ava understanding will be deeper. he will be able to modernize and change the same norms in the name of the very values ​​that society considers to be protected, the university can and must do this, of course, and if you listened to the rector of st. petersburg university, professor kropachev, says that students lawyers must share legal values, and only then do they become real lawyers. it is universities. by the way, this is now the subject for such a big discussion. you now i was talking, but i remembered, uh, some kind of fiction, and the old lawyer, i turn to the young. says the benefit of the doubt with the heart must understand, very good. you said thank you, dear friends, bishop, candidate of theology andrey aleksandrovich klishas. doctor of law . today we gathered our thoughts about law and russian legal culture. all podcasts of the project under the cost warehouse. you can find it on the channel one website. 1tv.ru

hello this is a must- read podcast. i am aglaya na batnikova director writer, today we are discussing dostoevsky's novel the idiot with director vladimir khotinenko and actress ekaterina guseva they say that people are divided into those who love tea coffee, but a dog or cat and fat dostoevsky and here i am, for example, dostoevsky's man you must be vladimir ivanovich too dostoevsky's man yes, well, you know, you have to take the liberty of saying that. i'm a dostoyevsky man, but in a certain sense, it's true, but i absolutely can't say that i'm somehow more to tolstoy's soul than a man who isn't even very loved dostoevsky to nabokov. i, too, take this very well, even paradoxically

, but i will say the same nabokov who did not like dostoevsky, which we did not yet know about, i loved dostoevsky dostoevsky later, when you worked on materials. this is fate i am grateful to fate. what she gave me the opportunity to do is not even what to shoot, because if i entered this world fedorovich, i would be an unhappy person. if i'm here now i can't even imagine that without here you know this. well, i'll even take a change to say. it's somehow already a part of me, of course, to live for the school curriculum is a little, but it's complicated, and therefore i, yes, well, thanks, who does not know dostoevsky, great writers. dostoevsky what is there to say? what, well, what crime is the punishment there or list something yes, so more than that by then. i haven't read much yet. but when it was already started, i already read something from just everything that is here. today we will

talk about an idiot, an idiot is a very voluminous novel, and how? it seems to me that he contains the entire matrix. here are russian characters and here are characters characteristic of dostoevsky, and this novel was written in post-reform russia , that is, after the abolition of serfdom, and it seems to me that a new hero was needed and dostoevsky tried to find a method to make a positive hero, because the main character is a prince, myshkin whom everyone calls an idiot. well, because he has epilepsy and. well, in general, he really just does not comply. uh, he has some rules of decency. eh, the other one. yes principle of interaction with people and therefore he is rashly called an idiot and roman is called an idiot. how do you think dostoevsky managed to make a positive hero, because it is difficult to make a positive hero unequivocally, for sure, we will not answer this question. i'll start with a seditious thought that has just been born to me. this is not homemade. here's a wonderful one. of course, who is the main

character, yes roman does not. well, prince dasha, yes. and that's what i thought, for sure. no, there are many characters, this is a mosaic, this is a mosaic, and he just flashes prince. myshkin i would say so, he is a lighting device. it highlights the characters. here is the book idiot is very fine. i think, lord, she let nastasya philippovna into herself. this is one of the most inconceivably complex paradoxical images in history, literature, culture, in general , this is how difficult it was for nastasya filippovna to let it all in. and what do you think about this character anastasia filippovna, that is, some seem to be

such a heavyweight. yes, these are not just replicas, which you need to say through the dash, yes, and make your own and they are preceded by a description. what state is this woman in? and what happens to her after she says something? and you understand that you have no voice, no data, no nerve, nothing in order to realize this plan. well, it's just the distribution itself, as it were, crushed the phrases. that i remember the day of the theater was the month of march its bulletin board idiot. yes, i saw everything. and he told me, so yuri ivanovich is eryomen. uh, our director of the moscow city council theater is here you have to find the limit. just a human limit. i need you to laugh like that. how are you? well, i never allowed myself in my life, or for example. well, that's any quality to reach

your personal limit. so he helped me gave this key, that is, the key is at the limit at the limit on his own, and then in general she is a bitch or she is a kind person. i think that neither one nor the other is by any means impossible. so categorically not in any case. it's not this, it's not defined, either or that's the point. she's elusive at all characters. i have everything. so i do not rule out that even dostoevsky picking up the names of hmm characters. he always had a principled attitude to this, he looked at the saint, i don’t remember myself. what does it mean? yes, it's sunday, thank you, actually, they say. aglaya is the light, the brilliance of the cattle , you understand, barashkova is not in an accidental sense elusive. and this is also fyodor mikhailovich this is an established point of view,

which i absolutely agree in any other hands of the works of fyodor mikhailovich dostoevsky they would have turned into, well brazilian serials there. well, what will not arise, you understand? yeah, that's all, or, uh, some kind of detective. yes, because he himself was talking about this, i read his diary entries. this is either not a meladrama, yes, an illegitimate child, or that's it. this is a bit of a brazilian series, but in the hands of the feudoi mikhalych it becomes high to fly that he wrote to him like that. it is important for me to catch reading or to interest him, and then already yes , this is such a novel. it's something incredible. i can't. i just translated how it is, well, they wrote about it and modern even critics wrote about it, what is it? the variety of characters is so damn good. well, everything, paradoxical laughter. here

they remembered. yes, they are laughing. there, on each page, 10 times from time to time they start laughing, then all in unison, then, nastasya hoarsely at that aglaya, and this, you understand? yes what is sometimes seemingly completely unaware, right? yes, yes, these and chatting them back and forth. so i just wanted to say that i was just re-reading it, and i had the feeling that they were all acting these characters in a state of altered consciousness. they experience extremes all the time. that's how catherine said extreme limiting emotions. and it really could be a brazilian series. if it wasn't, that's kind of a mystery. missed not so accurately in psychology and characters. if there weren't such an incredibly layer behind it, everything is complicated, even if it burns . yes, the boy-code even it would seem to be certainly a minor character. and the way everything is not easy there is hippolyta. and how do you come up with all this? how is that in the head?

i don’t know how this one, here’s something mikhalych in this fedorovich because he is human nature and in particular in the novel and do. here i am, here i hear it. you know when the bottom added. no one can go further with him vladimir ivanovich but uh, i, for example, have, uh, a tendency to guess. e according to dostoevsky. if , for example, i meet a person somehow. i don't understand his motivation. it's hard for me to find some character of udostoevsky, to find the key of a person. that is, i understand, but it lags like a ganichka. this is paraffin, rogozhin yeah, this is it, i guess. s myshkin that is, i have, uh, and it seems to me that there is no other such writer who would, and that 's it, an encyclopedia. these are precisely the psychology of russian characters created. do you know, yes, that she is mortally old? no, they opened. uh, opened the bible and a string. read above. he guessed his own death very curiously , because this is how it is vladimir ivanovich well, these scenes, here in an idiot, i

read there 15 to 10 characters that converge in one scene, for example, when nastasya filippovna throws money there. yes in fire. it's very difficult there. everything is psychologically connected. yes, there is a ganichka who looks at this money there, let's drag e money from the fire and rogozhin's perfume who is waiting to go with his neighbors, who yes paid for the night. here, uh, right there is prince myshkin , who offers her his hand in the heart. right there, her seducer is sitting, yes, to whom, in theory, he is sitting. then the colorful could women. look, he is a general, the teacher says. he kind of gave birth to it. yes, yes say this character. that's all these people and it is impossible to imagine. that's how director, how can this even be filmed, because uh, while one person is talking. yes, there for half an hour it is not clear what others are doing. and how do you choose

an editing room? what is more important is the character's reaction to what someone says or how someone says some words. as you know, this is, uh, such a question, yet too general it is meant every time. uh, well, i was filming something. i just filmed. i am reading. i see everyone. i know, i 'll bring you quite bears. mikhalych, these are wonderful situations, you can't go to war. yes, and there is a monologue pitank. and we see nikulin so yes, but basically this is all they will do, almost from one share moreover. did. that's why i would always behind the eyes. yes, this is it, maybe it's the wives there are so many characters. it's crazy. it is possible in these scenes in all you are now trying to present a mise-en-cene. she writes mihailovich sat down at a round table and so on to the prominent head of the local village. what are the signs of misanthenia? well, anyway, it's something. it

's something, it's incredibly such a boil, that's passions. and in general these how to transfer this everyone has their own. but in the theater here we are orders difficult ekaterina i also can’t imagine how it should be done this way, in general, in terms of. well, probably, probably, eyes whose eyes we will now show in this regard. well, first of all, for this is not a talented person. can't be. sorry , i need to understand a little bit here. i want to do something, and then you have to come up with something, because well, yes. in the theater, we see everyone at the same time and it only seems, it seems that it is easier, in fact, everything is more complicated plus. now already invented ways, when we are enlarged, even in the theater and so further and the like it is not the point to answer this question unambiguously. not possible, you are impossible. well you found. and maybe it seems to me, ours. uh, a theatrical film attempt, yes, uh,

to recreate all this is to attract the reader to reading the novel in the first place. this podcast is a must-read and aglaya na batnikova, director writer, director is my guest. vladimir khotinenko, and actress ekaterina guseva, we are discussing dostoevsky's novel idiot can you ask ekaterina, this is how you see the relationship between the real filippovna and prince mouse, well, for the first time myshkin saw a portrait and he disappeared in the form of these eyes. he said in those eyes of suffering a lot everyone laughed raised him to death, but he alone saw in her. here is the lamb of god yes lamb to you. victim if you want an innocent one, because who is nastya, the girl burned down and less than her father, her mother burned out behind her stomach with a sing. the sister died, whooping cough died, that is, this is an orphan, which a wealthy totsky landowner tidied up and at

the age of 13 noticed in her that he would become a rose and placed in the rooms elegantly cleaned and in general, the governor brought up and hired teachers for her, but they taught her not only french, but maybe nabokov was offended because of this. this is lolita's flow in general. well, it is, yes, they have a lot in common and butterflies. yes, yes, yes, yes, here, and he says , then i ask why you hate me so despise because you have prepared me for debauchery. and i think that since childhood she has bitten off this physiology, an abomination. i think that she did not return to this at all to physiology. i did not find her anywhere in the novel, by the way, physical with any of these e men who talk about it all the time, she already presents herself like that and behaves like that, but whether it was really me, by the way, it also

interested me. but i didn't follow anything. between the lines between the letters diagonally, i didn’t find something. found a phrase. uh, rogozhin arranged orgies at the station and is present there. well , what is an orgy is not in our understanding, so here's how to say it, it's death gathered. unless she knows death. maybe, maybe we can, well she at least clothes are scattered there, that is, she is naked or, because she is so bullied on this shell. so why does it seem to me that she ended up with him, she herself did not sit down to take the knife. she hmm wanted to say to herself through it with her hands. i think yes. here, but now we will return to the relationship with myshkin. why she does not get married is impossible internal. i wonder what is the key of ekaterina, how did she explain it to herself, she tried to somehow think highly. afraid

to destroy him. yes, she considers herself a fallen woman , she does not want many men very much, but when she saw christ, she suddenly understood what love is? and when you are ready to give your life for another, it is not carnal. uh, yes, absolutely, and i think it's this feeling that she was not familiar with. and suddenly, but this nature yes of this feeling, that is , a spiritual connection is not intimacy, yes, but of course , a feeling, understanding, who she is and unwillingness to instruct and defile and hmm it is impossible to be around. i would be here more, let's say, if you are a lawyer, and i would like to act as a prosecutor, because, uh, the character also has ogles and boarding houses, which are rivals. nastya filippovna for the prince. they are, like, stupid idiots.

two such women clung to him. yes two beauties one, so to speak, fallen another noble. here they are because of him, in the end they go there in one scene and after which anastasia filippovna she, on the one hand , wants him to marry aglaya, so to speak, he was happy, on the other hand. in the end, she does not let him go and shows aglaya, right before her eyes. she says he's mine and now you'll see that i will tell him that he will be at my feet, and he will be. and that is, it turns out such an all-sadism, that is, she shows aglaya that e myshkin belongs to her and indeed, this is how myshkin happens. it seems to me quite unexpectedly. even for the reader , nastasya lipovna chooses to stay with her, and aglaya runs away to see these hesitations and never sees myshkin again, that is, but it turns out that she has selfish motives for the session filippovna. that is , she is not that she is not a saint at all; she has a sense of ownership and she torments rogozhin

it seems to me very high-quality with pleasure, as she was once tormented so she torments all men aglaya, she says in this scene. she says, if you wanted to, it seems to me that the real lipov is on or offended not by the relationship with the prince, so to speak, she was offended, because aglaya says, if you wanted to be an honest woman, you would go to the laundress. after all, we can say that aglaya is right, that is, nastasya filippovna did not go to the laundress. she really walked with rogozhin, yes, and in general presented, so to speak, her tragedy all the time very convex, showing everyone that she knows life has lived. in general luxury is quite safe. she is not trained, she is, dear, the thing that was used cannot get out of this scenario, dear , the great mighty russian language was used. yes, you know the expression everyone knows him, probably, i love you so much. what are you ready to choke, right? ready to kill

would kill, yes. and this seems to be just a figure of speech, in fact, there is content here, but i have so many sayings in russian that are not translatable at all and in another even in cultural space is even impossible to imagine, go there, i don’t know where it will bring. well, i don’t know what you understand, yes, you know, the apostle paul has the first letter to the corinthians, where there is a large part about love. i don’t know by heart, but we are love, well, we more or less imagine what you mean, in general, this is love. i will say one more thing to attract the reader to this novel. let's attract today, if you read his letters carefully, nastasya filippovna, as glai. i will tell you. this is in general for today. then probably people didn't think about it, as he writes. she still needs such words and to live there for how long and

somehow uniquely, and how piercingly all the time it seemed that dostoevsky fired all these minor characters there. uh, kolya ivolgin is some kind of swan in this general ivolgin. there are many of them, he gives them some interesting monologues all the time, but it always seemed to me that this was due to the fact that dostoevsky played. he needed money. at the time, publishers paid by word count. it always seemed to me that all these watered superfluous are not related to this main intrigue. i do not rule out purely theoretically that he stretched the volume. yes? yes, here, it seems to me, the volume and nothing of the sort, if it is done like fyodor mikhailovich you, please, this is welcome. well, but fyodor mikhailovich has, uh, most of it, he starts such a retreat. he also has many such authorial, as it were , digressions. yes, we certainly attract writers to attract non-traditional

characters with something original appearance tips. what to do with what to do with us personalities and then fedor mikhailovich begins his position on ordinary people. and as they are, uh, you can’t shoot boringly. it's boring, you know. and what about the ordinaries, that is , he gives examples. she has them. ganya and the tragedy on ordinary a. he does not want to be single and you tell him this. so you are a nonentity. you see, anga doesn’t say, like a sheet, who are you pretending to be, and there are many characters and sister gani. she is kazakh. how was she there? yes , and he begins when fyodor mikhailovich is a writer. he begins here, for example, he says barbah. and how it then suddenly sets off, how it intertwines dostoevsky's whole life

. so we suddenly understand, and he turns them into eccentrics. and this is his genius. you understand here. after all, jesus is generally some kind of environment, generally speaking, it is impossible not to play jesus without doing anything at all. jesus can only be done here, yes it can be done in conditional yes, you can do such a work , yes, in the opera you can jesus christ - superstar by the way, well, also your own yes, there they are, yes, yes, yes, they did some kind of there, but, in principle, it plays everything the environment does. that's either a child or mary magdalene that or that. well, the environment does it. that's the problem. it is for the whole world, therefore, and somehow why it is quite difficult, of course, to infect. well, the whole theme of albens is christian

motives. you go? yes of course, this is the picture. yes, he himself is already there a lot of his personal , all these stories, these minutes about death conversation. why would you ask there? so don't tell guillotine about death. don't say nothing. here, and before that , he told them about them and told them how he was already on the guillotine and how the bag and katya he includes so many stories of his life there don quixote and the note hides volumes of don quixote in the eyes of the singer harmful poem. there is so much more personal there, plus everything, he was never shy about mikhalchik. including the player wrote to earn. yes, we needed money all the time, but at the same time, it's at this level so personal so deep. he intimates his experiences. then he invests that, in principle, it ceases to be important,

really. you know quite a few geniuses , including michelangelo who worked to work. you know ivangay, not the shameful motivation of the brilliant director bergman, he has an amazing interview with him that ends with saying, you know you don't have to. here are these lofty words. this is herman, one of his last interviews. actually, we are doing. what a carpenter does who makes the chair the shoemaker who sews died. this is the essence of yours. how to do stay but, in general, everything, you know. yes? no, you know, you're the one running around here. i 'm tall, you know, dostoevsky is suffering, the first chapters, it will be interesting, it will be interesting that there is not enough to write, christmas trees, i will have to write.

he, as with the region, returned from germany , ran out of money, you need to write, if there was money, there was money. this podcast is a must read. i am an online batnikova director writer, i have a director as a guest. vladimir khotinenko and actress ekaterina guseva and people who worked a lot with dostoevsky's material and today we are discussing one of dostoevsky's best novels idiot by the way, how does the public react does the public like the real philip? well, i'm generally interested in knowing this too. not well, you are generally problematic yes, the reaction of the hall is now the modern world. in general , a woman in the modern world. well, it's probably hard for a lot of people to understand. and what is it bad to get settled with a rich man from the age of thirteen? shampoo. is that bad? its cool. yes, it's

great. this stain cannot suffer from this, which means that it can wash away the souls, and this broke her. yes and now, she is broken and takes revenge. is it here. that's what's important. bear for the modern truth, wondering women's girls today around sex before marriage. now it's just not a problem at all and it's really impossible even to explain to people, but what's the problem? well, there you think before marriage, she lived with some rich man. it's really cool, the audience loves nastya and philip like she reacts to the money scene she has fun. well, uh, this is how nastasya filippovna plays tricks on people, cruel nastasya filippovna mocks men. unfortunately, everyone perceives 100,000 as 100,000. and that's several million. you see, those 100,000 are against our thousands. well, she has money for a separate issue. by the way, yes, he was one of the first to write. excuse me. yes, of course, that he has this money. well, i don’t speak russian anymore, and he has

the topic of money, he has such a thing with her. here is one of the key, what is making money in this in the world of fedor mikhailovich, there are few who did this, so throw the fireplace. it seems to me that through money the characters of the characters are determined. here is how myshkin relates to money. yes, he distributes to some fictional son pavlishchev. that is, as he says. i know that you are not really the son of a pawn. well, i'll give you 10,000 anyway, as long as you calm down. yes, there is nastasya filippovna who knows the value of money at the same time and use uh any person asks a question. yes, he seems to be, uh, indifferent to money. he is got an inheritance, you know? why didn't he refuse? he has two women here vladimir ivanovich he will accept no one without money he is a woman without money, yes, yes, but you have something to do with it, it’s joking every time not one akkakova. is it

that no heroine? yes, please tell us how you saw grushenka, how nastasya filippovna grushenka, in general , dostoevsky's favorite female psychotype holy sinner. that's how it is in a woman, after all , it will be read very harmoniously. yes, this is dualism. these swings, this apollinaris pendulum, after all. he's on his life is polynaria apollinaria suslova, his beloved. yes, the femme fatale of his life. she was such a vladimir ivanovich, well, in general, in general. yes, he literally writes. here it is against him, he says, with us he will put on dark glasses where a person needs to be for a day . she's already everything. that 's all. this is mikhalych writing. uh in ioke. but this is what haunted her all her life, that is,

this woman who changes her faces right. she has one side, there is another , and she stands between them, and these manifestations are polar. well, like marmalade in sonechka. it would seem, yes, this is probably the most striking example, but they exist and in every heroine there are just such women, you worried attracted his attention, you know? we can formulate here, however we want to formulate. why is she like this? i think the answer is no, really nothing to do. answer that is why music is the greatest of couscous . or someone's music, it doesn't articulate, it lets out feelings. but our nature. and why the spirit, i now think this is such our national nonsense. there is such a true sign of dui and it is in all of them. here in all these perns it is all unconscious of dostoevsky

so, my theory flows from our territory , this vast space. understand? here is another plus. this is another plus some kind of capacitor. this is a battery, because bogatyrs are a piece of land. he lost this world, his strength went to him, that's all, you know, this is a battery. this is absolutely convinced. this is no physics this is physics and this is the battery of us and we are sausage, you know, we are not all able to cope with this. so dostoevsky has this, idiot - this is, well, a direct lustration of this. here you go. you say that music is the greatest of all artificial. yes, and that literature is impossible, but to transfer it to the screen, right? you , as a director, have, uh, a tool that no other art has, and that is the human face. it is impossible to convey the human face of his facial expressions. everyone has their own director here. there is some

method of work, but i can’t torture katya to speak. you know, look at me now. like this, or in the place of stanislavsky, to run through the translation is to fall out, and so on. look at me, right? or i can't say, i don't play anything. it's not just a face that i sculpt. i have to convey my ideas. it should be clear to katya and sow this seed, which they will sprout just there for something. although if the director, who is successful, like this model. and it seems to me, now the one who has not read is happy. if the original source was a book you understand, then i have my own and he is my own myshkin, if the source is a book, because it is so strong and no pupkin tyutkin ivanov petrov sidorova e will convince me, because i have my own these characters revived who live inside me. that

's what literature is, and it's very difficult to break through brilliant film adaptations by staging through my vision the feeling of these heroes. well, by the way, i heard from some men that it was the reading of dostoevsky that broke their relationship with women very much, that is, when they saw these female characters by reading them. so to speak , female nature, something was understood that it was not necessary to understand, and since then everything has gone wrong , it's amazing. it can be a separate story. well , the truth is that dostoevsky's woman is very unusual. they are truthful, but at the same time they are all very strange. the fact is that in general , it’s true that there is no forgiveness for banality, it’s true that art and dostoevsky is everything and poets wrote critics wrote that it ’s not here, it seems that’s all that's all, but that's not life. it can't be like that in real life in this sense, i will

renew with fyodor mikhailovich, or maybe, especially in an idiot, this is a fictional world. this is the art world. you understand these female characters in the artistic world, and they turn out to be just an interesting world. that is, these characters nastasya filippovna and ogla does not work. they changed the face of world art in general. we can say so. don't know. i'm generally far from thinking. you may not agree with me that art affects reality. e there is no confirmation of this no art. worth it in order to strengthen a person, in a sense, universe. here is my firm point of view, and everything else about the influence of the specific. well, maybe somewhere someone will understand something, but it affects everyone on everyone. no. here is such a paradox and what do you think, an idiot, can give something to the modern reader. well , look, either we are uh derogatory

towards readers, because we ourselves say that we are bastard. i'm delighted. i am delighted too, and many have read delighted. does that mean the rest are idiots? i generally like to read another. this is of course not an easy read, and of course well, well i mean, it's not a simple read. e, although er, for example, for the third time it is not difficult. you are, after all, a man of dostoevsky vladimir ivanovich well, i think you know, uh, you have a handbook to take? yes , yes i am today, today, here i have, well, one. well, tell me, well, it’s all the same, yes, you say no, it’s difficult, you can’t name it. well , yes, well, a book or there is not one writer there, i will not think about dostoevsky. i know, i can even answer vulgarly and reading it gives me pleasure. i'm crazy this how it could be done. well, how

can you write it? just just now or it 's rust telling him to get away so i don't see you, never in a few lines. she says, okay, they're taking nothing. i'm like these here are all the changes that boiling is. that's how i don't know, come on it causes. i just absolutely. delight katya is also a person all the time. i remember my first reading of a novel, and at school i, in my opinion, limited myself to, uh, crime punishment and, in short, something like that in the reduction of other works. here, and thanks to the role, i specifically already re-read it, and i remember israel at 14:30. i then sat for a week, which means i was restoring my skin, because i burned out all but i was cold. it was the scene. i remember when the mouse of switzerland rides on the train with rogozhin from here.