Translated material
Meeting of writers
The text published by Colta.ru is based on the transcript of the reporting and re-collection of the Russian Pen-Center, held on December 15, 2016. All replicas are genuine. There is a transcript and video filming of the meeting in the editorial office.
Leo Tolstoy enters in pajamas, everywhere - a clear meadow.
Joseph Brodsky, "Presentation"
Actors and their prototypes
A man in the Presidium is a member of the executive committee writer Boris Evseev
Woman in the Presidium - member of the executive committee poet Marina Kudimova
Director of the Pen-Center -Director Mikhail Demchenkov
The head of the counting commission is the author of books for children Tatyana Ponomareva
The head of the audit commission - writer Marina Tarasova
I.O. President of the Pen-Center -writer Evgeny Popov
Former President of the Russian Pen-Center (who reported his departure from this post in March)-writer Andrei Bitov
People from the audience are members of the Russian Pen-Center, Prozaic, poets, publishers: Olga Drobot, Alexander Arkhangelsky, Alexander Bubnov, Marina Vishnevetskaya, Marina Boroditskaya, Sergey Yakovlev, Olga Warsaw, Maxim Amelin, Leonid Bakhnov and others.
Act I
A small hall in the old mansion located in the center of Moscow. At the table of the Presidium is two. While they carry out ritual procedures, declaring the number of registered and choosing an accounting commission, the scene is half -bombarded. Lateous. The quiet greetings of people who have not seen each other have long been heard.
A man on the Presidium: our next task is to announce the agenda ... Further, our main task today is the election of the President of the Pen-Center. You received wonderful voting ballots. And many, as I saw, have already been omitted (indicates a nearby urn for voting) . The presidential election will be secret voting, of course. Then the approval of the vote by the counting commission.
Voice from the audience: on the agenda a question.
The second voice from the audience: to discuss the agenda on the items!
A man on the presidium: everything is fine, you will discuss the agenda for those performances that will be made now.
Voice from the audience: you had to put her for discussion.
The third voice from the audience: And if we want to bring something on the agenda, what, we can’t already?
A man in the presidium: you cannot make changes on the agenda. Additions are possible, but they ... I want to read you here: “There is a debate, and there are different things” [1] . Further on the agenda, the elected president (we hope that it will be) reads his list of vice presidents and executive committee. An open vote is provided here. Next, the election of the audit commission. Further about work on a new charter.
Voice from the audience: Discuss the summons!
A famous TV presenter, writer, is suitable for the microphone.
A man on the presidium: No, we will not give a word.
Famous TV presenter: by jurisdiction. Do you give a word for the jurisdiction?
A man in the presidium (looking for the head of the counting commission with his eyes): Now the results will be announced.
Additions to the agenda, dear friends, are not provided for us. But you must voice them during issues that will be discussed.
Voice from the audience: the general meeting has the right to supplement the agenda, this is written in the charter!
The second voice: This is outrageous!
Man on the Presidium: The Charter says another. And we live in this charter and will live, dear friends.
Voice from the audience: just the question!
A man in the presidium: the question of the charter will be later. (A well -known TV presenter who approached the microphone) Do not do this, Mr. A., do not break the meetings!
Voice from the audience: Do you understand that you are violating the charter?
Noise in the hall, exclamations: "We have additions to the agenda!"
Man on the Presidium: on the agenda, we have a performance by the acting president.
I.O. President: Let me say the word, gentlemen? You will yell so until the morning!
The noise in the hall is growing. The exclamations are heard: "You violate the charter!"
Woman on the Presidium: After the report of the revision commission, the debate will begin. Calm down. (Acting president) Do not pay attention.
I.O. President: Well, how not to refer? They will say "there is no democracy."
With the beginning of the report read out from the sheet of the report, the noise in the hall passes into the hum of disinterest, through which to the viewer from the report of the acting President (about eight meetings of the executive committee and more than thirty statements and appeals made by the Executive Committee) only fragments of phrases: about the detention of Miroslava Berdnik, a famous Kyiv publicist ... regarding the death of journalist Dmitry Tsilikin ... On the attack of the hooligans on the participants of the contest of senior students ... in Odessa for political motives, a pregnant journalist arrested ... About The inadmissibility of the unauthorized use of the Russian Pen-Center logo ...
The whisper of those sitting in the hall is heard: “Let's write a note to the presidium”, “This is useless!”
A man on the presidium: I would like to remind point 5.8 of the charter: the executive committee organizes the work of the meeting, and not vice versa. This is clearly and definitely said. The executive committee thought over everything, and now our acting The president spoke out. According to the Executive Committee, you can speak. The debate is two minutes, please.
Famous translator: I have the following question: here you are saying “in accordance with the charter”, and what charter do you mean? What charter are we talking about?
I.O. President: We are talking about the charter, according to which you all, here have entered, you read, I hope, tired, and there are all the points presented here.
Famous translator: Can I allow myself some clarification? It turned out such a situation that we have a charter of two types. We have a charter that was posted on the website of our Pen-center, which was sent to us, and there is a charter whose front side looks exactly the same, which is scorched in supervisory authorities. And, unfortunately, these charters differ from each other in three significant moments. These three points relate to the elections. I don’t even know how this could turn out that one charter lies in your safe, and another in supervisory authorities.
Man on the Presidium: What supervisory authorities do you mean?
Famous translator: This is a tax inspectorate. I can present a copy that we have received [2] .
Man on Presidium: Tax Inspectorate - what does it have to do with it?
Famous translator: And, unfortunately, these two charters differ in three very important points - these are points 5.3 and 5.8. They all concern the elections. On the basis of the charter that hangs on the site, only the executive committee has the right to put forward its candidates for the position of president ... And on the basis of the Charter, which is registered in the supervisory authorities, all participants in this meeting have the right to nominate candidates.
I.O. President: Tell me, when you entered, you took the charter in the tax inspectorate?!
The famous translator: it somehow never occurred to me that in a human rights organization you could face such a situation. I don’t even know what to call it, I would then call it the word “forgery”.
A man on the presidium: you actually choose expressions.
A well -known translator: what else to call, if the accepted charter is the same dates, the same front, title sheet on it, the same content is everywhere, it varies only in three points that relate to the management elections. (I.O. President) knows the executive committee with what charter works?
A man on the presidium: So I represent our lawyer, a member of our PEN club ... She is a specialist in the charters! Charter specialist. (To a famous translator) Please leave the microphone and give ... you have exhausted your two minutes. (Lawyer) And you sit down for now. (Hall) The lawyer will get acquainted and give his ... next report of our director. Ask.
BLACKOUT
Act II
The same hall is twenty minutes later. The director completes his performance.
Director: With the charter, everything is not so simple. We need to decide who we are: the Russian branch of the International Pen-Club or Public Organization . Now the charter is engaged in a specialist in the charters, she, of course, has a legal framework. I think she will perform in the debate ...
Man on the Presidium: We have a lawyer's performance ...
Director: And all the questions will answer you.
Famous TV presenter (this time from the microphone): Dear friends, good afternoon. The question of the charter of the future is one question. The question of the charter of the current is fundamentally important. No matter what positions we occupy in this life, no matter what bets make, but everything should be according to the rules and laws. In order to understand whether our collection and all its subsequent decisions are authorized or unlawful, whatever they may be, we must understand what charter we live today: the model 1998-1999, signed by Deputy Minister of Justice Sergienko, or on the basis of another, unregistered ... Because there are discrepancies. If we act on the basis of the Charter registered in 1999, and this is the law, according to the law! - This is one statement of the question. Then really - why I wanted to speak on the agenda. Just because then it is really necessary to make the opportunity to nominate candidates at the meeting. If it is legal (not from our point of view, I emphasize, but from the point of view of registration) another - let's determine.
Woman on Presidium: on the agenda, a lawyer will answer all these questions. And we considered it reasonable that after the lawyer’s speech we would summarize a result, express our doubts, ask her questions - that’s all.
Famous TV presenter: so that there is no tension at the beginning, when the agenda is formed, this issue must be solved: on the basis of what.
Director (sharply changing the topic): so that we do not break spears, 98 people are present in the hall.
A man on the presidium: a very good result, I congratulate you!
Director: Great! And they voted in absentia ... But the quorum here (indicates the hall) on this issue is not and cannot be. Therefore, the production itself is misleading, it is already illegal.
Voice from the audience: Well, let's go home?
Director: The charter will still change! And then let the lawyers report. Now it's just leaving aside, muddy water. I will not say bad words, but it's not good.
Famous TV presenter: Well, muddy water on your conscience. But if this charter does not imply the right to nominate at the meeting of a new presidential candidate and new candidates in the Executive Committee - this is one story. If it suggests, this is different. My position, which suggests. But if you legally prove to me that no, then another story. But it should be legally clean.
The man is on the presidium: we understood your position, thanks ... (Looking for the head of the counting commission with our eyes.) You raised the question, and we will answer.
The head of the counting commission: here I have on my hands I have data voting on the Internet - preliminary. Only 181 people voted. If another presidential candidate will be added, then only 98 will have a choice. But these 181 will not be able to take part in this vote. That's just this is about.
Man on the Presidium: Yes, thanks. We actually figured out this issue. Sit down. And you sit down. There are people who will never perform. They arrived specially from the province. And now one of them asks for words.
The writer from the province (looking into a pre -prepared sheet): I have a replica and an ad. When engaged in human rights activities, defending human rights, we forgot that inside our foam, each of us has the right of a person, the right to ensure that your colleague behaves respectfully ... (looking up from the leaf) without muddy words from any side. Because in the province there is a decrease in confidence in the human rights statements of foam, and the resonance from these statements is not the same.
A man on the presidium (suggests): About the executive committee, perhaps, about the directorate.
The writer from the province: So here I am ...
Man in the Presidium: About the Executive Committee!
The writer from the province: regarding the executive committee, if already to me ... I am a person not quite competent in this ... I consider the activities of the executive committee as a whole positive ... The activities according to the charter need to continue to ensure that the consensus is ... I invite you tomorrow to the wrong evening.
Man on the Presidium: the word for the report of the revision commission is provided ...
The light on the stage is mixed. So that the audience of our performance is not tired of the monotony of what is happening, the characters in this scene will go to the microphone and move their lips silently. And their replicas will be projected onto the back of the scene, quickly replacing each other.
The head of the audit commission at the microphone (silently articulates).
While her replicas run around the screen with subtitles, a famous poet, a classic of modern literature, slowly enters the hall. He is helped to sit in the front row. Its appearance causes some revival in the hall. Someone rises from their places to photograph the classic.
Subtit replicas: this year the life of our foam was somehow very saturated, it was not formal ... I will read it specifically-about the executive committees ... I have the first one from March 3-to postpone the reception of new members ... to actively carry out public events, to intensify the connection with the media ... about the collection of proposals for the charter-this is really a very important thing and to some extent deciding for the revision commission ... I personally have not seen at some discrepancies, I personally did not see three different charters [3] . It was not entirely clear to me how so, why 180 people, I want explanations, could not take part in the vote. How? This is completely incomprehensible to me.
A man on the Presidium: Dear friends, a respected living classic has come. Let us greet him.
Applause, flashes of the fowders.
Former president of the Russian Pen-Center (unexpectedly for everyone, rising from the table standing next to the Presidium table): I He was not present at the last executive committee, where two candidates were nominated, quite worthy candidates. One, Evgenia Popov, I know for a long time, in every way and for a long time, in detail. Another, Evseev, I know a little less ... Mindful that I was elected from three candidates at one time, I propose, if he agrees that there was a third candidate from me, I did not have time to nominate it, but I think that this is a decent person, I will then explain why, this is Vladislav ***. Here, so that nevertheless it was chosen from three.
Voice from the audience: We also want to put forward the third.
A man on the presidium: I want to say right away that the charter ... We respect very much - I don’t see where Vladislav *** ... Slav, we love you very much, but I want to answer that we simply cannot introduce the third candidate now.
Voice from the audience: Let's listen to the lawyer first!
A man in the Presidium (former president): We had time to nominate candidates, we know that you could not there, were busy.
Former President of the Russian Pen-Center: I was simply not healthy.
Candidate from the former president: the question is removed, because I refuse, the question is removed.
A man in the presidium: Vladislav refuses.
Candidate from the former president: I am very grateful to you for your trust and bow in every way to you, but because of my life I can’t just ...
Man on the Presidium: Thank you! Thank you. Everything was just announced, we have a special sheet in which - who put forward, who did what and so on. All this is absolutely open. And, of course, if this were done on time ... In general, we would probably have listened.
BLACKOUT
Act III
The same hall after 20-30 seconds.
A man is on the presidium: and now I would like to say that you need to actually go to voting.
Voice from the audience: Can you have a replica on the work of the audit commission?
Man in the Presidium: replica on the audit commission. See how democratic we are?
Prozaic (at the microphone): Dear colleagues, according to the charter, the audit commission monitors how the life of the executive committee, the life of the foam is interconnected with the charter. I want to ask the head of the audit commission, what version of the charter she used.
The head of the audit commission: I used the classic version, canonical.
Prose writer: The canonical version lies in the safe of our director.
The head of the audit commission: But this is not a state secret.
Woman in the Presidium: as well as scripture.
Voice from the audience: The fact is that another version is posted on the site.
Proseic: The fact is that all the latest meetings were held in violation of the charter.
Woman in the Presidium: Russian Pen-Center lives strictly according to the charter.
A man is on the presidium: only according to the charter lives.
Woman on the Presidium: So, we vote on the agenda.
Prose writer: First I must receive the response of the head of the audit commission ...
Woman in the Presidium: You will receive answers from a lawyer.
Voice from the audience: release the lawyer at last.
Man on the Presidium: Well, let the lawyer work something.
Prose writer: I still did not understand ...
Woman on the Presidium: there was an exhaustive answer to the question, this is simply an artificial delay in non -existent controversy.
Man on the Presidium: Thank you.
Woman in the Presidium: and an active search for the enemy.
Man on the Presidium: Dear colleagues, let's work. Let's not get away from work. Therefore, we go immediately to voting. For the executive man. Who is for approving the work of the Executive Committee of the Russian Pen Center?
Voice from the audience: debate, debate should be before voting! I submitted the first application for the performance. Why...
Man on the Presidium: debate on what issue?
Russian writer: For executive!
A man on the presidium: well, according to the executive man, and we will vote ... one performing on the executive man.
Voice from the audience: why one?
A man in the presidium: how much more?
Voice from the audience: I, too, for example, I want to say.
Man on the Presidium: everyone here wants to say. No need to give a voice from the hall, we are already crowded with these votes! Dear friends, already buzzing in my head.
Русский писатель (от микрофона): Ни одна демократическая система не работает так, чтобы после ухода премьера оставшийся кабинет, кооптировав самостоятельно, ввел в себя новых членов, а затем выдвигал нового премьера. Мы разрушаем...
Мужчина в президиуме: У нас это прописано в уставе.
Русский писатель: Дайте мне сказать...
Голос из зала: Нет этого в уставе!
Русский писатель: Мы разрушаем собственную демократическую организацию. Я считаю, что даже если в какой-то мере нынешний устав ограничивает наши возможности, нам необходимо сказать нынешнему исполкому, что в их интересах, в интересах общих наших, чтобы погасить наши собственные внутренние трения, надо предложить исполкому добровольно уйти в отставку в полном составе. Либо подтвердить полномочия конкретно и персонально каждого члена Общим собранием. Либо выбрать новый состав.
Мужчина в президиуме: Спасибо. Значит, еще раз читаю то, что написано в уставе: «Исполком предварительно рассматривает вопросы... выводит и вводит в состав исполкома новых членов с последующим утверждением на очередном собрании». Не выдвижением, а утверждением [4] .
Шум в зале, реплики: «Дайте все-таки уже юристу сказать!»
BLACKOUT
Женщина в президиуме: Уважаемые коллеги, мы переходим к самому главному вопросу нашего собрания — к выборам президента.
Известный переводчик: Можно как раз по выборам президента?
Женщина в президиуме: Нет, извините.
Известный переводчик: Я имею право выдвинуть кандидатуру.
Женщина в президиуме: Вы имеете право выдвинуть кого угодно. И вы уже это делали.
Голос из зала: А вы знаете, тут написано, что Общее собрание имеет право...
Мужчина в президиуме: Это взято в НАЛОГОВОЙ ПОЛИЦИИ! А мы полиции не подчиняемся. Это полицейский протокол!
Поэт: Это наш устав, тут написано: Общее собрание ПЕН-центра может выдвинуть еще кандидатуры! Статья пять, пункт восемь: Общее собрание. Члены ПЕН-центра могут выдвигать другие кандидатуры! Я хочу выдвинуть еще одну кандидатуру!
Мужчина в президиуме (отбирая микрофон): Выписка из устава, который хранится в налоговой инспекции, — вот что здесь написано!!
Женщина в президиуме: Мы будем вынуждены лишать слова.
Голос из зала: А вы и так не даете слова.
Шум, реплики накладываются друг на друга.
Мужчина в президиуме: У нас не Верховная рада Украины. Пожалуйста, садитесь! Потому что у нас не Верховная рада! А Москва, Россия.
Женщина в президиуме: Уважаемые члены Счетной комиссии, пожалуйста, приготовьтесь к голосованию.
Голос из зала: Выборы будут нелегитимными. Вы это понимаете?
Женщина в президиуме: После выборов президента выступит юрист и даст объяснения.
Голос из зала: Нелегитимными!
Женщина в президиуме: Ну что ж, вы их оспорите в судебном порядке.
Мужчина в президиуме: У нас большинство решает, большинство!
Женщина в президиуме: Мы начинаем голосование.
Шум в зале. Реплики накладываются друг на друга: «Мы не можем голосовать, давайте юриста!», «Предъявите юриста!», «Вы обещали предъявить юриста перед голосованием!», «Вы узурпировали власть».
Мужчина в президиуме: Призываю к выборам президента. Кто за то, чтобы президентом...
Женщина в президиуме: Идет подсчет голосов!
BLACKOUT. На заднике появляются ТИТРЫ.
За новоизбранного президента проголосовали 40 человек из 104, зарегистрировавшихся на собрании. Победу обеспечили 129 голосов, полученных кандидатом по итогам предварительного интернет-голосования [5] . Счетная комиссия, избранная лишь на собрании, ни подтвердить, ни опровергнуть эту цифру не могла.
На заднике надпись «ЭПИЛОГ».
Небольшой зал старого особняка на треть пуст. Оставшиеся продолжают кричать: «Юриста, юриста давайте!»
Мужчина в президиуме: Ну давайте не превращать наше собрание в балаган и в украинскую Верховную раду. Не надо этого делать! Мы все здравые люди! Голосуем! Кто за то, чтобы принять список нового президента с исполкомом и вице-президентами? Прошу «за»!
Голос из зала: Почему мы списком голосуем?
Новоизбранный президент: По кочану!
CURTAIN
[1] Общее собрание ПЕН-центра может дополнить предварительную повестку дня любым вопросом, относящимся к деятельности ПЕН-центра ( Устав Русского ПЕН-центра, п. 5.1 ).
[2] Любое физическое лицо может получить копию устава организации, обратившись в Налоговую инспекцию. Выдача копии устава происходит в регистрационном или территориальном налоговом органе по месту постановки на учет организации в качестве налогоплательщика.
[3] Видимо, оговорка. До этого речь шла о трех пунктах устава.
[4] Мужчина в президиуме вновь пользуется усеченной версией устава.
[5] Имеется в виду голосование по электронной почте.