although there is also little desire to resolve the idea, but nevertheless there is a lot of passion, but here it is rather not shabbyism, but some kind of detachment, so to speak, such a chill, i don’t feel it.

to some extent, it’s generally a little bit virtual, yes, because, well , i don’t know, but he, too, like others, did not try to take root in this society, he never tried to obtain, say, citizenship of another country, he did not try to become german or there, well, no, he became american, you can also take it out, it’s forced, yes, he’s not i wanted to go to america, my homeland, this bone is yours, it just amazed me, yes, but what about the execution? jesus

, that is, he didn’t just leave with some body of text, then he wrote. mashenka twenty-sixth, yes, we have a year, yes, that is, this is the most beautiful novel, just a pale fire, ale, yes, of course, well, what do you say, tatyana, i love poems by nabukov, but i really love, yes, i know that not all, but it seems to me that the most interesting thing here is that he suggested writing russian poetry, very traditional, without anything. just without any

the ball rolled my friend's comot on the candle and continued to write this until the last years of his life, while in english he wrote the most complex and, i must say, very unloved by absolutely many , complex, complicated, even perhaps deliberately novels in which this open emotion is no longer present, there is no this warmth, which many lack, in the poems it is, even in the later poems, this is amazing, as if, as if there was some kind of split in the writer.

and hamlet to be and not to be, asking why you want to play the role of hamlet, just because a good role, he would probably be a wonderful king, the prime minister’s ass, vladimir vysotsky, i came out on stage as vysotsky broke chains, lyubivo as a director was eager for freedom, there is no stanislavsky system, it’s all stupidity, there is a method of work. the great master, yuri lyubimov,

a man of the century, suddenly leonit ilich says, it’s a good theater, don’t touch it, tomorrow is the first one. with fabulous ease, a provincial resort turned into the capital of world cinema, mr. wenders, why are you repeating yourself? and i ’m not repeating myself, my god, are there no doors, in in this film i play a negative character, i am an avenger, i just left my rights, jane's script is real literature, we cannot leave. i feel like i'm made from one piece of cinema, from head to toe. thank you for being here.

matador on saturday on the first. this is a festival where there are films for everyone. this is cannes. we continue our conversation, we talk about vladimir nabokov, about his biography, about his books, and my interlocutors, today the head of the nabokov center of the institute russian literature, russian academy of sciences, pushkin house, tatyana olegovna ponomareva, and literary critic, journalist, researcher of nabokov’s work igor kirienkov. igor, i’ve already put on my glasses, this means that...

mandar begins, well, in the broad sense of the word, it begins with how fyodor konstantinovich godunov cherdyntsev reads his collection of poems, rereads it, understands its significance, directly quotes himself, or rather, well, how if in a novel we see these poems written by him, here he rises to the pinnacle of pride, thinks, i thank you, fatherland, that’s it, his career has taken place, he is recognized by you, he thinks, but then a miracle happens, because we see... how a poem is written before our eyes, imagine that we would have a text where pushkin would describe how he writes, i remember, a wonderful moment, or i erected a monument to myself that was not man-made, nabokov has it all, let’s listen to vladimir vladimirovich, i’m still far from thirty, today

i’m recognized, recognized, i thank you from my fatherland for being pure, this chanting is very close , a lyrical possibility flashed, he caught this rhythm. i thank you, fatherland, for a pure and some kind of gift, you are like madness, tatata, the sound is recognized, i actually don’t need it now, life flared up from the rhyme, the rhyme itself disappeared, i thank you russia for the pure, the second adjective, i didn’t have time to see when this flash, it’s a pity, happy, sleepless, winged, pure winged gift, he continues to write, calves armor, winged, calves, armor, where does this roman come from, calves and armor. no, no, everything flew away, i didn’t have time to hold him back when he went to bed, my thoughts just started to settle down for the night, and his heart plunged into the snow of sleep, he always experienced interruptions in falling asleep. fyodor konstantinovich risked repeating the unfinished poems to himself, just to

enjoy them once again before his sleepy separation. he was weak, they twitched verses, twitched with greedy life, so that in a minute they took possession of him, giving him goosebumps. the skin filled his head with a divine buzzing when he turned on the light again, lit a cigarette, and lying supine, pulling the sheet up to his chin, and his feet straightened out like socrates of antokolsky, the sculptor is meant, not the poet, then he surrendered to everything requirements of inspiration, it was a conversation with thousands of interlocutors, of which only one was real, after 3 hours of life-threatening inspirational listening, he finally... in meaning, he was proud that he was recognized as his homeland, that’s what happened, thank you, the fatherland for the evil distance, i thank you, it is full of you,

unrecognized by you, i speak to myself, in conversation every night, the soul itself cannot understand whether it is my madness that is babbling, is your music growing? we see amazing poems appear, born from a completely opposite thought, and you can read it only... nabokov, well, let's go back to his russianness, not russianness, to his paradoxicality, he doesn't like very many people, igor, well, bunin doesn't like anyone, he's annoyed by everyone, yes, nabokov, my god, he doesn't do dostoevsky loves, there is too much superfluous, well, the very thing that is most important in a russian writer, the idea to resolve, yes, this is all superfluous, chernyshevsky, he is not he, but his hero, he cannot stand it, the same godunov cherdyntsev, he mocks. above him it’s clear why, well, dr. mertvaga, there’s roman

pasternak absolutely, who does he love in general speaking of pushkin, tolstoy, well, i wanted to say that of course it’s impossible not to love pushkin, he is the author of commentaries, he loved a lot of people, in fact, even the same pasternak, he loved his poetry, what he talked about, he planned to translate dostoevsky take karamas into english, everyone’s name can be turned to see there in the other direction, and even i.

he often speaks in his lectures about fairy tales about mechanisms, so he is the same person who is still a scientist and not an essayist, an essayist will not talk about the device plumon carriage or not? well, it still seems to me that these lectures, it seems to me that after all, this is what we call scientific literature, it still seems to me that this is not entirely true, yes, it is still his, there is a lot of him personal, yes, he teaches to read, that’s right, he teaches to look, to see details, but... yes , a pedant, a pedant who wants to get to, disassemble, debunk, everything, but an essayist at the same time, yes, yes, to instill in students a love of literature , love of reading, it seems to me that this is what he always wanted, to show them how this is interesting, yes, but this also cannot be said to be scientific, yes, a scientific approach, after all, it is rather the writer’s approach to his reader, yes, there was a subtext here, i asked you as a prisoner in uzov, right?

this is a collection of his selected interviews, which he compiled himself, some of his reviews, and it seems to me that there is, by the way, about nabokov’s love for other authors, there is a wonderful essay

on inspiration, where he talks about how his thinking process works, that’s how he came up with hell, from which... we continue our conversation, we talk about vladimir nabokov, about his biography, about his books, and my interlocutors, today the head of the nabokov center of the institute

of russian literature, the russian academy of sciences, the pushkin house, tatyana alegovna panomareva. and literary critic, journalist, researcher of nabokov’s work, igor kiriyenkov. we have come to the most important thing, just recently a huge, meaningful archive of nabokov returned to russia, now it is located in the pushkin house, in the institute of russian literature of the russian academy of sciences, you can say that you are its custodian, so it’s correct to say, well, formally, no, formally, after all, i’m not a custodian, i’m more of a scientist.

soon it will be read, printed and read in russia, let us remind you that 1977 is, of course , a time when it is difficult to assume anything, yes, so he, of course, did not give such orders, did not provide for them, and dmitry vladimirovich, he did not became in 2012, and he was just thinking about this and wanted to convey most of it, this is not the entire archive, of course, most of the archive, also a very large person, like dmitry vecheslavich ivanov, for example, of course,

because he didn’t have, in fact , he didn’t have a permanent home anywhere, so all this was transported and a typewriter, a typewriter, he himself never typed, it’s true, but this typewriter was already in latin, and it was already typing here, of course or vera iseevna, or later they invited a typist, but here , nevertheless, this typewriter is here, and this is what nabokov himself used, this is what now, probably, not everyone will recognize, i am writing with this, these are inserts, this inserts.

which do not write in all directions, there are a pusher without pushers, there is a hairline, this is the motor skills of writing that disappeared forever under the onslaught of ballpoint pens, felt-tip pens and especially keys, here is the return of the archive to its homeland, that’s how you blitz again, do you think this is some kind of new impulse in studying in understanding, in emotions on the beech, what is this or are these just future museum exhibitions, of course i would really like to. such a full-fledged nabokov center and maybe even transcontinental, because as we discussed, many texts are stored in america and europe and have been studied there, of course, here we are right now, yes... a few years ago , nabokov’s poem about superman was published, a text that was considered lost, which we only read in brian boyd’s retelling in his biography, here it is, it arose, and there are so many others like it somewhere-

then it is stored, and maybe in this archive there is also waiting for us, some discoveries are waiting, of course, well, still, i want some very vivid detail, what is there in the archive that no one knows yet, well, here is the correspondence sphere trail, yes, who is the daughter of guchkov, well, the most famous russian. russian politician, and then the wife of suvchinsky, one of the founders of eurasianism, we also hope you remember our listeners, because you do not speak, but read, according to our slogan, so you know who suvchinsky is, who trubetskoy is, who the eurasians are , of course, well, here’s vera trail, nabokov’s interlocutor, what ’s interesting in this correspondence that has become available to us, the interesting thing is that it’s hard to call this actual correspondence, yeah. yes, this is just very interesting, because this speaks, firstly, of the stability of the political views of nabokov and his wife, who, vera trail, was a person of a completely

different, of course, political camp, she was a communist there, at one time she was considered a soviet agent, and apparently, on the one hand, they did not wanted to communicate with her, on the other hand, it was impossible not to respond to her letter at all, because the letter was so very polite, personal, she knew nabokov’s sister, so they came up with... a very sophisticated way, on the one hand, to answer, on the other hand, they don’t even put their signatures, so the answers are signed with very funny initials jc, which of course reminds us, this was the time of the opera jesus christ superstar, where this jc is constantly christ, yes, yes, yes, they sign , or rather their secretary, who usually did not write such letters, but here jc signs, and the answers themselves, they are, of course, just very... this is just a very, very interesting correspondence, because, because of course, when i saw it i was amazed, because i i realized that it seemed like nothing could connect them, and indeed, as it turned out, they were connected only by vera trail’s acquaintance with

nabokov’s sister olga, with whom it turns out they studied together in berlin, at a russian school, after which they met, that’s how nabokov i came up with a way to answer her without entering into correspondence at the same time, so i think this will be interesting to read, a wonderful story, yeah. let's also call it, i will include myself if you allow me, our general conversation, i will not only be asking, but also answering, this is what i came up with, but each of us has some favorite thing, or one or two igor, let's start with you, invitation to execution pnin, yes, well, i certainly agree with the invitation to execution, pnin is wonderful, but not completely belongs to the core of my main works on...

on the side it is interesting to our contemporary, let’s finish with this, this will be our final chord, why is it important, what is the most important thing in our time, is it nabokov’s time, let’s get you this time igor, let’s start, nabokva had a metaphor that these are his ideal conditions existence of creativity is life on campus with a huge amount of books, free time, it seems to me that in a sense, right now with the advent of the internet...

and a wonderful hell, that is, nabokov’s time has come, but it’s true in your image a little reminds me of quarantine, yes, when you don’t have to go anywhere at all, but nevertheless i agree with it. tatyana olegovna, what do you say? yes, maybe, after all, the main thing, it seems to me, now is that how he managed to remain, while remaining a russian writer, forced to live outside of russia, with this is to become an interesting reader of the whole world, of course, now too, yes, this is amazing.

that more than once, and we spoke with journalists, literary critics, researchers of nabokov’s work igor demyanovich kirienkov, thank you very much, we are not ending this conversation, because it is endless, we are going to read, and i tell you, as always, read with with pleasure, dear friends.

well, as for vladimir ilyevich, for some he is great, a statesman, a revolutionary, etc., for others he is simply satan, that is, it was so, it is, and i assume that it will be so, i propose to talk about whether he is national, or whether he is an internationalist and, in general, according to the worldview of a westerner, since we are a podcast. with russia, the west, so, uh, let's try to figure it out, and then, as a particular matter, maybe touch on the topic of dirty german money for the revolution, because there is also a lot of talk here, myth, reality, in general, well, about lenin there are a huge number of myths, both such leafy myths of the soviet era, and negative myths that were created back during his lifetime, which were picked up after the collapse of the soviet union, and

interestingly. those people who praised lenin before the year ninety-one began to throw mud at him after the year ninety-one, traditionally wavering from the general line of the party. so, the task of clearing lenin of myths is also huge, but we need to do this in order to break through to objective knowledge about this by far the largest figure in the history of the 20th century. hello, this is a historical podcast russia west on the swing of history. pyotr romanov is with you and sergey solovyov, today we will figure it out. from a historical point of view, well, literally yesterday, and so much happened, that is , an unimaginable number of all sorts of events, and of course a very contradictory opinion about this figure, sometimes they compare him with peter the great, well, to a certain extent, it’s probably possible to do both to say this, but in

the end... peter the great built st. petersburg on the bones, lenin made a revolution, and then they began to build socialism and he lit the light bulb from the funeral pyre of the peasants, but nevertheless brilliant st. petersburg still stands, and the light bulb, in general, has not completely burned out, so, probably, this is a parallel, generally acceptable, perhaps, especially since peter’s reforms are called: revolutions from above, and lenin was the leader of the revolution from below, but still the funeral pyre of christianity from my point of view is a later period, this is the period of ancient repressions of collectivization, may heaven forgive me, i allow myself to compare lenin with the apostle paul. there were a lot of apostles, but paul was one; in fact, the paulicanism created christianity. there were a lot of marxist theorists here, well, the most influential

and popular in russia. there was palekhanov, in western europe, say, kautsky, yes, but, as said, there were few practical organizers of the uprising, well, pavel said, not elina, not jews, but lenin brought marxism also to the mongolian steppes and to africa, so yes , for some time he was a teacher of such a planetary scale, undoubtedly, in fact, are you right, western europeans? marxists, not marx himself, but his followers, quite dogmatic, such as kautsky, in plekhanov was less dogmatic, but nevertheless, they believed that all countries would come to socialism more or less the same way, so lenin just revised this point of view, saying that there could be more than one path to socialism, and that the methods by which one can achieve power can be different, it was lenin who owned the model

that determined many... the illegal existence of the social democratic movement in russia, the russian empire, and for other countries where there is also a leftist movement, the national liberation movement was illegal, but this model turned out to be very effective, including in the struggle of a number

of countries for independence from the colonial yoke during the 20th century, during the waves of decolonization, so it really is on a planetary scale. if you read his articles, which is interesting, he quite often repeats the main idea in the article several times from different sides in order to... different in level of literacy, because he counted not only on intellectuals, professional revolutionaries, members of his party, but also people who recently came to the party, the same machine workers who were also present in the party in large numbers, in order to convey this idea to them, so he turns it in different ways, both in texts and not only in texts, at rallies, he returned, sometimes several times to the same main idea, he returned, of course, without fail, but, but, but in different ways, yes, in order to drive it into people’s heads. yes, with the help of conviction in this sense, his style differed from trotsky’s style, who was very stormy, bright, who was more interested in rhetoric rather than logic, even his enemies admitted that it was very difficult to argue with lenin’s logic, and lenin managed to convince the party

to actually turn 180° several times. in particular, this was in his famous april theses, when he announced the possibility of a socialist revolution immediately after the bourgeois democratic february revolution, that bourgeois reformers and the provisional government would not carry out even bourgeois-democratic reforms, he won’t give land to the peasants, which is what happened, yes, but the path to the revolution was far from easy, as far as i remember, memories of his childhood, well, yes, then under the soviet regime a whole lenin family was created, lenin is small with curly hair head, he also ran in felt boots on an icy slide and so on and so forth, but in principle, if we take the memories of his teachers, he was a brilliant student, a gold medalist,

he was interested in many things, but to say that he was really uh interested socio-political disciplines, no one uh, i didn’t notice that about him. he was, strictly speaking, a good, wonderful, talented person, in his environment, well, not, not everyone, so to speak, turns out to be a revolutionary, but in lenin’s family, after all , all the children became revolutionaries, from the elder alexander to the younger sisters later, so to speak, that’s all, but this happened , among other things, because lenin’s father was a typical sixties man, yes, he was a teacher, then at one time he was a director. accordingly, he was an inspector of schools, rose to a high rank, yes, received hereditary nobility, lenin was a nobleman, yes, yes, he deprived himself of the nobility after october of the seventeenth year, when the estates were completely liquidated, equalized, and so, lenin, well then volodya

ulyanov, was the son of a man who really hoped, was generally raised to the social life of the sixties, was he brought up on the values ​​of the sixties? becomes impossible, the screws are tightened, and this causes the opposite effect, yes, this value conflict arises, i agree with you, in this generation, i agree with you, just come on, you know, i don’t know a single period in our history when a russian... person didn’t dream of justice, you know, he dreamed about it before the great reforms of alexander i, he dreamed during the reforms, he dreamed after that, as it was with the sixties, which you

spoke about, he still dreams today, that’s right, that’s why not everyone goes to the revolution, so yes, the very situation in the family, it set one up for a certain kind of thoughts. and probably the elder brother came to this also not without influence, so to speak, here this homely atmosphere, but nevertheless it was vladimir ilyech who was the revolutionary. in my opinion, first of all, it was not the situation in general that did it, but specific ones, the specific death of his older brother, who was a huge authority for him, was an authority, but still, if you look at the chronology, just when his brother is executed, he surrenders exams, yes, he enters kazan university, the faculty of law, which, by the way, was attended by people who wanted to change the system from within, yes, that’s it, and then he is expelled, as you know, in soviet times created a myth that he was

almost a leader, imagine a freshman who studied for 3 months, of course, he was not a leader at all, he just took part and was expelled from the list of others, then, what is also important, he graduated from st. petersburg as an external student already at the faculty, law, after several petitions he was refused several times, his mother wrote a petition, he wrote a petition, and also his revolutionary activities are still unnoticeable, but after this meeting, he receives - accordingly, a degree, becomes an assistant sworn attorney and even act as lawyers, by the way, he even won some things, won some things, but nevertheless won related cases, well, he commuted the punishment for the poor, he just mitigated , he mitigated, there are not many cases there, in general, there are a few there were things to do, but yes, although he himself joked later, it was a joke that there was a lot to do with this, because he perfectly understood that this was not a solution to the problem, so to speak, he came to the revolution, remember what his nickname was, yes old man. because he looked older than his age, he went bald early, in addition,

compared to other youth, student youth, he came to the revolution later than them, yes, we just usually have an image of the late lenin, in general, he went through several stages, i would say, and the first stage was, of course, following brother, at first, his passion for populism, of course, remained with his idols for the rest of his life. chernyshevsky, his book what to do, was for him in general, almost a reference book for many, many years, later having already sifted through marx, engels, feuerbach, hegel, he was even with such a teenage i remembered with enthusiasm the pages of this book in general, although in my opinion the book is the most boring one that people can find today. they don’t encounter, they don’t, they don’t realize

that many people then, and there were several generations of oppositionists, not only lenin was carried away, three generations of russian revolutionaries were brought up by this book, they may have read it, they don’t just read it like they do today text, they read the subtexts, because they perceived it as a kind of encryption, well, by the way, i don’t agree that the book is very boring, i even read it at school i didn’t seem boring, i also studied her at school as a compulsory one. no, just how to read it, it’s a utopia, in fact, this book is written in a special genre, utopia, these dreams of vera palovna, famous there, yes, these are utopian dreams that paint a picture of the future society, but it’s hard to blame the author for being boring , in my opinion, it’s difficult to reproach, it’s possible, but it’s difficult, who in the book is distinguished by self-irony, he mocks himself somewhat, is ironic, despite the fact that he is talking about very serious things, by the way, very many people then were inspired by the model of relations between a man and a woman, in general, oddly enough, it was the russian revolutionary environment, the first in the world you ...

such an orthodox marxist, and lenin then moved to a higher level, he started this marxism, i i would say, develop, in relation to the changing, changing historical. well, just a convinced, convinced marxist, svetlana petrovna ilagina, military lawyer, how beautiful you have become, by the way, i was in love with you, well, a little bit, stay with me, sedorenko, we’ll work together, zamanju, and how do you

like it between two husbands, but they don’t look like murderers, they’re civilians, a jealous husband , an abandoned wife. here are all the pies, it’s a common thing, you’re afraid, but i’m not at ease, you should figure out, svetlana petrovna, which of you is the commander here, otherwise i’ll get into trouble, you may never wait for him, well, look around, there’s a war going on, people they die, and if you are lucky and are alive, you have to live, it’s stupid to hide from life, according to the laws of war, a story with a continuation, tomorrow after it’s time for the program, grigory ivanovich, maybe we’ll make a joint card, i’ll send it to vanya, now i’ll organize it. once these people determined the trends of rock-pop music, but now they have left russia and divided the performers into their own and others, former music producer and now agent mikhail kozyrev. there are artists

who, as we call it, ziganuli, and there are artists who for them it is suicide to express their anti-war. i'm trying to catch some glimmer of hope that ukraine can win on the battlefield, on the other hand, how pathetic are you guys? i don’t see anything, unfortunately, there are no irreplaceable people, goodbye guys, you are not relevant, the vavan and lexus show, on wednesday on the first, this is a historical podcast,

russia-west on the swing of history, today we are talking about lenin. the difference with plekhanov was this: plekhanov believed that the bourgeois-democratic revolution, as written by marx, opens a long period of development, after which, when the level of development of the productive forces and production relations under capitalism comes into conflict, then there will be a reason for the socialist revolution in the most developed countries. and lenin, in his april theses, showed that he was right that the russian bourgeoisie is so closely connected with the monarchy that it will not carry out these same reforms. she did not carry them out under the provisional government, power then lay on the road, but we will also definitely talk about the revolution in our podcast, the largest european marxists, they considered bolshevism, in general, to be such an illegitimate child of marxism, although in my opinion , well, if i suspect so, i can’t

to be 100% sure, but i strongly suspect that marx - well , would have accepted bolshevism with greater understanding than any swedish model of social democracy, because in the end it was marx who wrote that i sowed dragon teeth, which were born -fleas, i think that in a certain sense lenin really understood marx better, sometimes we say something stupid, there is also complete anti-communism, of course, it exists. and uh, when lenin is criticized, it reaches the point of complete absurdity, and makes a difference between communists, communism and fascism, although well , just the initial goal setting, uh, in the german case, it presupposes, uh, germany

is above all a superman, and racism, and racism, and communism presupposes something completely different, humanistically. it’s important to say here that you touched on the issue, in particular about the future dictatorship, but the bolsheviks had absolutely no intention of establishing a dictatorship, they ended up being drawn into it as a result of a fierce civil war, they initially believed that they could do without much blood , they when they came to power, they abolished the death penalty, which was restored by the provisional government. at first they abolished it, yes. provisional government, then kornilov restored it, and so, uh, the bolsheviks in the spring of '18, when kornilov was defeated, when the atamandutov fled from orenburg, they believed that the civil war had been won, they, of course, greatly underestimated the resistance of the former ruling classes, and of course , underestimated the scale of western intervention, overestimated the possibility of world

revolution, and no matter how they treated lenin, question of his erudition, he also became a theorist, an outstanding theorist, this was recognized by european marxists at a fairly early age, when he wrote, he was not 30 years old, the development of capitalism in russia, in which he showed that russia is becoming, first of all, despite the predominance the peasant population, precisely the capitalist country, this book was aimed at. what was happening around him and existed in general, whether it was, i don’t know, politics,

military affairs, man, god, physical education, cinema, he looked at everything, measured with this slide rule of marxism, introducing quite serious changes into it, making, making changes, but since this slide rule, which... served him all his life, it was western production, so he is national or he, so to speak , a westerner, an internationalist, but it seems to me that there is no contradiction here, it seems to me that lenin is certainly a national figure who could only arise in russian conditions, and this catching-up path of development of russia gave birth to such a figure as lenin, and the conditions themselves.

there is a story about one priest who , as he said, gave his savings to gorky, that is, in fact, for the bolsheviks, they took from a poor student, they took from famous lawyers, they took from manufacturers, so to speak, from sava morozov there, so in principle , in my opinion, the very idea that lenin was not for himself personally, naturally, is not from the core, is acceptable. motives, in the interests of the party, the world revolution, in general, his policy, he could have done it, lenin would have...