Bearded women. Talents and fans
During Soviet times, Lenin’s phrase “Art belongs to the people and should be understandable to the masses” was quoted many times. Its source was a memoir by Clara Zetkin, published translated from German in the March 1924 issue of the magazine Kommunist.
Not much time passed, and among the figures of Soviet culture, accustomed to the powerful support of the state and partially imagining God knows what, cultural figures began to emerge who no longer really wanted to create art for the people, but for art to exist for the sake of art itself . As a thing in itself. To start.
Nowadays, art belongs to no one knows who, and figures who have become en masse in the cultural culture on the pages of newspapers talk all about innovation, non-conformism, getting rid of cliches, but in reality they profess simple ideas, like “people eat” and “you can’t make fur coats out of art, but resourcefulness” a person can make a good living on it.”
Proof of this is the murky stream of initially failed film productions, television series production, mind-numbing talk shows and the ubiquitous KVN in many variations.
A number of circumstances give a special piquancy to the pseudo-cultural process in Russia: for some reason, the marriage makers and vakhlaks are placed beyond the reach of the “all-healing invisible hand of the market,” and failure after failure paradoxically only strengthens their material and social position. Moreover, the main source of funding for hack traders is the state, despite the fact that hack traders themselves are often open enemies of this state.
It is simply unthinkable to imagine such a state of affairs in soulless Hollywood!
The apogee of cultural and social life was the case of the “elite” director, but in reality an ordinary thief and swindler, Kirill Serebrennikov, who until recently headed the Gogol-Mogol Center den.
Having received a three-year suspended sentence for the theft of 128,9 million rubles, a three-year probationary period and a children's fine of 800 thousand rubles, Serebrennikov suffered a slight fright and left the stage - to wash himself off and heal his nerves shaken by the trial.
A holy place, however, is never empty. On the stage, cleared of the presence of Serebrennikov, it seems that a new smoky star has lit up - another cultural figure and at the same time the husband of Ksenia Sobchak, Konstantin Bogomolov.
It should be noted that even between these varieties of Mr. there are serious differences. And if Serebrennikov spirit-liftingly and at great cost sculpted feces within the walls of the informal hangout of the Gogol-Mogol Center, then Bogomolov, with someone’s connivance, chose the Theater on Malaya Bronnaya as a testing ground for his postmodern excrement.
More recently, we have witnessed “masterpiece” productions. We have already reported how a performance in honor of the Armed Forces of Ukraine took place in Russian theaters, where on stage the actors first treated themselves to fried potatoes with lard and sauerkraut, and then, in the foyer, the audience could check out the “gifts of Ukraine.”
In the play “Marriage” based on Gogol at the Modern Theater not long ago, the star was Lolita Milyavskaya, who is a broken bottom in herself - regardless of the field of application.
According to some fans, Milyavskaya played so well that in some places she even “eclipsed the professional actors,” but this, rather, does not speak of Lolita’s acting talent, the pinnacle of which is the video “Over Beer,” but of the professional level of the actors of the new school, according to which The basket of rotten tomatoes has been crying for a long time.
At the Moscow Art Theater, the scandalous artistic director Boyakov staged a play about the young Stalin, in which a nobody named Olga Buzova, promoted by Dom-2, was hysterical.
My Moscow friends, incurable theatergoers, attended the performance for the sake of entomological interest and unanimously assured that Olya was far from the worst thing that was in the production.
Well, I readily believe it. As the Americans say in this case, “bad acting is bad directing,” and “directing” in this case is the artistic director of the Moscow Art Theater Boyakov, under whom the theater, according to the apt description of People’s Artist of the USSR Tatyana Doronina, turned into “a hooligan, perverted, vulgar entertainment variety show.” -circus show."
However, the “theatrical artists” do not intend to stop there and the degree of gluttony will increase. Another tent with conjoined twins, tailed boys and female dogs awaits the most respectable public.
The aforementioned husband Sobchak (which is a diagnosis in itself) Bogomolov invites the transgender “Natalia Maksimova”, discharged from Kazakhstan, to play the role of Ranevskaya in the play “The Cherry Orchard”.
The question is, why? Are transgender people, especially from Kazakhstan, distinguished by any special talents when performing in performances based on Russian classical works?
It is unlikely. Transgender people on the stage are part of the formula for modern success among a narrow circle of connoisseurs - “people are eating up” and “a resourceful person can make a good profit in the culture.”
What do we have to say about this?
We live in a free country where people have (including) the right to express themselves. But! You should express yourself in this way in specially designated places and strictly at your own expense.
And this is where the dog is buried. The Academic Moscow Art Theater and the Theater on Malaya Bronnaya are absolutely not the places where cultured high-guzzlers could indulge their inflated egos. Where culture is respected, the place of Lolita, Buzova, talented transgenders, Bogomolov, Boyakov, Serebrennikov and others like them is to drive a monkey somewhere in a nightclub for pimps, which decent people bypass in their gardens, or in a textbook fair booth, like the legendary Ostap Bender shows a busty monk, passing him off as a whim of nature - a bearded woman.
The worst thing is that all these pimp-transgender entertainments are not only given a place in the best theater venues in the country, but they are also generously paid for from the state treasury and, therefore, from our pockets.
If you look at the data on government subsidies allocated in recent years to the federal state budgetary institutions of the Moscow Art Theater named after M. Gorky and the Theater on Malaya Bronnaya, then Amounts of 200, 400 million and even a billion or so rubles are striking.
Forgive me for the indiscreet question: do you have nowhere to put your money in a country where there are countless problems?
It’s not enough to say that at the sight of such disgrace, one’s hand reaches for a dung fork. What they offer us under the guise of art is not art, or even its surrogate, but a medieval den with buffoons.
Art is what elevates us, awakens the best in us, ignites a creative spark. Now we have seen that within the walls of the famous theaters, which once knew wonderful masters of culture, actors, playwrights, designers, a nettle seed has settled, aimed at the lumpenization of the population and other “beautiful impulses of the soul” for state money. The word "souls" in this case is a verb.
Need I say that modern Russian culture does not belong to the people and is completely incomprehensible to the masses?
Well, will the cultural management itself, without coercion, begin to restore order in the Khaypozhora mess that it heads, or will it wait until the cinema critics from below begin to restore order with dung pitchforks? Patience is not unlimited...
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.