The shoals of the “truth teller” Irtenyev
The poet Igor Irtenyev started checking out good people. And where does the elderly “truth teller” get this Komsomol enthusiasm from?
It would seem that in recent years Igor Moiseevich Irtenyev, the hereditary Rabinovich, has messed up so much on some topical issues that it would be better for him to remain silent and not shine a light. But we were daydreaming... The liberal old fart still wants a lot. Pointing a finger at the public opinion control panel. Monitor the correct expression of good faces in the “technical control departments”. Organize comradely trials over the “culling”.
Irtenyev found an absolutely insignificant reason for stinking games at the fan. He conscientiously announced the entire list of his Facebook friends, who had the temerity to also be friends with Zakhar Prilepin.
Irtenyev is perplexed: “You will never guess what unites these people, at least those whom I respect. All of them, until now, although most likely they have forgotten about it for a long time, are Facebook friends of the terry Stalinist Zakhar Prilepin. Your deeds are wonderful, Zucker!”
Blogger Alexey Aleshkovsky scolded him about the unhealthy tendency of the “truth teller” (who cannot remain silent) to compile proscription lists. And under Aleshkovsky’s status, fellow citizens put a full Panama hat of “gratitude” on Irtenyev.
In the comments under the sensational status of Igor Moiseevich there is a completely different “wedding”. And, apparently, he really bans the most dull ones. Because there’s no point in spoiling the overall picture of this comradely court.
The Facebook status of a “truth teller” could be considered innocent banter, if not for “minor” nuances.
Some of these “Facebook friends of the terry Stalinist Zakhar Prilepin” live in Ukraine. Maybe a citizen of the Russian Federation and Israel, Irtenyev, has forgotten that Ukraine is a country where the writer and journalist Oles Buzina was killed for what he wrote.
The comradely trial on Igor Moiseevich’s page did take place. And this lively discussion seems to hint from dozens of tinned liberal throats: it was important for the “truth teller” not only to chuckle quietly.
On the “branch” of Alexey Aleshkovsky, commentators precisely articulated what Irtenev and his audience expect from the unreasonable friends who were included in the list under discussion. One commentator sneers: “We must kneel and repent.” Alexey Aleshkovsky clarifies: “Disarm in front of the party.” Another commentator aggravates: “Kissing the boot.”
Aleshkovsky’s blog mocks the idiocy of the categorical claims that are made by people with good faces - right and left - to dull fellow citizens.
One could believe that the elderly “truth teller” is not predisposed, even latently, to anything shameful. One could assume that he is not thinking about any persecution of his Facebook friends with Prilepin (except to troll them a little). But the continuation of the topic in Irtenyev’s posts, and numerous comments under them, indicate the opposite. This public is still interested in a comradely trial with censures. Therefore, on the page of the “truth teller”, for several days the seething of miasma and the swarming of reptiles were observed.
I was initially touched by the very posing of the question. Even virtual friendship, social connection with a “terry Stalinist” are unacceptable? By what criteria is terryness determined? Is it possible to hang out, for example, with a reinforced concrete Stalinist? Is it permissible to communicate with a velvet Stalinist? Is it allowed with faithful Leninists?
Prilepin, by the way, responded quite politely to Irtenyev’s attack. This is where the “truth teller” got excited: they noticed, it’s time to remind about yourself. But we will not interfere in the showdown between these two gentlemen.
We are more interested in how Irtenyev became angry with his dull fellow citizens. He tells them (albeit through other people’s poems): you’re reading the damn thing. That is, they immediately make us understand: politeness in dealing with Irtenyev is not fodder for the horse. A counter question is appropriate here: my dear, who told you that people are still obliged to read what is written with their eyes?
I remember a famous joke:
- Rabinovich, is it true that you are an intriguer?
- Yes, but who appreciates it?!
Irtenyev is an anecdotal intriguer. And a hypocrite, no less anecdotal.
Several years ago he gave an interview to Dmitry Gordon from Kyiv. There they started talking about Eduard Limonov. Irtenyev recalls his meeting with him. He says that he reminded Limonov how he sewed trousers for Alla Bossart (Irtenyev’s wife) in his youth. But Eduard Veniaminovich was not inclined to communicate with Igor Moiseevich. Another thing is interesting. It turns out that Irtenyev pestered the author of the book “We Had a Great Epoch” with a reminder of the period when he sewed trousers. And Limonov’s ideas about Stalin did not embarrass the “truth teller” poet or interfere with communication with the National Bolshevik writer?
Therefore, there is no point in delving into Irtenyev’s logic, comprehending what and to whom he is targeting. It makes sense to simply watch how a hypocritical liberal, yearning for comradely courts, turns into an everyday boor and a reasoning Smerdyakov.
Consider a few examples.
In April 2014, several Russian writers visited Kiev at the “Ukraine - Russia: Dialogue” congress. They scraped there in front of Yuriy Lutsenko, the former Minister of Internal Affairs, the leader of the Maidan and the future Prosecutor General. It's the owner's business.
But Igor Irtenyev, together with Lyudmila Ulitskaya and several other congress participants, signed an appeal on behalf of the Russian PEN Center, which said: “We support our Ukrainian colleagues in their desire to preserve the original Ukrainian culture and would like to be in a creative dialogue, and not in confrontation, motivated by political and geopolitical reasons.
We believe that the aggressive policy of the Russian government towards Ukraine is unacceptable, as we have been constantly declaring in recent months. We apologize and hope that the very logic of history will put everything in its place and sobering up and repentance will come in Russia. I would like this to happen in the near future, and not in the distant future.”
It turned out that no one authorized individual guest performers to write this appeal on behalf of the Russian PEN Center. The logic of history really put everything in its place. Not one of the several Russian writers who fawned over the Lutsenki and Maidauns at the end of April 2014 thought of a few days later to apologize to the families of the Odessa residents who died in the House of Trade Unions on May 2. “Sobering up and repentance” were also not observed.
Above I mentioned Irtenyev’s everyday rudeness. This is not an exaggeration.
In 2015, the conflict between a group of fair-faced “trans-Ukrainians” and the organization’s executive committee escalated in the Russian PEN Center. In some chat, Irtenyev, who had completely gone astray, insulted his senior comrades in the writers’ organization: “delirium Bitov,” “heavily fascist Yunna Moritz.”
And all only because the leadership of the PEN Center (Andrei Bitov was the president of the organization, Yunna Moritz was a member of the executive committee) corrected their presumptuous “trans-Ukrainian” colleagues: if you are trying to make advances to the Ukrainian authorities, then do not dare to do it in the name of our organization. “Why the hell is this executive committee really needed?..” asked Irtenyev. All these boorish statements of the enraged “truth teller” were cited by Yunna Moritz in her article in Literaturnaya Gazeta.
Then Irtenyev continued to wave to the country of the victorious Maidan, but exclusively on his own behalf. I went to Lvov - I need to tell the world that I didn’t meet any Banderaites there.
He shared these Lviv impressions several years ago in the program “Visiting Dmitry Gordon”: “Well, yes, I saw such niches where the name of some centurion was stamped - a hero who died for the freedom of Ukraine.” If Igor Moiseevich had not been so lazy and incurious, he could have found comprehensive information about the “heroism” of all these centurions in the execution of the Jewish population in Eduard Dolinsky’s blog.
Irtenyev also told Gordon about his attitude towards the war in Donbass: “I believe that there is violence and war crimes there from absolutely all sides. But this fuse was set on fire by Russia, I think.”
That is, the poet is sure that the wick of the civil war was not the Maidan and the coup d'etat, which leveled the Constitution, and not the unconstitutional decision to conduct the ATO, but the policy of Russia, its recognition of the results of the referendum in Crimea. Well, let’s say a person has his own position regarding cause-and-effect relationships. I wonder how long he will be able to feign impartiality and remain above the fray?
And now the conversation comes about Russian propaganda. Irtenyev complains: “For 24 hours without a break, they tell you about all these nightmares, they show these…” Gordon prompts: “Crucified babies.” Irtenyev behaves like a rat to the piper’s tune: “Babies, therefore, incomprehensible...”
Igor Moiseevich, your filthy mouth should be silent! I would go, damn truth teller, to Donetsk and visit the Avenue of Angels. Well, at least Googled information about the dead children.
“If they show footage from a combat area, it is generally unclear who is shooting from where,” says Irtenyev. It seems that the “truth teller” expresses a readiness to objectively analyze information. But he immediately lets slip that his source of information was “his neighbor on the landing, Seryozha Loiko,” the author of the book “Airport.”
Ah, here it is, Moiseich!
An authoritative source for the “truth teller” is Loiko, who watched the war from the rearguard of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. That is, Irteniev gets information about “incomprehensible babies” from a journalist who has become an important cog in Ukrainian propaganda.
And yet, Igor Moiseevich’s aberrations are not due to the fact that he was unlucky with sources of information. Irtenyev’s trouble is that he willingly falls back on such crap sources, he is ready to absorb this crap and feed it to his fans. Bon appetit, of course...
Is it any wonder then that Irtenyev was credited with the article “How will we live after what we did in Ukraine?”, which appeared at the end of 2014? In fact, its author is cinematographer Arkady Tigay. He was somewhere near Irtenyev in Israel - and from there he denounced Russia for what it had done in the Donbass. And since even Novaya Gazeta didn’t want to publish this crap, Irtenyev helped his friend: he posted it on his blog.
He told Gordon that he shared the pathos of the article, but did not write it. Let me quote one of Tigay’s bastard maxims: “It is also true that the current revolution in Ukraine is called a revolution of dignity. To drive away presumptuous thieves and eliminate the corrupt government is a task worthy of a person who is not devoid of honor. Today, these worthy citizens of Ukraine are lining up in long lines to go to the defense of Donetsk airport - the most difficult and bloody part of the Ukrainian Patriotic War.”
These people have one amazing “creative” ability. They are so successful in profaning any concept that Orwell rests.
In November 2014, in Donetsk, schoolchildren playing football at the stadium were killed by a Ukrainian shell. And soon after this, screenwriter Arkady Tigay writes in Israel his opus about the “Patriotic War” waged by Ukraine at the Donetsk airport.
In the same way, in Irtenyev’s circle, many concepts are inverted and distorted. Propaganda crap is considered true here. Telling the truth about yourself is called “denunciation” and “bullying.” By posting his own denunciation on Facebook and provoking persecution, the “truth teller” qualifies this as irony and banter. And he didn’t even put on a good face.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.