who saw her in this role, in general , insisted that tsalikovskaya play this role; in general, it is indicative that cherkassov started musicals, zharov played a huge number of comedic roles, kadochnikov was generally a comedian and an actor in tyuz, tselikovskaya is a comedy actress , uh , serafima birman played dramatic roles in the theater in the thirties, but again started with comedies, including playing comedies in films, but it is necessary to say who could play. instead of seraphim birman, we see her on the screen in the role of aunt, the main villain such a film, in the role of euphrosyne, but there should have been an even more famous, even more beloved actress, faina ranevskaya, who was tried, who really wanted to play, but they didn’t take her, unlike ronevskaya, but we can at least see how in the end, lyudmila tsilikovskaya looked like in the frame, what she looked like next to serafima birman, we have a small fragment.

it cannot be said that isenshtein made a compromise with the performer of the role of euphrosyne, because the authorities forced the actress polovikov, another actress, in general isenshtein, when ronevskaya’s invitation did not materialize, he nevertheless insisted on his other candidacy. he specifically invites comedic actors into tragedy simply because they have a greater sense of the boundaries of conventional genres. i have a theory that he called comedians, among other things, to make it easier to at least somehow survive on this set, because in addition to... technical conditions, there are also

simply filming conditions, this is filming from night to night night and cold, we have plenty memories, yes, how they spent hours there, for example, sitting on make-up, during the day the energy went to the evacuated factories, so they filmed at night, they were malnourished, like everyone else, yes, ah, they had steam coming out of their mouths during filming, it was it’s colder inside the studio space than outside, these were also quite serious tests for... it’s great that serafima birman, like a number of other actors, left wonderful, very colorful memories of the filming. in general, indeed, for many it was one of the main events in life, in general, if not most importantly, even birman, who seemed to be proud of her theatrical biography, she staged and acted herself, but - for her, all the same , this meeting with esenstein, with a man who thinks so figuratively, brightly and... so unusually in general, it was

such an absolute gift of fate, this is even visible in the letters of mikhail nazvanov, who played kurpsky, so he writes: it’s hard, i got sick while i was doing makeup, i’m waiting, i’m arguing with other actors, i don’t understand what ’s happening , i don’t understand what esenstein wants, and then the next letter, he looks at the pieces and says: well, esenstein is a genius, i understood how it all should work, it’s great, we don’t suffer here in vain, and not all the actors don’t always... but esenstein understood what he wanted from them, but that’s it this highest idea of ​​his, or many ideas, a conglomeration of ideas, why he bends them, for example, yes, why he works with light like that, why he refused to fully use his usual cameraman eduard tise called andrei moskvin, these distortions, of course more cherkassov suffered everything from them, who in his memories he describes this experience quite critically and... at the same time, he regretted that

he told the journalists this way, uh, dictated it, because for him it was also emotionally important, after all, as he later realizes by the end of his life experience, here, after all, he had to play a huge number of ages, that is, he begins, he is a sixteen-year-old youth in the episode of the wedding to the kingdom, on the other hand, he was supposed to actually become an old man by the end, the film was not, as we know, completed, the third episode was not filmed, we'll talk about it. but even at the end of the second episode, in which we now say goodbye to ivan, he is already very old, in childhood he was played by another actor, there was a boy, here is the wedding and before the murder of the elder we look at cherkassov, the most complex makeup, in general, which took several hours to complete, let's see what it looks like, the upper reaches of our rivers, wolves.

volkhov’s guilt is under our power, and their access to the sea is in the wrong hands, hers? and now, of course, this is a very kind of mask, practically, yes, and a mask that gradually appears on ivan’s face, because here, in general, this is such a film is largely about the self-destruction of the individual, gradually ivan from a generally normal person, just as we will see in the scene of the crowned kingdom, how he turns into this completely dried out mummy. how to choose the right glasses? the bow should go along the main wrinkle like this, then the eyes with glasses will always be young. and we have the largest number of patients with allergies to metal temples. let's look at the rules for selecting points. it's great to live in the program. tomorrow

on the first. lately we have been hearing more and more often the phrase global majority. who is included in it from what. it consists of countries and , most importantly, who controls these states. we met in the palace of the syrian president, the man who challenged the collective west. our war is a war for existence, which is why the price is so high. the west is now supporting and promoting leaders like zelensky. these are people who say yes to everything, right, left, up, down. to everything, the answer is yes, boss. and my father never discussed my future with me. i think, what?

new project of the first channel. global majority. bashar assad. in sunday. on the first. i want to remind you that this is an ezenstein-125 podcast. we are discussing sergei esenstein's film ivan the terrible. i am film historian natalya ryabchikova and with me in the studio is my colleague, film vet artyom sopin. artyom, what happened next? filming. the films actually began in february of forty-three and continued the tension of forty-three, forty-four, and the fact is that at that time the studios evacuated to almaat were gradually returning, but there was no longer any need to interrupt in the middle of filming, as was the case in 1941, but here the production was already

planned in such a way that a director finishes a film in almaat and starts a new one in moscow, azenshtein did not finish and did not finish, because the long complex filming was already in fact everyone is back. moscow isenshtein was already one of the last to remain in almaat in 1944, and since the question arose that one series had to be completed before others, it is important that in almaat three series were filmed in parallel, here they were finally completed filming the missing scenes of the first episode, returned to moscow, in the fall of forty-four in moscow they were editing the first episode of the formidable and in the winter of 44-45 they continued filming the second episode, while the first... is being prepared for release, i must say that everyone probably knows about that , that the first series received the stalin prize, the second was banned for 12 years, but less often it is mentioned that in the first series there were censorship notes, quite serious, there, right at the end, he creates this most aprinic army, that is, he stops

to trust anyone, surrounds himself with this pack, in general, almost like a wolf pack, in general, these are such well-trained people around. poses himself, and there was a rather terrible, judging by the photographs that have been published, a terrible scene of the oprichnik oath, when the son of the chief oprichnik alexei basmanov, fyodor, speaks and says: “i renounce my father from my mother, for the sake of the great russian kingdom.” and in fact, the composition was built there in such a way that this son looked at his father, his own father, who led the aprican army and said: “i renounce my father.” mother and then turned to ivan and spoke for the sake of the great russian kingdom, but looked more and more puppyishly and devotedly, these are separate frames, static ones were preserved, they were published, in fact, it was clear that he was saying what was supposedly for the sake of the russian kingdom, although in general -the homeland and parents

are things that are not opposed, as a rule, but here it is important that he is looking at ivan, this is for the sake of the great russian kingdom, it’s just us... we understand that he is looking at gives a comment that he interprets it differently than what is written in the text, this was very important for isenstein, because after that experience with the ban on a film about a village in the thirties, he realized that...

actually, of course, this one a terrible image of this one... in fact, before this they

are egged on by ivan, who begins just the first to exclaim burn, they pick up, just at the same time the rest of this film had already been shot in black and white and therefore, in particular, after the color episode there should have been a black and white episode of vladimir's murder staretsky, one of the main episodes, in fact, the second series, so there had to be some kind of transition, isenstein came up with this way. into this blackness, then such a huge blue spot floats on him, like such a harbinger

of death, we can watch this transition to black and white. and, by the way, in the original copies printed by the moscow operator, at first, unfortunately, we cannot see it now, but what he saw there was painted blue, monochromatic, thus, through this blue. there was a transition to deadness to this theme of murder, but then in black and white there was an episode of the murder of vladimir staretsky, which begins with vladimir walking for a very long time with a candle, in fact, isenstein at first wanted to build the scenery in such a way that there would be a very long passage, and he i even developed an approximate composition of this pavilion, in which such a labyrinth goes exactly.

long, but still this is a plunge into darkness. boris volsky, who was the director of sound on this film, writes in his memoirs that esenstein asked him to record the music, which is soaring and then dying down, to record it, and so that it either comes out louder, then goes quieter in the rhythm of labor pains, this is the instruction that ezenshtein gave, because for him everything comes together, here this departure to death is a return to the bosom of the macera of the earth, yes, on the one hand, this is such a psychoanalytic interpretation. what is this, this move, on the other hand, is quite plot-driven, realistic, yes, staretsky

returns to where he came from, and this and the lighting show how he goes with this a candle, such a column of light falls on it, shown in music in sound. it’s almost like a horror movie, this is the story about how a man spends longer, longer, longer, staying on this royal throne,

gradually going more and more crazy, and at the same time, of course, we understand , that in those years isenshtein. did a very brave civic act, thereby actually expressing it to stalin, because he understood that stalin was waiting for something else, that stalin was very jealous of this plan, and there is even such an apocrypha, not apocryphal, there is a recollection of one of the actors that isenstein was allegedly filming, having heard a question from a member of the film crew, what is it that ivan the terrible is repenting, well, the tsar, well, the terrible , what did he, well, kill someone, well... this happens with tsars, to which isenstein said directly in front of the film crew: well, stalin killed even more people, maybe he’ll look at it and also begin to repent, this looks more like apocrypha, yes, although on the other hand, in general, authority from einstein was indisputable in the film crew, on the other hand, such creative

state, of course, well, that is, at least in the memoirs of one of the actors this story. there is, but there are also memories of watching the film, in my opinion, this is written by ezovsky, a wonderful theater critic, that everyone who watched understood what isenstein wanted to say, but could not say it out loud, and he said, well, why does it seem to you that something is wrong here, i can change it and rom remembers, and mikhail bleiman remembers, this feeling, who is ivan, ivan, like stalin, yes, it prevailed, it seems to me , on the other side, here, if this were a pamphlet showing... historically and artistically, here this is such a very big pie , very tasty for any audience, here you don’t necessarily need to read all these subtexts, and edinstein deliberately

creates such a number of roll calls and different cultural movements, which... in general allows this film to be perceived as a kind of labyrinth through which the viewer walks and finds something, perhaps that esenstein did not leave there for him, but by the way, a labyrinth is just that what esenstein wanted there invest, because for him, detective, as a form of telling a story, as a form of following history, it is especially important at this moment, he , in principle, loved detective stories from childhood, talked about it, forced students to read it already in their twenties, but. ..

to destroy the hatred, to tear up the boyar treason by the roots, it is impossible to keep the kingdom without a thunderstorm, like a horse under the king without recognition, so is the kingdom without a thunderstorm, who stands strong against the enemy of the king? the new king raises his majesty, forgives and gladdens the hearts of his warriors, the prince does not dare to think about such a thing,

i stand on the path of great service to the tsar of moscow. faithful servants, in fact, as it is said here, that the kingdom cannot stand without a thunderstorm, in fact, what ivan consoles himself with, how he justifies himself, is that the king, he cannot help but be formidable, but such a temptation of power in general the profession of a director also gives, in this sense it is significant that isenshtein not only, even thinking about possible prototypes of ivan, taking individual features, he relied on. on his acquaintance with meirhold, who was in many ways such a director, demiurge, a director, a tyrant, in general, and at least the wonderful film historian liodid konstantinovich kozlov has. the hypothesis that this is, in general, to a certain extent , a portrait of mirkhold in the role of the formidable, because there is even a similarity between the photographic proof, the formidable and

the portrait of mirkhold, which mirkhold gave to ezenshtei, we even know that ezenshtein took rings that belonged to meirhold during the shooting, which isfelshup had them, isfelshup, a documentarian, was once meirhold’s secretary, so she still has them for some reason, these rings, on the other hand , isenshtein, as a director, himself understood what this art of power is, he remembers, while working on the scene of ivan’s childhood for the script, he remembers how - he himself shouted at the film crew for the first time while filming, about how, while still filming the strike, at some point he shouted, made a scene and thought that now everything would just be the film crew turning around, leaving , saying who are you to shout at us, and after that...

reads reality on -in different ways, in principle, for eisenstein, grozny is still a mirror, which reflects the rest of the heroes or the hero of the mirror that reflects ivan, this is some kind of structure where all those who surround ivan are actually part of his personality, anastasia, of course, this is his good side, yes, kurpsky, who is actually played here is mikhail nazvanov, he is generally a reflection of ivan, he is the moon, as i wrote. to the sun of ivan, i even wanted to draw a corresponding image on the armor, we have a small fragment with kurpsky, to the throne, the path to the crown, who is

anastasia, ephrasei, in general, the first series came on the screen. quite safely in january 1945 and a year later she received the stalin prize, exactly the year when work on the second series was being completed, after which he had a heart attack, because he knew that stalin would now watch the second and something would happen, and already in the kremlin hospital, he learned that the second episode would not be released, and stalin, in general, was, one might say, furious, because when a year and a half later...

in which some accents were shifted for the wrong reasons to break history, and isenshtein directly in the historical commentary to the partially published script he writes that this episode was actually different, but in order to reveal the character, the true, real character of the character, there is no timing to show every biography of each character, so here individual events were displaced, precisely in order to reveal the true essence of historical processes, in fact, about this... i didn’t write to him, then charlie chaplin said, because what infuriated the members of the polyburo in the second series, artists, world, they noticed already in the first episode, which

was only available to them, yes, there zhulenie writes him a letter, back in the winter of 1945, it seems , what a wonderful government that allowed such a wonderful film to be made, the second episode, fortunately, has reached us , it was saved and in the fifty-eighth year it was released, the third series: it has not reached us, we have a script that has been published, in general we can form a certain idea of ​​how this idea developed, and yet, then, what we managed to film for the third series, which was filmed in parallel, in general, with the exception of tiny pieces, almost everything perished after the death of esenstein at the turn of the forties and fifties, it is very important that this film is really such a complex work, this is involvement in many things...

it’s mind almost as emblematic as the story of athelus, macbeth or boris gadunov. on the other hand, there are so many artistic features that you don’t have to know everything, but which you can touch while walking through this labyrinth, so walking along it is interesting for the next generations, in fact, for many years to come, let’s hope that people will learn more and more interesting features from this film. take it out for yourself? students sometimes ask: in principle, why do we need this? it’s been unfinished for a long time, and i usually tell students that isenstein put so much into it that we can pull out of it what we need, but we are each a little bit of a creator ourselves, we work with media, yes, we take photographs, we film video, we paste something there, draw on it, and what esenstein does it with color, yes, for us it...

may be too difficult, maybe we won’t do it in reality, but to know that this is possible, to know that you can record music like this, it seems to me that this is what what else is layered on top of these plot things, on the knowledge about those periods that are touched upon in the film in the history of its creation, and the extent to which this is really a film for those who see deeper or want to see deeper, it seems to me that it really is...

hello dear friends, this is a podcast life is wonderful, i am with you, its host, writer alexey varlamov, and in my studio is the rector of the shchukin theater institute evgeny vladimirovich knyazev, people's artist of russia and theater historian, rector of the higher education institution. theater school named after shchepkin boris nikolaevich lyubimov, the reason for our meeting was the anniversary of boris vasilyevich shchyukin, who turns 130 this year. boris nikolaevich, what can we say about this wonderful actor, this is how he is remembered in the history of russian theater and russian cinema. yes. this is a very difficult question for many reasons. in general, when you talk about

actors. you give lectures, say, on the history of theatre, as opposed to history and literature, you know this very well, you can’t take the book off the shelf, there isn’t, especially if we talk about theatre, there isn’t that live role that you can show today, there haven’t been those decades people who have ever seen machalov, shchepkin, the sadovskys and so on live, here you go, shchokin, whom we can see live, and a photograph.

the optics are very complex, finally, there is still a point, he died very early, 45 years old, he didn’t lived to the age when, say, he would have played king lear, and - there would have been a whole chronicle of his creative life and so on, he died in the thirty-ninth year, and he - starting with the generation, the marvelous generation of vakhtangov actors, so to speak, next to them, at some point... probably, starting with the role of yegor boluchev, he simply went up sharply. he was on the first list of those awarded the title of people's artist of the ussr. he received the stalin prize posthumously. he fit everything into these 15-20 years of his creative life. what one could say, judging by what i read and what those who saw him and knew him well told me. on the one

hand, it combined what... was characteristic of the first generation of vaktang members, and not only the first generation, this is a wonderful theatricality inherited from vaktang, grotesque and... irony, sarcasm, those roles that, well, starting with there, for example, with the role of tortali in princess torandot, in this legendary performance, he was busy, but at the same time, very often the philosophy of turandot is reduced to such skittish, stupid playfulness, which was present in it, but behind which stood zavadsky’s powerful philosophical worldview, twenty-second year, the civil war had just happened. ended or ended, there was no family in which, so to speak, there were no killed, wounded, arrested, deported, with whom ties were severed, this is cartaglia, yes,

irony, a joke, a practical joke, fun that conquers death, devastation, despair and so on and so forth, this is the line that existed and which lived in shchyukin, on the other hand, there is this... type of actors who, probably, he belonged to him, they cannot play episodic roles, if he is on stage, he should be the first, yegor boluchev, lenin, yes, the main one, he cannot be, secondary to the stage, he seems to obscure this, maybe there was some kind of person behind this then the jealousy of the tanger actors of his generation, who suddenly saw how one of them rushed like this...

whose name the institute bears, of course, who boris vasilyevich shchyukin is, they don’t know, there’s little that has been written about this man, and little is known, except for the photographs that we showed, and more, probably, it will seem a photograph of vladimir ilyevich lenin, which he played, that’s all, actually, i began to look for some video recordings to find shchukin, except for a tiny fraction of a second when he... plays tartaglia, when he says one phrase in yegor baluchev: there is no video or film material, nothing to show at all. the name of boris vasilievichakin is alive today only due to the fact that after

his death, the stalin prize laureate, people's artist of the soviet union, when he died untimely, was given his name ours. institute, you see, here, here is shukin, shukin, shukin, shukin, now we can name you a huge galaxy of artists of the twenties and thirties who were brilliant in their expressions, acting, and which we forgot about when we talk about vakhtangov, for example, the widow nadezhda mikhailovna wondered why the name vakhtangov was so bright in the sixties, why he... sounds, and the answer was found from his grandson, when we opened the monument in 2014, he said: i now understand why the name vakhtangov sounds, because it comes from him

students, and the name shchukin also rings loudly today from his students, from the fact that we study at the shchukin school, and the rest, those conjectures to ask...

talented, because he plays so frantically and so brilliantly on the one hand with tartaglia, on the other buluchev’s side, you need to have talent like that. crazy range, in general shchyukin is a supporter of the moscow art theater, but how did it happen then that he ended up in the vakhtango theater, he did not end up in the vakhta theater, the vakhtangov theater did not exist then, there was only the third studio of the moscow art theater, which he directed vakhtangov, the word “mkhat” is also written there, well, the boy who came from kashira, he first played in the amateur theater there, he played in the amateur theater there, he was one of the best there, the best artist when. .. he graduated from a vocational school in moscow, his own railway school, and his uncle, he

was also some kind of worker, not a worker, or some kind of occupied position, well, not very much, well, as if according to the table of ranks he was not occupied a high social position, he was a big theatergoer, it was he who taught him to go to theaters, and shchukin, from a huge number of theaters and the enterprise of that time, he... chose the art theater and his idol was kochalov, and there is a photograph where kachalov was written, i probably won’t say the exact phrase, but its meaning is, that my brother in talent, grandson, in my opinion, brother in or grandson in talent, that is, he , yes, he identified him as a very talented person, kochalov, and can you imagine what kochalov is in... this

boy who wandered around moscow, came to work in a koshira, and he could not settle down there, because he was already cramped, because he lacked the cultural environment in which he had immersed himself, he missed these theaters, what kind of amateur theater in kashira, where he also played, he worked as an assistant driver, rode these trains he showed up at vakhtangov’s studio,

vakhtangov was not at the show, it was the studio people who accepted shchukin, vakhtangov treated shchukin, well, he saw, he saw, well, a man came, well , he said, well, show what you can, and he sat out, he proved, he’s there there is something written in his hand that he saw talent vakhtangov, he is a detailed person, he is a very, he, he, when he came somewhere, he wrote everything down... he had a wonderful family, tatyana, he was such a modest person, this is the story of his love for shukhmina , this is his wife, in the distant shukhmina and shchyukin, when they had, well, a little higher social status, and he came, he didn’t do anything, even he couldn’t confess his love, it was she who determined that he was in love with her, it was she who brought him, he was a very modest person, extraordinary. this is how they lived their whole life their life, they had yegor, this

wonderful son, and he writes to him that you can’t deceive adults, you can’t go out on the street, he writes him a whole sheet of paper on how he should behave, that he shouldn’t use the benefits of those who enjoy, here he is for his son, he was an amazing person, voice, live, tomorrow after the program time, a wonderful yarolage is being filmed, i hope it will be funny, boris yurvich had some kind of streak, he could choose from the crowd, a lot now famous people, thanks to geralash, he was like that, right kinopa, he was, for me, it’s not me, it’s her, i don’t have an acting education, beralash became the first step in cinema. tell me, well, who am i? i passed

it, by the way, without testing, he just showed me, sanya, your emotions are needed here, that’s all, don’t be afraid, we ate on purpose so as not to bite, not to eat small children, it’s a colossal pleasure, happiness, to do what you’re crazy about you love, what the audience loves, probably there is nothing better and there is nothing better, on the occasion of the seventy-fifth anniversary of the birth of boris grachevsky, on saturday on the first. oh and i i grew up on ural dumplings, and i on homemade ones. hello, hello, when you swim in the pool as a team, don’t you go blind? kvn. major league, new season, on saturday, on the first. sergey, it will be uncomfortable for me to live at your expense. well, if you want, you can go to work yourself. we continue, this is the podcast life of the remarkable. i am with you, its host, writer alexey

varlamov, and my guest is the rector of the shchukin theater institute, evgeny vladimirovich prince. and rector of the higher theater school named after shchepkin boris nikolaevich lyubimov. boris nikolaevich, how did it happen that this modest young man, who was even embarrassed to confess his love, became such a superstar of soviet cinema, it was he who was entrusted with playing the role of lenin, it’s no joke to play lenin. this is not a joke at all. because in general, well, imagine, this is lenin in october, lenin in 1918, this was filmed in 1937 and 1938 , that is. just 20 years, so to speak , but what was happening at that time in the country in thirty-seven and thirty years, perhaps, it’s pointless to talk about here now, everyone has a very big responsibility, because the revolution was made by lenin, stalin , the people, no one from lenin’s inner circle,

in fact, by that time they were either pushed aside, like krupskaya, or shot, so here's a step.

shadrin, in the role of a tolchan, goes to meet the seagull, there’s nowhere to get boiling water there, a comrade can’t tell him, and he leads him to the other side, they say it was some kind of, well, the effect of a bomb exploding, the appearance of lenin, when started filming this film, they invited him, but the deadline was so short that they filmed around the clock. and shchukin was also forced to the repertoire that he had to play, it was all like that, and the responsibility, that’s what we’re talking about, and he writes in these books, what if it doesn’t work out? let's see what happened, a fragment from the film lenin in october, have you seen lenin, write

what he is like, they bet on copper here, they said here, he is red-haired and with a sideways eye... yes, but we think that he is an independent man , strict and enormous in stature, what should we do? what can we do, what is written, let's go to sleep, yes, yes, sleep, sleep, in fact, i had a feeling, now, when i watched this film, that this is some kind of fig in my pocket, that this is some kind of joke that lenin looks there, well, so funny, he is so similar to all these jokes about lenin that we told, that i don’t really understand. how seriously could this picture and this role be taken then? you know, i think that here we still need to immerse ourselves in that time, of course, because of course, most of the audience should have perceived him precisely

as the most humane of people, well, before iosifanovich stalin, so to speak, there was a difficult role, on the one hand, the great lenin, on the other hand, in no way... note stalin so as not to cause the effect of some kind of jealousy, this is really on the edge of a knife, here it was, apparently this entire film crew everyone understood that the price of the issue was simple, it had not yet been worked out, because in the next part, let’s say, pogodin trilogy, kremlin chimes, there after all, lenin is also the main one, and stalin is very second. lenin was always played by people's artists of the ussr, major actors, and the role of stalin was there. not really, i think that maybe the hero of your, so to speak, book, mikhail ivanovich bulgakov, had not yet found, when he was writing, that image of stalin that... simonov in

the image of stalin liked joseph vasarionovich himself to such an extent, that he recognized the man with the gun of the vakhtangov theater, they were even invited to government concerts with a number from...

the first artist of the vakhtangov theater, further a man with a gun, then these two films, and absolutely untimely, of course, death, i want to say again, at 40 at the peak of absolute glory, then, so to speak, it’s even difficult to imagine how he could have developed, but in general, in general , this is his illness, it’s acquired, because when the revolution happened, he came to moscow around these years, returned from koshira, i can’t tell you the exact dates now, he lived in

the poveletskaya area, in a studio on mansurovsky he walked the alley, he had to work during the day, in order to earn a living, after all, you had to pay for the studio, it’s also not free, but how, but how, how did they pay everything for the studio, it’s not easy, it’s not just like that for you, or bring a log to sing. it doesn’t matter, i feel bad, i feel bad, his comrades, they even called him a malingerer, they all the time thought that

he was slandering himself so that something like this could not particularly complain, he was always for some time that malaise, he was clutching his hands all the time, well, there were no such clinics where come, you will check all this, that is , the heart has already made itself felt, and the heart has already made itself known, it tingles, it... and it is still unknown what will come of it, this is the result that i fell asleep and did not wake up , what a short life he lived, he read before his death a paradox about an actor, that’s how it is, it was he who had a paradox about an actor , this book was opened, he was engaged in this, he lived only in the theater, he had no other life, everything his correspondence is only about the theater. only empathy about what he, he walked and thought about how he could play the mayor, because he had it.