Time for fools

On February 8, director Alexei Uchitel filed a statement with the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation with a request to protect the staff of the film "Matilda" from "threats and illegal actions of extremist persons", as well as from slander by State Duma deputy Natalia Poklonskaya

The conflict that has developed around Alexei Uchitel’s film Matilda, which has not yet been released, is about the famous ballerina Matilda Kshesinskaya and her romance with Nicholas II, demonstrates, first of all, that in our glorious Putin times, ignoramuses and fools have become incredibly bold and insolent. I really love an anecdote, or rather, a real historical story from the life of Pushkin: under him, Nicholas I was somehow praised, they said how disciplined he was, how he delves into everything, put things in order. And Pushkin said: yes, he is good, but he has spawned so many fools that there will be enough for our great-grandchildren. And enough is enough: today the situation is exactly the same as almost 200 years ago. Autocratic power generally breeds idiots.

I recall Kulikov’s monologue from the film “Nine Days of One Year”: “A fool, a strong and reliable fool, unusually accurately reflects the uniqueness of the era…” also silent. Would the president say at least once "enough!" - maybe these stupid statements, scandals from scratch would stop. But he does not speak, he flirts with the plebs, and this eloquent silence bears such fruits - aggressive ignorance.

The most striking thing is that in the entire State Duma there was not a single even slightly literate deputy who would straighten up this prosecutor and remind: in St. Petersburg, not far from the Peter and Paul Fortress, near the Trinity Bridge, there is a mansion donated by Nicholas II, the ballerina herself - Matilda Kshesinskaya. But neither Mrs. Poklonskaya nor the State Duma know anything of this, thereby demonstrating complete ignorance - of the authorities and their own.

Of course, on the one hand, this is outrageous, but on the other, it causes Homeric laughter and gives rise to a feeling of some kind of coven, when the authorities, instead of dealing with real problems in the country, allow this muddy foam to be whipped up. After all, it’s not yet known what kind of film it is, who knows, maybe it didn’t turn out too successful at all, or maybe it was brilliant, but now all this bacchanalia around brought him such success in advance that even those who didn’t intend to go to watch it. And this fits in so well with the wonderful tradition of our fatherland, when at first aggressive ignoramuses persecute and punish the creators, and then ascribe to themselves their world fame and are proud of “their” heroes. So it was with Brodsky, and a very recent example is Pussy Riot, who, after the scandal surrounding their singing in church, became popular and in demand all over the world. And this happens over and over again, as if we were bewitched, and we are moving in a circle. I really like the phrase, which, alas, does not belong to me: Russia has a terrible past and a great future - and it will always be so! So I think: maybe "Matilda" went the same way? ..