, Pavlensky spent six high -profile actions . We meet in the center of Moscow to talk about the artist invisible to people, the continuation of which is radical artistic acts.

- When did you meet Pavlensky?

- 9 years ago.

- Where are you from?

- I arrived in St. Petersburg at the age of 16 from the city of Talny - this is a small town in the north near Norilsk. She ran away from hopelessness and boredom. Working city. People work, come home, watch TV, then go to work again. And so every day. Half -life existence.

In the preparation of the film, their own shooting of Radio Liberty, a video from the archive of Pavlensky, the filming of "Reuters" and Internet television Piter.tv were used .

I tried to find some kind of nerve of life to move on

- Was you bad there?

- In Norilsk - yes. It simply cannot be good, it’s dark and cold there all the time. Not a place for life. It is difficult to live there, and even more so to develop. I wanted impressions. I just wanted to go, no matter where. I entered the institute, to journalism, completely not understanding whether it was interesting to me or not - it was the only way to escape. I have always read a lot. At school, she began to listen to the "civil defense", the texts were powerful, they protest in them, they were close to me in spirit. Subsequently, I talked with different musicians: it seemed to me that this was an interesting environment. What is concentrated there is life force. I tried to feel some kind of nerve of life to move on. Now I understand that musicians are maintenance staff. They work for money, few for the idea. There is a customer who calls them - and they act. If they do not have political texts, then this, in fact, is just serving the regime, a way to have a good time without straining and without thinking. And this is the path, pleasing to the authorities. Which needs relaxed people who do not think, it is easier to keep them in subordination and fear of losing this comfort. It turned out that most musicians play a role: then they leave the stage and become other people. This lie has become obvious to me. Therefore, Petya and I became close to Pussy Riot. We knew that they did not have a gap between the way of life and action. They have no other bourgeois life where they go after performances and live calmly in it. And they surprisingly accurately formulated the problems of the context of Russia.

- Before dating, was I interested in contemporary art?

- No, in general.

- How did Peter introduce you? Said - " I am an artist"?

- He did not even study even in the fly then, only acted.

- What was the first impression of him?

- What it was, and remained. This is a person who is insanely pleasant to me externally, with whom fun and interesting, with whom he is never bored. The impression for 9 years has not changed.

- How difficult is he a partner?

- It is very easy with him. You just need to understand it. Know when to leave him alone and go about your business. And everything will be fine.

-When you were just starting to live with him, you had to adapt, compromise, change yourself in something, maybe?

- I think everyone has to. Of course, it was necessary, and it was only good. I grew up in a bourgeois family where a woman was refueling, and the man was quiet and humble. I did not solve anything. I did not want to match this model. I learned to be tactful, polite, never allow myself expressions that I would not want to hear in relation to myself. Recognize human right to personal space. Do not climb. Do not advise. I still have such weakness. I can advise where they don’t ask me. This is a thing with which I am struggling very seriously.

Free relationship

Oksana Shalygina against the name “Civil Wife” - together with Peter Pavlensky, they deny the institution of marriage. And they proclaim free relations, without the intervention of the state, with complete freedom of action and the right to change partners, if you want. The word that Oksana characterizes her role in a pair is "ally."

- Take, for example, the last number of "political propaganda" - we made it the three of them, it was a project. There was a girl who became sympathetic to us, and we began to live together.

- Who was the first to suggest?

- We always have everything together. Impulse arose, and we invited her to us.

- That is, you like the same people?

- Yes, we have similar tastes. An important point: we have friendship first of all. Because there can be no relations based only on sex - this is uninteresting, okay and inhibits the work. And if we share ideas, if a person is our friend, he can enter our close circle. We do not use the concept of "family", because it is a socio-political construct, which implies possession and rejection of free will. We say “close circle”.

Our union has become the result of the number

- And if a person does not cause a sexual impulse?

- No, well, of course, a person should be outwardly pleasant to you. Sympathy should arise, and joint. Then everything turned out: we had sympathy and interest - therefore it was good, productive and fun.

- How much did you live together?

- Six months, probably.

“ Did she move to you right away?”

-At first we talked about some projects-there was a common interest in political art. They shared their experience, found out about Ukraine - it is from there. They even found a way out how to reconcile the peoples of Russia and Ukraine. The last number of "political propaganda" is almost completely dedicated to strong women. Our union has become the result of the number. We came up with women's response to the patriarchal world. They offered Ukrainian and Russian women to unite with the help of a man who does not share women, but, on the contrary, becomes an intermediary of friendship and love. With a personal example, they showed that the peoples of Russia and Ukraine, to set up against each other, are uniting against each other - we are united. For friendship, work and political propaganda.

- And yet, a family with the participation of women seems to me an ideal harem model. Comfortable man.

- This is a limited, superficial look. The palette of relations can be very different. Often a woman in a pair is stronger than a man, he depends on her emotionally, morally and even financially. Therefore, I would not say that two women are the dream of any man. We must look at the goals and objectives of such a union.

“ But the man is psychologically closer to the polygamous type of relationship than a woman.”

- Not true! Women change at least. If not more often. Women are often the first to begin to look for another partner, if something is wrong with the current one. Without thinking that they are also far from perfect.

- It is more difficult for a woman, over the years she faster loses sexual attractiveness.

- If a woman does not develop as a person, then, of course, she has little chance of arousing interest in herself. If she was used to the fact that she was evaluated as a product all her life, then in the end she becomes an unattractive product.

“ Are you devoid of fear of stop being sexually attractive?”

“I'm definitely not afraid of this.” Firstly, I have a friend, partner and colleague with whom we are developing together. Everything is decided by the ideological component. If your eyes burn, then what difference does it make, how you look, the main thing is what you say and do. Do you feel like a full -fledged subject as a person.

It would seem an independent person, but you look on Facebook - got married!

- Who was the first to propose a model of free relations?

- At that moment, we had a comprehension of ourselves as subjects in the social and political space. We fundamentally did not want to do what the state imposes. They did not want to please and obey.

- In free relations, it is difficult to avoid bouts of jealousy.

- We trust each other. Of course, jealousy is animal instinct. But this is a bad feeling. Therefore, if you are a civilized person, you must work with him, fight. Jealousy is also part of the program of traditional family values. This is trite.

- You want to say, you defeated his jealousy?

- I'm in the way. I have a desire to win.

- And if the situation with other partners is uncomfortable for one of the partners?

- The issue of agreements. If he needs it, and you are against it, then you simply cannot be together. Do not agree.

- There were people who told you: why don't you get married?

- Of course, we were constantly asked. And everyone married. It would seem an independent person, but you look on Facebook - got married! That is, it fit into the prescribed order. We just wanted to be together. As long as it will be interesting: after all, nothing will keep people together if they are tired.

- How often were there such stories as with a Ukrainian girl?

-There were still some samples when a person was not introduced into a close circle. When we understood that he was ideologically not close, we ended the relationship. There were some girls, but not for long and, basically, it was not interesting.

“ But you always have two relationships?”

- Yes. We have never been interested in developing relationships besides work. We have no life separate from work. So if someone leaves, plunges into a new relationship, then there will be a loss. On another story you need to spend time and time. And they are simply physically not.

- And how do you represent these partners?

- Everything is cool with children, because they are our children, grew up with us. They know the context perfectly. They know the political situation, they know why we live exactly like that. Acceptance is their natural reaction: yes! Cool, great. We still have Vika, cool. There is a friend, they love and accept her.

Children

- How did the children appear? Planned?

“They just appeared when it seemed that they could be started.”

- Have you discussed this topic?

- Yes, like everything else. And they got the children.

- You wanted children?

- It was so natural: we want to be together, why not have children?

- Who was the first to suggest?

“I don’t remember someone said: Oh, let's get the children.” We are in constant contact, we communicate all the time, we feel each other. When the topic arises, we pronounce it and make a decision.

- Didn't scare responsibility?

- No, the children were a natural continuation of our relationship.

-In your opinion, children, in principle, the natural continuation of the relationship of a man and a woman?

- One of the options for continuing the relationship. It depends on how far people are ready to go in a relationship. We never thought that children would need more money or the best conditions. No. We were just at each other. And they understood, yes, we want. And we will do everything from us in their full life.

- Children need to devote time. Peter was not afraid that the children would distract him?

- We distribute roles. If you need to solve the issue, and someone is busy, the second decides it. Of course, children take time. Everything is just very clearly divided for us. If I have a task that needs to be solved now and quickly, then Peter, respectively, frees me from life and children. If he, then I take the children.

- Does Peter are engaged in everyday life? I can't imagine.

- Certainly. He is an ordinary person who does everything in the same way as I do. We have everything equally, 50 to 50.

- He is happy to engage in children?

- Any business he is engaged in, he does with pleasure and one hundred percent. If this business is children, then in full: with driving in training, cooking and walks. In addition, we have independent children. They always know what they want. They do not need to decide for them, they always know, for example, where they want to go for a walk, what to eat and how to occupy themselves. We provide children with the opportunity to decide for ourselves, do not impose our desires. We even try with advice more accurately. Thus, they have a responsible attitude: if I haven’t done something, in my studies, for example, then this is my problem, tomorrow it will be necessary to do twice as much. They learn to make decisions on their own without support on the elders and their instructions. We rather direct them in a global, general plan, help to make their solutions and aspirations.

Alice is Alice in Wonderland. Lily is a flower

- The second girl appeared because you decided that one child is not enough?

- We wanted a friend for the first child. Children living without brothers and sisters are very boring. It turned out a friend. Great. They are friends.

- The chain on the floor lies so huge - is that, children play in it?

-In my opinion, with its help they protect their territory from us. We do not have walls, everything is a little inorganized in terms of separation of space, this is such a border.

- And what is their name?

- Alice is the eldest, Lily is the youngest.

- Who chose the names?

- We. When a girl, I want something magical. Alice is, of course, "Alice in Wonderland." Lily is a flower, also a very delicate, magical name.

- What are they borrowing from you?

- They look at us how we react to situations, how we defend our position. Learn to defend their own. For example, they do not eat meat. They have a clear position, no, do not give us meat. We do not eat it because we love animals. There was a moment when we lived with Petit's mother. She said that you need to eat meat, otherwise the children will die. I gave them meat secretly. They recognized the taste and at some point began to ask. Then we explained: if you want, go to the bird market, buy a living chicken, you will kill it, cook and eat it. Not someone will kill her for you and take responsibility for it, but you yourself. They thought and decided that they did not want meat.

- I agree. All children need to be brought up like that.

- It is necessary to explain, not forbidden.

- Why did you decide not to give the eldest daughter to school?

- They wanted to give. Even signed up, went to the meeting. There was a woman who told how she would teach children ... discipline, walking and silent. And he honestly said that the first 4 years they will be taught discipline. And they must walk in shape. In general, we went to the meeting - and came out of there with the understanding that we want to give the child knowledge, and not to develop a reflex of subordination and herd instinct from him. They did not want such a fate for Alice. She is a living, smart girl, seriously engaged in chess and Thai boxing. In general, they decided to take on education so far.

-You are not afraid that some basic knowledge may be lost?

- For example, I do not know the multiplication table. I know very poorly geography, biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics. That is, in principle, from school, besides hatred for school, I did not take anything. I liked literature and history. Yes, I started reading - but I would read without school. For ten years I was tormented, and for what? For the sake of certificate, apparently.

Lie

- With a lie, a serious question, very much. The question of the price of the word. The word is all that we have. If you said, you must comply with an agreement. One story is connected with this. Petya and I already had a free relationship, but there was an agreement to tell each other to each other. I broke the word. After action, you can say a thousand words, but they will no longer have any meaning and weight. I thought for a long time how I could combine a torn connection between reality and my word. And at some point I realized what to do. I chopped off my finger. I appointed myself such a price for a broken word - two phalanx of the little finger. Then she told Peter. He agreed. So the connection between action and the word was restored. I thought about it for about a week. At some point I decided: today. I went, took an ax from the neighbor. Put a chair, laid a finger on him, and chopped off.

- One blow?

- No, of course. It is only in films that a person cuts off a finger with one blow. Either I had a dumb ax, or there was not enough strength. I transported for a long time.

These two small phalanxes are all the lie that was in my life

- How did you stop in the process? This is a terrible pain.

- It was the most difficult thing to start. There was tension. Then it began - and it was already clear, only forward. When she separated her finger, she simply wiped her blood and went to the emergency room to the street of Pravda.

- Didn't she scream from pain?

- But there was no pain. I was so painful inside that the liberation in the form of bodily pain came. I am not a masochist, it was just that the nailed that needed to be separated, to remove. These two small phalanxes are all the lies that was in my life: I removed it, and it is no more. My word means exactly what I say, I do it one hundred percent.

“ Now you should be very scary to lie.”

“Now you think before you give a word.” Another important question arises here - that our society is used to not asking a woman. In a society where I live, they are condescending to female lies: a woman, what to take from her? She is frivolous. I am for equality. For the fact that there is a word that must be kept regardless of gender.

- You fell in love then?

- No. There was a rush, absolutely not serious. But entertained serious things. Therefore, I am grateful that it was.

Life

The apartment of Peter Pavlensky and his ally in the center of St. Petersburg is remarkable: without wallpaper, without curtains and without furniture. So could live Rakhmetov or Evgeny Bazarov; So the revolutionaries of our days live - in a space cleansed of all superfluous.

- Where is the cabinet with clothes?

- We do not have a closet. Вот висит голубой, тряпочный – это шкаф.

– ​Это вся ваша одежда?

– Да, там какая-то одежда. У нас немного одежды. Там что-то еще на полу.

– ​Где кастрюли?

– Вон, на плите одна стоит. Можно чай заварить.

– ​Как вы умудряетесь жить, сведя свой быт к таким спартанским условиям?

– Наоборот, все очень просто и понятно. Есть место, где спать, место, где работать, где есть. У нас нет душа, но это сейчас, сделаем потом в какой-то момент.

– ​Нет душа, а как без него?

– Можно сходить в гости.

– ​По-твоему, это необходимый минимум вещей, который нужен человеку в принципе?

– Это минимум, который не отвлекает и не заставляет тебя хотеть большего. Люди перегружены вещами. Мебелью. Они хотят еще, еще и еще. Соответственно, попадают в ловушку потребления. Тебе кажется, что отстоять себя ты можешь, только покупая вещи, а для этого нужны деньги, соответственно нужно работать. Включается цепочка, попадаешься в ловушку – и все. Мы оба, Петя и я – официально не работаем. Мы делаем только свои дела. Занимаемся политической пропагандой. Это наш официальный род деятельности.

– ​Вы долго шли к такой минимизации быта? Когда квартира стала квартирой без шкафа, душа, посуды и занавесок?

– У нас никогда не было шкафа. Никогда не было занавесок. Были какие-то матрасы. На самом деле мы так жили всегда, никогда не было много вещей. Петя рассказывал, что в какой-то момент, он стал просто выкидывать из своего дома шкафы. Понял, что нет воздуха, что нужно срочно избавиться от лишних вещей.

– ​Тебе никогда не хочется новую кофточку?

- No. Я очень просто одеваюсь. Вообще это нормально, когда ты исключаешь излишние потребности и все время направляешь на работу: идет рост и развитие дела.

– ​Дети понимают, что вы живете как-то по-другому, чем остальные?

- Yes, of course. Когда они ходят в гости, они могут сказать, что у нас по-другому. Они же знают, почему мы так живем.

– ​Они не хотят вещей?

- No. Как нам кажется, у них нет конфликта с их внутренним миром и внешним, в котором они живут.

– ​Не требуют больше игрушек?

– У нас нет телевизора, они не смотрят рекламу, соответственно, они выключены из контекста потребления. Конечно, когда им дарят игрушки, они сразу начинают хотеть больше, но мы объясняем им, почему это происходит, что это ловушка, в которую они попались. Их быстро отпускает.

Род деятельности

– ​Ты тоже художник-акционист?

- In no case. Я главный редактор журнала "Политическая пропаганда". Это журнал о политическом искусстве, который мы делаем вместе с Петром. В какой-то момент мы ощутили сильный недостаток информации о политическом искусстве, о том, как оно представлено в мире. Мы решили компенсировать это упущение. Сначала это был интернет-проект, потому что у нас вообще не было денег. Потом появилась печатная версия. И так как мы за экономику дара, то сами находим деньги на печать, а потом раздаем журнал бесплатно.

– ​Сколько лет вы издаете?

– С 2012 года.

– ​Как Петр пришел к политическому акционизму?

– Все началось три года назад, когда посадили Pussy Riot.

– ​А что было до?

– Петр поступил в вуз, хотел быть художником, заниматься творчеством. И уже там понял, как устроено это заведение. Политика вузов направлена на то, чтобы сделать из потенциальных художников обслуживающий персонал для декорирования режима и клерикален. Там учили работать на заказчика. Петр уже в процессе учебы стал интересоваться современным искусством. Поступил в "Проарте" на дополнительно образование – это что-то вроде курсов для современных художников. Там было все то же самое. Ему стало противно. Преподаватели бесились: потом, когда к ним приезжал Центр "Э", они дали Пете плохие характеристики: “был обособлен, не старался влиться в коллектив, продвигал свои идеи, которые шли вразрез с учебным планом”. Художник, по их мнению, должен был быть пластилином в руках заказчика. А потом случился суд над Pussy Riot, Петр понял, что это уже нападение на искусство. И нужно действовать. Художники молчали. И музыканты молчали. Петя сначала просто хотел встать в одиночный пикет с плакатом, но потом стал думать: "А хочу ли я отвечать, когда мусор попросит предъявить документы?" Решил, что нет. И зашил себе рот.

– ​Как они реагировали, когда увидели зашитый рот?

– Они реагируют всегда одинаково – не знают, что делать. Начинают звонить тем, кто выше по рангу. Начальники стали решать, что делать и вызвали на помощь "скорую помощь". Повезли в больничку на психиатрическое освидетельствование. Тогда встретился первый друг. Врач спросила: "Это за Pussy Riot?” Петр кивнул. Она сказала: "Я поддерживаю". И написала диагноз – психически здоров. Даже дала ему денег на маршрутку и проводила до остановки.

– ​Где ты находишься в момент его акций? Сидишь дома и смотришь интернет?

– Я не всегда знаю, что они состоятся.

– ​То есть, вы не обсуждаете их дома: это будет сегодня в таком-то часу?

– Есть контекст, в котором мы живем. Я могу ожидать чего угодно, и ожидаю чего угодно. Мы не живем от акции к акции, мы существуем в непрерывном потоке происходящего и осмыслении. Параллельно делаем журнал, ведем работу по другим проектам, занимаемся детьми, решаем вопросы, как существовать, что есть, как находить еду.

– ​И как вы ее находите?

- Differently. Были моменты, когда денег вообще не было. Нам люди помогают, мы не отказываемся. Когда были плохие времена – добывали еду. Человек сейчас превратился в беспомощное существо. Животное ведь всегда может найти себе еду. Идет и добывает. И мы так же можем. Просто забыли.

– ​Никогда не прижимало настолько, что возникали мысли выйти на любую бессмысленную работу?

– Были моменты. Но как прижимало, так и отпускало. Недели две тяжко, а потом раз и все выравнивается. Устройство на работу – простой надежный способ. Сел на зарплату и получаешь 20 тысяч в месяц: здесь в Питере у людей маленькие зарплаты. Пока как-то удавалось выживать без официальных трудоустройств. Сейчас для нас это уже принципиальный вопрос. Мы не будем работать на кого-то, чтобы продавать свое время, это самое драгоценное, что у нас есть.

– ​Вы дружите с Pussy Riot?

– Нет, мы не дружили, просто знали о них, но не общались. Я с Надей познакомилась только сейчас на суде в Москве.

– ​По-твоему, какой сейчас период у Pussy Riot?

– Я могу только цитировать Надю, она для себя этот вопрос решила. История тех Pussy Riot, по ее словам, закончена. Их время прошло. Есть преемственность. Когда закончилась "Война", практически сразу начались Pussy Riot. Когда Pussy Riot "закрыли", появился Петя. Эстафета передается, высказывания продолжают жить.

Когда внутри горит огонь идеи, ты понимаешь, что это часть пути

– ​Ты участвуешь в его акциях?

- No. Я делаю свои. Вот, например, у нас была акция – презентация книги Александра Бренера и Барбары Шурц "Бомбастика" на выставке Зураба Церетели в Русском музее. Церетели – проститутка, которая ложится под любой режим и хочет удовлетворить его максимально. Режим, соответственно, поощряет его премиями, деньгами и большими выставками. Сам он, к сожалению, не приехал. Была его дочка. Я вручила "Бомбастику", которую прямо там же достала из себя. Так Бомбастика появилась в России.

– ​Она не поняла, откуда именно ты ее достала?

– Она была, видимо, в своих розовых мечтах, стояла с цветами, довольная очень. Я извлекла "Бомбастику", вручила, она взяла, мы сфотографировались, я ушла.

– ​Это больно – книжку в себя засовывать?

– Нет, это возможно. Книжка маленькая.

– ​Там были фотографы?

- Were. Половина перепугалась. Большая проблема со страхом. Люди боятся.

– ​Почему ты не берешь своих, проверенных?

– Потому что их нет. Текучка. Слетают из страха, не отвечают, исчезают.

– ​Когда вы говорили о дверях Лубянки дома, вы понимали, что дело может кончиться тюремным заключением?

– Мы эту акцию не обсуждали, я про нее вообще ничего не знала. Думаю, Петя про себя прикидывал какие-то варианты.

– ​Т ы о ней узнала, когда она уже случилось?

– Да, с утра. Из новостей.

– ​И что? Испугалась?

– Нет, очень обрадовалась. Подумала, наконец-то случилась акция, точно показывающая ситуацию в России. Угроза терроризма сегодня исходит от ФСБ и органов власти и направлена на жителей нашей страны. Жители должны противостоять этой угрозе.

– ​Тебя не расстроило, что ему могут дать "двушечку" и вы долго не увидитесь?

– Когда у тебя внутри горит огонь идеи, даже если с человеком что-то случается, ты понимаешь, что это часть пути. Я знаю, чем мы занимаемся. Я знаю, на что мы оба готовы. Мы готовы идти до конца.