No need to be shy?

Alexander Gorbachev in the "cold" writes about music and what happened to the post -Soviet musical space after February 24:

“With the onset of the Putin era, this alliance [between musicians and the state. - approx. Polit.ru ] stabbed completely. Key media were divided by the zones of the influence of the main players of the industry - primarily producers and production centers, at least ready to cooperate with the state, as a maximum of its supporting (see relations . President with Igor Matvienko and the Lyube group). The main sources of the income of pop artists were corporate performances-and since the state soon crushed the whole large business, the pop economy now more depended not on a wide audience, which, in theory, was supposed to sell hits, but on a small group of permanent customers: why spend money on tours around the country, if you can get a fee for 10 concerts in one New Year's show? In part, this, it seems to me, is explained by a noticeable stagnation in the Russian pop music of the middle-end of the 2000s: the conveyor of the usual “stars factory” stamped songs and artists in pre-known parameters and almost in the absence of real competition, which several years ago stimulated the same producers-magnates (Matvienko, Krutny, Fadeev, Meladze) to come up with something new. ”

About the situation that has developed in the musical world over the past 30 years:

“This paradoxical situation can be interpreted in two ways. The first version-the one that is close to me, the one on which it is ethically based "do not need to be shy," it sounds like this: pop music supported the world, united people contrary to politicians, tried to bring humanism into a negative media space. The second could sound like this: all this was a screen, even if many built it unconsciously. Songs and dances covered imperial ambitions and preparation for war, helped to pretend that everything was fine when everything was abnormal. The musicians, flattered by the audience and money, involuntarily worked for colonialist optics, in which the Russians perceived Ukrainian artists as "ours". If these ties were torn earlier, the threat would be visible better. ”

About the present:

“There is no doubt that all these processes are most damaged by Russia: as has already been repeatedly noticed, the most important actor in the abolition of the Russian / Russian /“ post -Soviet ”culture is the Kremlin. The neighboring states in one way or another for 30 years perceived Moscow as a constituting another - that is, as a reference point, from which it is required to rebuild. Accordingly, in the former Soviet countries they cultivated their own cultural fields as fundamentally different from self -proclaimed metropolis. Russia, in turn, proudly collected precisely composite, umbrella, imperial, if you like, identity - and it has to build its separate, if not from scratch, then with obviously lower positions.

<...>

Their own, which, in theory, is supposed to be united and inspired, are just ears in the field, working material; The real audience is strangers, others, the same "all." Ultimately, the lyrical hero of the singer Shaman also turns to them - and requires love from them. But he, of course, intends to get it. In this sense, keywords in "I am Russian" - "My blood from my father." In the absurdity, clearly for the rhyme invented line, the harsh patriarchal reality shines through, where love and recognition is achieved through cruelty, through the belt, through flogging. Where respect is the right of strong. Where release is submission.

Honestly, I no longer think that this is not necessary to be shy. ”