How good it is to be a demon

Some thoughts about the ornate ways of culture and spirituality

The patron saint of Muz Bastrykin decided to create a council for culture under the Investigative Committee. It will contribute to the formation of patriotism and traditional spiritual and moral values. One of the main tasks of the Council is to increase the shaft of films about A separate question: how will this neoplasm be different from other similar ones, including the Presidential Council Council? And here is an even more important question: are such undertakings in reality, finally, solve the problem with patriotism and values?

Observing the snowy coma of similar initiatives, she remembered that this was a kind of tradition. On another historical round, in another context and even in another universe, but a tradition. Count Dmitry Andreevich Tolstoy, when he was his Minister of Internal Affairs and the chief of the gendarmes, also believed that he should also engage in the internal spiritual life of society. He, like Bastrykin with his upcoming advice, thought primarily about the young generation. Meth about yes it was as follows: it is better not to kill the flesh, but to direct the thought (or the thought of killing - here it will turn out). The answer to the creative column was an increase in the number of bombers from among citizens already infected with freedom. The piquancy of the situation added one more consideration. Under Alexander II, Count Tolstoy went to famous reformers, and under Alexander III signed up in the camp of the main counter -reformers. But this is a completely different story. Although, perhaps, not the other.

One of the dramas of our time is the drama of ideas and people doomed to a rapid change in the fate. In the most swiftness lies something dual, confused, sometimes lackey. And if life is just doomed to adapt to a new canon, then the spiritual life stems according to special laws. You can only sympathize with the state that is trying to resolve that it is not subject to quick adjustment. All problems with genuine culture lie here.

So Bastrykina, as I understand it, worries not only the quantity, but also the quality of the current films about his and World War II. The quantitative plan is fulfilled regularly, and with qualitative - trouble.

Recently watched the old Soviet film "Ivan", which I had not seen before. To say that this is propaganda cinema means to say nothing. But a miracle happened. The main role was played by Anatoly Papanov. He played the tragedy of a little man so that the soul trembled. The great artist lived here and now on top of the text, directing, bossy aspirations. Why can old propaganda cinema be of high quality, but a new one cannot? Without applying for an exhaustive answer, I venture to assume - a matter of historical distance.

The generation of Soviet masters was not shocked by instant changes. They existed for decades in about the same paradigm. Their gift was tempered in the swamp atmosphere of the proposed circumstances. In such an unnatural natural selection, only large talents survived. For the history of three years - a moment. Now talents in culture, including cinema, do not appear, but are appointed. Zakhar Prilepin can tirelessly repeat about the outstanding successes of Z-Poesia. But the pioneers will not read the poems of Anna Dolgareva in chorus (she is one of the best in her generation), but Konstantin Simonova “Wait for me” (I saw it on Pushkinskaya Square).

And until the state will understand the banal truth about the nature of the gift, the tips and fighters for all the good against all the bad will multiply exponentially.

There is another perspective of modern high art, which sobbchak was perspicacious. In her interpretation, the problem looks like this: "The battle of patrons." Ksenia Anatolyevna was pleased to return Danila Kozlovsky to his native penalties, who will celebrate the 40th anniversary of a large concert in Russia. And moreover, she remembered that the artist wrote tough posts. And Ivan Urgant, who did not write anything, but only laid out a black square, is still prohibited. For that, and for another, informed Sobchak reports, various important people asked in high offices. She calls this the "battle of patrons." The Kozlovsky party won, the Urgant party lost.

Reflecting on the ornate ways of domestic spirituality, I came to a paradoxical conclusion. Today, the most advantageous role is to be a demon. In recent years, Nikita Mikhalkov does not make a movie, and if he shoots, then not outstanding. He was all the more before the theater, until he got his own, had nothing to do, except for his performance based on his own film “12”. Nevertheless, he does not forget to leave a bright mark in the area of ​​the house. The theater of the film actor on Povarskaya is now richly restored and bears the proud name "Workshop" 12 "of Nikita Mikhalkov. The constructivism monument is reformatted in a modern sample of the imperial style. But this is not the end of the film. To be continued.

I read an interesting message in the local public. It turns out that the name has changed at the stop on the garden ring. The former "Kudrinskaya Square" is now called "Kudrinskaya Square," Workshop "12" of Nikita Mikhalkov. " The names of a stop of six words are a big exclusive. You can add another one to the lush titles of Nikita Sergeyevich - the genius of the place. I’ll finish the column and go to admire with my own eyes with a new miracle of the Moscow location.