[000:00:00;00] military successes have dawned on the front, but this is madness, we must, of course, achieve completely different victories , the front line must pass in a completely different place, in order for us to start talking, firstly about capitulation with ukraine, secondly, to conduct these behind-the-scenes negotiations with the west , in which we will discuss the world order, why these negotiations will still be required, without them we will not end this war, because we understand perfectly well that... without western help, it will not fight for even two months, and even if america, for example, won't happen consensus of republicans and democrats, will no longer give them a cent, there is still europe, which can be obliged to continue to support this ukrainian army, so you will still have to negotiate with europe and america, and there is a nuance here, europe is not interested in war, europe is suffering from

the war, more than russia, russia is growing. economic indicators in europe are falling , completely and have already broken through any ceiling, prices for energy, for heating in homes, for gas, the population is suffering, there are demonstrations on the streets about this, europe is suffering from this war more than russia, less than ukraine, but much more than russia , and europe is interested in stopping it, but in europe there is no political leadership, because european bureaucrats, they can obey orders from washington, they can participate in some corrupt... .schemes, but they do not have any political ideas and ambitions of their own, they are a completely idiotic mass, and america is interested in continuing this military conflict, because europe is weakening, and the main threat to america globally is the euro, which is a threat to the dollar, not even the yuan, and certainly not the ruble.

russia continues to spend such a large part of its budget on the war, this also suits america, so america is unfortunately interested in continuing the conflict, perhaps because of the presidential elections that have happened now, aid to ukraine will be stopped, but it seems to me that negotiations are now not in our interests, we will not achieve more in negotiations than at the front, so if they asked me, i would not negotiate in general, until the front line moves west of kiev, well, here i will disagree with you. because i make a clear distinction between starting negotiations and reaching an agreement, and negotiations can not only be difficult, but cannot be long, when you refuse negotiations altogether, you lose significant political points in the world, including countries that are generally then they are quite favorable towards russia, but if we are talking about signing

an agreement, then... here your concerns are more than understandable to me. i agree with you of course, the position of our political leadership that we are always ready for negotiations is an absolutely correct diplomatic position. i completely agree on this. i mean real negotiations, negotiations that could lead to a signing tomorrow. of course of course. and the last question, now , it seems, the leadership has decided to allow russian chess players to take part in international chess tournaments, if only they do this without the russian flag, but under the auspices of fida, what would konstantin say? molofeev, if such an offer was made

to him? i would say that i won't play. on such conditions, because when our athletes say that they trained for a very long time, therefore, even under a white flag , but they need to perform, because the life of an athlete is short, it sounds funny, they did not train for their own money and not for the money of their parents somewhere - then in a neutral country, they trained at state expense, from them they raised russian athletes so that they would defend the honor of russia, if the honor russia doesn’t allow them to defend, then it’s... it’s a matter of honor to refuse. why would you take such a tough position, just out of principle or do you have any other practical considerations? because without defending the honor of the country, it is unclear why you are doing this. it's just a sport. and when we talk about this with such anticipation, against the backdrop of a war, where people are dying under the flags of russia. and here we are saying that we must understand athletes

who make faces, i’m talking about all famous athletes, but this doesn’t go anywhere comparison with giving up your life at the front, and we make a concession to them and say, you can do it without a flag, but it’s no good, but how will they look? konstantin, i understand what you are saying, but i have one more consideration, which does not contradict what you said, when you allow yourself to be treated like this, when you allow yourself to bend like that just so that you can be admitted to international tournaments, and in those sports where you have very impressive... results, you cannot expect that this flexibility of yours will not be perceived as an opportunity to generally put pressure on russia, and that russia, as they say, will endure and accept. for a great

power, to create such an impression, from my point of view, to put it mildly, is far from harmless. on this we are completely in agreement. thank you very much and good luck. with your cathedral, well, we’re leaving the air now, we’ll be on the air next week. this is a must-read podcast, yaglaya nabatnikova, director, writer. today my guests are children's writer sofia remes and writer ivan shipnyagov. we will discuss creativity of nosova dragunsky, classics

of children's literature. nosov and dragunsky, one might say, became the founders of the genre of children's prose, realistic. what is their innovation? actually, probably, it’s precisely that... this world of realistic childhood, it was created among the first, by these very writers, right under dragonsk’s nose, there is a lot of humor, something that is in children’s literature, no matter how strangely lacking, although it would seem that in general everything should be fun for children, but unfortunately, it’s usually fantasy, usually it’s some kind of fairy tales, stories - wanderings, journeys, adventures, always something with magic, in the realistic stories of both tragonsky and nosov, magic is what the children themselves see, there is, say, a hat that comes to life, some kind of, yes or there is a firefly that glows like a magic piece of something magical, yes, that is, this is the magic that exists in our real life, which does not need to be specially

invented, it just needs to be seen and - captured, well, it seems to me that they take some fragment of reality, but their focus, well, they see ordinary everyday situations as magical adventures, can we? but they only further enhance, let’s say, all the effects, for example, in dragunsky’s story, if i were an adult, and a very simple situation is taken, the child imagines what would happen if he were an adult, and his surroundings were adults, it was all children, and accordingly he would control them, and he plays out such a truly sadistic picture in which, this is a very funny story, it is very small, i highly recommend reading it, he just takes ordinary phrases that parents use, ordinary situations and shifts them, as it were, turns the situation around, yes, when grandma comes and says, supposedly from hockey, what kind of dirty stick is this

, oh where did our little grandma go, her neck is wet, covered in dirt , that is, this is all really what we say, parents say to children, and we recognize all these phrases, we recognize it all, that’s why it is. yes, it’s funny, because it’s true, because we recognize it all and, as it were , a slight exaggeration gives this comic effect, and indeed in nosov and dragonsky has very, very funny stories. vanya, please tell me, what do you think is the difference between the worlds of nosov and dragunsky? one worked in the forties, nikolai nosov, yes, viktor dragunsky - this is already the sixties, a little later, there are some features of everyone’s world, here. children's, there are, of course, they are fundamentally different, yes, nosov is very cool, and dragunsky, very funny, it seems to you that nosov is very sad, yes, well, i can explain, when i was preparing,

i reread it, i thought that i was i didn't read it i need to read this again, i was surprised to discover, well, i actually have this peculiarity that i constantly have some phrases from literature spinning in my head, read once there at the age of 5, so i remembered three words that are spinning in my mind all life. i don’t remember where it came from, what it means , i just got hooked, one of these phrases was in my head: the porridge is bitter, not salty, i don’t know where it came from, i started preparing it, right? it turned out in this way it turned out that it turns out, naturally, i read all this many times, i just carefully forgot how i forgot, well, in principle, i tried to forget my childhood, so i forgot children's books, it was for this reason that i came to this, that i tried to forget, because it is very similar to my childhood and it makes me sad, but i tried to forget dragoon , because he is very different from my childhood, this is also sad, enviable, this is the difference. it’s sad to remember my childhood, listen,

tell me about this story by mishkina kasha, this is absolutely my childhood, it’s just exactly that’s why i did it like this, tell me, my mother left it left the children for 2 days at the dacha, said whatever you want, but i was the only one we had, and sonya kept telling me that it was similar, but this is my story, and i didn’t know what it was about, because i forgot, i have turned off, only there they catch minnows, we had brushes , well, little brushes, they are running out of water, they try to get this water from the well at night , they drowned the kettle, miraculously, miraculously they didn’t drown themselves, then they burn these minnows, they have water there is no way to put out the fire, they wait until the oil burns out, that is, the situation is really terrible, while it’s scary not even in this, not in these details, that there are neighbors , if there was some kind of fire here,

it would probably be just the children alone, well, this is a very cool situation for anyone a child, for a child who is constantly surrounded by uh adults, loving, conscientious, responsible, adults, he gets a kick out of being left alone once a year to burn some oil there, this, but when is this, in principle , the norm for you, that is, when it is not the norm is becoming the norm, it’s sad, well , it looks like a world of children who are out of touch from adults, it's a lonely world. why gloomy? it seems to me that they are having fun, but dragunsky shouldn’t be like that, just like nosov shouldn’t be, that’s the point, that’s why it’s sad. sonya, do you also think that this shouldn’t be the case? i’m probably also closer to the friend, because for me it’s still a connection, a small person, the age of a small adult, a big one, this is also an important part of my life, rather, i grew up like a child from

rasskovsky in a loving family, unfortunately, i was left without a father early on, but even now i remember this relationship between my parents, dragunsky has a lot about this, in fact, we can say that dragunsky’s stories are a kind of declaration of love to his wife, and to the hero’s mother, yes, to his mother deniska, because there is this constant story about how beautiful she is, that my mother is the most beautiful in... it also seems to me that this is a knightly dedication, that deniska’s stories are a knightly dedication to deniska’s mother, and there, of course, the family is much more prosperous, not even in the sense some financial circumstances, but simply due to the fact that there is this love of mom and dad, such care for the son and care, even let’s say, more care for each other, which simply automatically includes and is transferred to the child, because

there are parents who, with the birth of a child, their, let’s say, personal relationship did not end, as sometimes happens, but, on the contrary, they found some kind of new breath, that is, there dad is in love with mom, mom is in love with dad, and the child is very feels good because that when he comes to the house, in some stories some ladies, who can be said to be playing a wedge on dad, try to give him something there, there is a story where nicotine kills a horse, and the child feels it very well. and tries in every possible way to resist this, he understands, he feels this relationship between his parents, and he is such a sensitive child, maybe precisely because he has a fairly prosperous emotional atmosphere in the family, sonya, you are the author of a fairly well-known series of books, notes by gosha kunitsin, tell me please, can you call victor dragunsky your teacher in the literary sense, you were guided by deniskin’s stories, it seems to me that there is something similar in the structure and in the approach, a lot of similarities, indeed, but this is an amazing

story, i only noticed it myself when they started telling me about this, when the book had already come out, apparently this is the case when some works go so deep into you in childhood that you don’t even realize that they already live in you, that is, of course i didn’t do it on purpose wrote about dragunsky, but probably, a lot of things turned out that way, well, in my opinion, what you have in common with dragunsky is that we see the life of adults through the life of a child, that is, we read... in the family, some kind of, well, relationships, we read all this, some problems of adults, that is, they are shown through a child’s focus, through the optics of a child, but at the same time we recognize them, we read them. it turns out that the child is united into a single system with his parents, they have some kind of common game reality, so curious, sometimes touching, sometimes funny life, it seems to me that this technique is similar, i generally like books that adult children can read

, this is a separate type of book, and marshak spoke about children's poetry, but it seems to me that this can be attributed to prose, that what examples? poems are checked twice, by an adult child with good taste, with subtle taste , if these poems are liked only by an adult, these are not children's poems, if only a child likes them, this is not the element of hack, and these are not entirely accurate quotes, but it seems to me that this is true also applicable, this world with some easter eggs for adults, subtle, smart , interesting, this is what, of course, i really, really, really appreciate in dragonskoe, and this is very cool, vanya, are you an adult? but at the same time, i know that you and sophia together have now written a book for children about teenagers , an urban thing, tell me, can an adult writer switch to the format of a children’s writer, how difficult is it, what is special, what is the difference between an adult writer and childish, you have gone through both

experiences, a writer can also be childish if he had a happy childhood, and if he had a childhood it’s not very sad. then let him write better for adults only, so i would have separated sofia and me, well, in a sense, here we are as a children's adult, but it was difficult for you to work on this children's book, it was the most difficult work in my life, yes, i was just afraid of every word, every word i was afraid, why were you afraid, because i’m passing on my childhood there and it’s impossible, but it’s sad, a sad look, well , i probably also have some kind of closed-mindedness, so i can explain to sonya that it’s not always probably to be afraid of the sad, but in the children's, well, drakonsky has a lot of sad ones, nasally there are, they are like that sadness there, there you also enjoy this sadness, i mean how it is carried away, here are two children, they dropped everything into a well, and then burned the last one

food left at night, it’s sadder, but there’s one story that’s sadder, and what happens in the story are cucumbers, the story is cucumbers, a boy stole cucumbers for his mother, brings cucumbers to his mother, it’s as if deniska rather, yes, druzhny brought it to his mother... and his mother burst into tears out of happiness, yes, but the mother from nosov’s story says: where did you get it? cucumbers? he says, well, in someone else’s garden, she says, go return the cucumbers , he says, well, there’s a guy with a watchman with a gun, so he was already catching up, yes, and what does mom answer to this, here’s mom from nosov’s story, yes, let me rather not have a son at all than to have a son, that is, she sends the child back to this watchman who runs around with a gun, well, this is balaban for children, it’s just, well, i don’t know what’s worse, well, nosov really has something in common with balaban, he loves policemen very much, he drives all the time this image of a policeman, but the truth is that nosov still has this policeman, such a kind

uncle styopa, who maintains order, but nevertheless, nosov has certain coordinates of good and evil, which very clearly give off some kind of edification, of course, to security, of course, not security, in the sense that the watchman will not shoot at this boy , naturally, that’s not what’s scary there , it’s the very idea itself that’s scary, that is, in principle, this one thing is enough for me, i thought that if i hadn’t read, i would have thought that this was it story, a boy stole cucumbers and brought them to his mother, that’s it, that’s it. you can burst into tears, leave and not read anything else, well, it’s good that there was someone else to steal for, this is even better, there is a mother, at least, yes, and dragunsky, well, these are two absolute such, poles, poles, yes, childish, it would be nice

, of course, to be somewhere in the middle, montechoca cognac, a product of the stelar group. this is a must-read podcast, i'm oglaya nabatnikova, director and writer. my guests are sofia remes, author of notes by gosh kunitsin, a very popular book, and ivan shepnegov, author novel stream. today we are discussing drunsky’s nose classics of children’s literature, how are they unique? in nosov's dunno, in his stories, a lot is devoted to a certain system of society in which a child grows up, this system is for him... what is good, what is bad, it is bad to deceive, it is bad to steal, punishment for bad deeds will always inevitably come, a certain one is read, well, socialists. and there is a lot of this in dunno, it seems to me, yes, dunno on the moon, dunno in a sunny city, a certain model of society is drawn, and this is

important, but in dragunsky, it seems to me, rather an emotional world, a world of relationships, we can say so, dragonsky’s heroes, they live outside of time, of course, that is, of course, there are signs of the times there, there is even a wonderful book of comments on deniskin’s stories, i don’t remember the author now, a very good book, where... all these objects of time are analyzed and the fact that deniska lives in a communal apartment, there are five people in a room, and many, many things like that, but emotionally yes, you can easily imagine these characters now, just remove what yes, there are communal apartments now exist, that’s also okay, well, there are some signs of the times in the episode “mom is tired of washing the dishes, and the engineers have not yet come up with a machine that washes the dishes.” is trying to invent this machine by spinning an electric floor polisher, but probably the most important thing in this story is that dad decides to help mom, there are no options left for him

, all the options have already been tried, deniska offers a whole scheme for how to eat with the whole family from one plate, and then from one circuit? deniska is actually invited to invent, mom, with a hint to dad and deniska, says that she will no longer wash the dishes unless they invent some cunning way for her to wash herself somehow, so it’s clear that mom... started hinting to dad that that it would be nice to wash the dishes, but this is again a relationship, dad understands this hint perfectly, this is exactly this relationship between parents, this whole thing, and deniska doesn’t understand, he really thinks that some way needs to be invented, he still it invents, he came up with such a conveyor when mom prepares a bowl of soup, the first member of the family eats it, which means then, while the second one goes to wash his hands, from the same plate there, well , that is, one plate from... is used there for the entire lunch or dinner, or three plates, here, but dad understands everything perfectly from the very beginning, as a result, of

course, he says, okay, i know the way, not so tricky, yes, well, in general it’s a great plan that dad sometimes washed the dishes, it seems to me very even, it seems to me, it is important that dad, deniska, is the author of the text itself, yes, as we understand, he he treats himself quite ironically, and... we see this dad, the character, also from some kind of funny, amusing side, there is some kind of self-irony in this, it’s just that dragunsky himself, as i understand it, is like a children’s writer, yes , these are not stories about his son, yes, these are stories about him, it turns out to be such a slightly collective character, he is not collective from the whole world, but he is collective from him and from his son, that is, he takes situations from deniska’s real life, rather all in all, an adult doesn’t invest this experience into his childhood experience, and it turns out such a synthesis of all these emotions of children's adults, this very irony

in relation to dad, it just applies here, because he is trying to immediately understand how he sees it, how deniska sees dad at the same time, yes, well, that is , this is such a split , frustration, split personality, it’s very cool when we see several points of view in one story at once, so... it turns out very cool, sorry, i can’t help but intervene, the topic will just go away now, but cool details, well, compare, here you just said them, yes the nose boy stole the cucumbers and brought them home, at dragunsky’s the boy threw cutlets, threw them away, but this, this is the pole , this is fundamentally a tragedy, he throws away the porridge, again at dragoonsky’s, the boy, throws the porridge out the window, then time, at home, there is a lot of food at home. and the child is not afraid that there will be no food, but he stole food from nosov and brought it home, well, that’s the difference

, but we still have a prosperous world, nevertheless, it always ends well, everyone always admits their mistakes , because he, like a playwright, wrote it in the way that is correct in the textbook, but as it doesn’t happen in life , it never ends well, that is, you don’t believe him, no, absolutely, not a single word, that is, no, i believe, i believe in this longing, how everything ends well. but it should be added at the end, no, at the end i never believe it, i say, to me, why is enough for me, it seems to me that the story of the noses ends at this point, the boy stole the cucumbers and brought them home, tell me, don’t you think so, what children's writers do they look at the world is more honest, there is such a moment, children's writers remain children in the sense in which they protect the ability, here i am not using the formulation of a children's writer, but mine is still my favorite, the formulation of tolstoy, leo tolstoy to look at things

simply directly, like a child, we are all adults, we live in a world of falsehood, lies, hypocrisy of everything else that we love so much, everyone understands everything, but all the games that people play, they look into each other’s eyes, smile and say that’s how it is ok, now we will correct it for you, you better, i understand that everything is bad, well, it’s necessary because society is structured this way, yes , any, any, naturally, and civilization, but children retain this ability to look at things as they are, this is the main difference, i... i also retained this ability, but i look at the world rather gloomily , so to amuse myself, yes, let’s say, well , as an adult, i try to write some funny things, to amuse myself, here in the nursery, so you asked, as if this was why, that’s why it was scary, as if

i can’t tell modern, prosperous children, yes, who are not afraid to throw away cutlets and don’t steal cucumbers, but for mom, as if they had their own dragonsky, there are also very sad stories and these are exactly those stories where children encounter the world of other people’s adults, because that dragonsky’s children live among, these are good children with good adults, they have all these relationships, where they go out to the big garden movement, where they go out to the big, instructiveness of dragunsky, in principle these questions are not asked, they are not relevant, necessary, is it possible to steal, steal, deceive, well, no. not just no, because you can’t and don’t have to do this, it’s not sanctioned, it’s proven that you can’t do it, look, you can’t, but this may be the nature of the time, after all, nosov worked a little earlier, earlier, but they at some point crossed paths because he lived with us longer, by the way, they even had very similar lives in many ways, one had something to do with

the theater, the other with cinema, both had two wives there, there was a very fun party scene there, his, yes , it's always about him they spoke as if they were talking about a person with a lot of guests, yes, holiday people, it seems to me that this should also be felt somehow, of course, you say that as if you just now noticed that nosov was a little gloomy, it’s just in every letter of darkness, honestly. i hear you with great surprise that you remembered one piece of evidence this way, well, it’s so shaky, of course, but it’s possible, i’ll say it anyway, and one of my favorite writers, dmitry gorchev, unfortunately died early, in april of the tenth year, i i clearly remember this day when i i read that he died, well, he died very early, he could have been a very great writer, even more, but he worked in a short form, he would have been very melancholic and

his trademark, again one of the phrases that... constantly spinning in my head, and such a distilled melancholy that you can’t think of anything better, so he loved this melancholy, here he is in everyone, for me nosov has no melancholy, but gorchev loved nosov very much, and he described, he constantly went to trains, between, he lived in a village, podskov region, went to st. petersburg, well, on business, on work, there to straighten documents back and forth , this train, well, on the train with a book, he constantly describes, sat down, sat in the compartment, put out a can of beer, laid out, i don’t know. everyone is looking at how this is children's literature interesting for adults put on a beer i put out i don't know how it's such an adult gloomy guy with a beard so unshaven scary how is he reading well i'll translate this kind of garbage a little now he reads and laughs, but i just need people to smile more , writes dmitry gorchev, it is very characteristic that gloomy

gorchev loved this gloomy nose, here is sonya, please tell us in more detail about the world... of these alien adults, we somehow encounter this alien world in these stories, how it manifests itself, this can basically be divided into dragunsky’s stories into three parts, there were a lot of them, it took 10 years to write them, even more, so probably this exit to other people’s adults is more likely the last part, where, in fact, these wonderful children from the world of good children, but meet with conventional adults, there are no there must be adults there in the story of the garden big movement they meet, in my opinion, with a guy with a teenager , but from another world , where he was clearly sitting with tattoos, he begins to tell, my grandmother is dying of double appendicitis, but the children suspect something is wrong, and there it began with the fact that the children received a long-awaited bicycle and they are enjoying it, yes, yes, and, that is, it

was just happiness, and well, in short, this teenager, they have it... lures this bicycle away and rides off on it and they are discussing what could have happened to him, maybe he was hit by a car there, something else, that is, for these children, but they are waiting for him to return. they wait and will stand there until someone tells them that there is nothing more to wait, and these are sad stories from tragonsky, they also exist like that, there are just lyrical stories, well, for example, there is such a story, 20 years under the bed, where the boy is playing hide and seek and adult women accidentally lock him in the room, he sits under the bed and is afraid to get out, imagining what will happen, if he stays there forever, if she climbed out awkwardly for him... because she had already taken off some part of her clothes there, that is, he understands that the further, the worse, now she has already gone to bed, some kind of experience voyeurism, he has already gone into this adult story,

that’s the point, all dragunsky’s stories are adult, they are simply shown through a child’s lens, but they can actually be quite meaningful for adults and it is not an event that unfolds there, here from some of the sensations, he unfolds a whole story, yes, this fear that he will remain sitting there like that, then ... of course he is saved, there the adults start looking for him, this is the case when, like you in the story, the adults save him, by the way, we said about policemen, and about the police in nosov's stories, there is also a story where a boy, on the contrary, is terribly afraid of a policeman, but the policeman is so good that even he, he, through someone else , negotiates for this child, many stories unosav about this super-thin one. a policeman who understands that the child is afraid of him, but makes sure that he helps him, but the child is still not afraid, that is, some adults too, well , a policeman is who, a representative of the authorities,

that is, accordingly the child gets the feeling that he is protected, that the authorities are taking care of him, by the way, i don’t even remember bad adults from nosov, but dragonsky has bad adults and them, strangers, but not from the family, absolutely certainly from school. good adult wonderful music teacher who listens to all of this, what i like, what i don’t like, what deniska loves - horses with kind faces, yes, something cute, there’s magic, which means he has a friend bear who loves, what do you like, i’m dumplings , yes, he lists all the food that he loves, at the end when, maybe , you love something else, besides food, well, kittens, he says, well, that is, grandma, yes, right away the character, yes, here are two stories, two. character, here is mishka - as far as i know, this is deniska’s real friend, yes, a real boy, it’s clear that

victor dragunsky watched them, but it is clear that these are still made-up guys, yes, denis dragunsky often complains that people ask him all the time, he grew up to become a writer, yes, and he and his sister ksenia dragunskaya, both became writers, commentary about whom you remembered, he apparently had him in mind, he wrote several comments. commentary stories, yes, where he explained how it really happened, well, relatively speaking, as he remembers, this podcast is a must read, i am oglaya anbatnikov, director, writer, in my guests, children's writer sofya remis and writer ivan shepnegov, we are talking about children's literature that is interesting to adults. specifically about nikolai nosov and viktor dragunsky. vanya, please tell me, being a children's writer in soviet times meant making very good money, and nosov and dragunsky, they generally became popular

precisely thanks to literature, although they were involved in cinema and theater, some other activities, but you can say that this stimulated their creativity, such profitability of this children's literature, the breadiness of this activity or... it doesn’t matter at all, in the case of a children’s writer, there is simply a certain creative method of perceiving the world, everything was completely different there; it was profitability, this is not the meaning in which we are talking now, the meaning , no, but it was essentially a kind of state grant, a very large one, this doesn’t mean that they sold a lot of copies, well , they were paid at the market price, no, they were sponsored by the state, i don’t think that’s how they it was very inspiring, i think they would have written without it they simply wouldn’t have published and we would have discovered them there through, from nikolai, these were taken from the soviet state , yes, we don’t take from anyone, thank god, this is

freedom, yes, this is freedom, poverty, yes, and the unknown, this is good, yes, well, given the unknown, i would argue, of course not, if there was a specific question, i don’t think it was inspiring, well, no, no, but we can say that they are relevant today, we can read them today, both nosovo and dragunska. yes, we can do that, and moreover, it seems to me that not many realistic stories have appeared, funny, but inventive. about children, now there is a lot of cool modern literature, children's and teenage, but humorous, among it there is still not much, it exists, but something as funny as dragonsky’s has not yet been written, and it’s a shame, but so you you write, sonya, you, for me, it seems to me that it’s not so funny, i have this simple human writer’s envy when i

read, say, a story. i was an adult and here i am driving in a car with a child, we turn on this story, he laughs, and i laugh, the audio version, yes, well, this is a moryshak test, really, this is also interesting for a child to be an adult with good taste, yes, it’s very funny and really cool, or nosov’s story, fedya’s task , where a boy tries to eat a funny nose, he listens to the radio, tries to do his homework, he can’t do either, because - he can’t concentrate, it’s really funny, it’s great, there’s a bell ringing, there are so many bags here, it’s funny, dramatic, that is, it’s built, it ’s invented, they said that this is funny, we were joking, laugh, well, it's not charming, it's no, in itself, he doesn’t think so, but it’s too mechanistic, too much, i don’t like playwrights, film makers, so yes , noses from there, of course, well, it’s obvious, not well,

they’re just different things. indeed, there are very dramatic stories that are similar to what could be a script, say, a living hat is actually a ready-made cartoon script, that’s why it’s not interesting, it’s not interesting to you, it has a lot of film adaptations, we have that, there are plenty of other film adaptations, and from my point of view i don’t want to offend anyone, but dragunsky, well less successful film adaptations, maybe the fact is that they are more difficult to film, there are a lot of them. with language, there are a lot of linguistic constructions that are funny exactly as long as they are written - on paper, when you - see it, well, when these lines are transferred to dramaturgy and done and that is , some events happen, this ceases to be funny, there are stories in which , dramaturgically, they are very funny, but mostly in the language, yes, if - literally good literature

translate to the screen, as a rule, yes, it doesn’t work, it’s generally a film adaptation - it’s a very complex story, i still don’t understand how it ’s done, i never learned how to make a script for my own stories, yes, it’s very difficult, vanya , it’s cool that both nosov and dragonsky work very simply, they have very simple dialogues, it’s possible, it’s impossible, where and where , this is exactly the most difficult thing in general in life, it’s difficult to write, it’s easy to do difficult things. it’s difficult to do something simple, the simpler it is, the more difficult it is, they are incredibly cool, of course, that’s why they sound relevant, it’s unique, well, that is, these are dialogues of the level, i don’t know, but again we remember movies constantly of the level, again i don’t know, well , so strange, well, no, i won’t say, well, no, well, tarantino, well, tarantino , well, that is, that is, you are comparing nosovo with tarantino, i ’m not comparing nosorantino, but this is the level when it seems to you that it’s very simple, but try it? and this means that it is

impossible to repeat this, it is impossible to repeat the dialogue of these boys, it seems very simple, but that is why it is impossible to repeat this, therefore, answering the question, yes, nosov and dragunsky, in their simplicity, they knew how to do, there is no feeling, no feeling that the literary editor was specially tinkering with this text, but there are dialogues in drakonsky, where mishka said, alyonka said, he repeats himself 10 times, he said it and it doesn’t seem like it, for some reason it works , for some reason it is believed that we speak one language, but should write in a completely different language, they don’t intersect in any way, actually, but maybe nosov and the dragoon broke through this fourth point, as they say in the theater, this is another cool thing about them, because the only language of the existing physical reality is oral, which is produced in our speech apparatus, these masses of these icons on media that we call written language...

it has little to do with anything, this is a very, very large agreement , in which there is inevitably a huge number of errors of all kinds, this is a big convention, but therefore a strange situation when, well, it always seemed strange to me, it was always there, so we speak so badly, we write it so well, well, that is, we throw away the basis and take the convention and make it again to the issue of falsehood and hypocrisy, you know what i mean, yes, that an artificial agreement is recognized as more real than... more cool because they realized that you don’t have to be a literary editor, that is, you don’t have to clean things up, you have to invent them. just take it from life, and here ’s the next difficulty, you can’t literally transfer oral media in the form of signs, well , in letters, convey sounds in letters, you just need to be able to do it, you just need to create imitation of the fact that this is as if conversational, and this is simply the most difficult

level, yes, aerobatics, yes guys, thank you very much for the interesting conversation, this was a must-read podcast, i am aglaya batnikova, director, writer. my guests were the writer sofia remis and the writer ivan shipnyagov, we discussed nosovo and dragunsky classics of children's literature. well, today is nicholas ii. the figure is quite controversial, even for the convinced. monarchists, because many criticized nicholas for leaving his post, deserted from the post of god’s anointed, and even more so for others, especially after the revolution, so the controversial figure in soviet

times was called the bloody nicholas, now primarily nicholas the martyr, so there is something to deal with, in general, the personality is really interesting, and quite you can often hear the point of view according to which russian revolutions are a consequence of weakness of will, weakness of character, mistakes made by nicholas ii, but if it weren’t for nicholas, there would have been someone else in this place, at least alexander ii, then perhaps the revolution did not happen, vid, in particular, said so, we’ll sort it out, probably, hello , this is a historical podcast, russia-west on the swing of history, pyotr romanov and sergei solov are with you, we’ll sort it out. in the fate of the last russian emperor, it is interesting to remember the upbringing of nicholas, because in general, a lot is laid, naturally in youth, some main traits, they tried to educate, in general, all the main, so

to speak, historical figures, nicholas, let’s say , raised alexander ii this way, physical activity, preparation. the upbringing of such a man, you can’t complain and so on, such a very tough upbringing, alexander ii did the same thing with his son, the same method was used in raising nicholas ii, he came out really a very strong, formal person, physical, very strong, physically strong, says that he spun the sun on the horizontal bar, he was a good rower, but uh, in order to govern, especially a country like russia, spinning the sun is not enough, and not even necessary, and even not necessarily, without question, but as a teacher, so to speak, of life, especially politics, philosophy and so on, he had a famous

conservative victorious, who was his father’s teacher, to what extent, this upbringing really reflected on so to speak , figure... it’s difficult for nikola to say, because when they asked about the same victory, what his students, so to speak , first alexander ii, then nicholas, learned, he shrugged his shoulders, he didn’t know, in general, that it was understood that didn’t get it, if we talk about upbringing, he still has one thing nicholas ii definitely learned from pobedonostsev, and not only from pobedonostsev, from the entire russian context , that it is necessary to protect the beginning of an unshakable autocracy, and his reservation in the coordination speech is known. when he had already become emperor, he called dreams of parliament meaningless, in the 1897 census, he also filled out the corresponding questionnaire, in the occupation column he wrote the owner of the russian land, this is exactly how he felt until

the very end of his reign, the owner of the land russian, that’s how adequate it was the reality of that time, this is a big question, the very beginning of his reign is curious, all his predecessors, in general, came with some fairly definite program, well, not a plan, maybe specific actions, but still, paul changed everything that catherine did, alexander ii changed a lot of what paul did, nicholas i after the decembrist uprising, with surprise, let’s say, considered the police matter in general when he was established in russia and created a gendarmerie, so to speak, state, alexander ii. great reforms, he practically changed policies of his father, alexander ii largely disagreed with the liberal initiatives of his father, too, counter-reforms. yes, counter-reforms, yes, what nicholas ii came with. with nothing, he had no

plans of his own. in general, the force of inertia acted like this. in both domestic and foreign policy, he tried to continue his father’s work to some extent. well, on the inside, you can remember, let’s say, that he, glory be to god, continued his father’s economic undertakings, monetary, so to speak, these reforms. yes, and as for foreign policy, then, well, alexander ii is famous, he was called a peacemaker, yes, and he really, in general, was a man of a non-military nature, in general he did not fight, he had the only serious war, a customs war with germany, economic, here he defended the russian wallet, so to speak, he was the owner, so he was really some kind of owner of the russian land, he was interested in, say, socialist ideas, yes, something like that, disarmament, and so on, all this

fell on his table, but he, uh, sympathizing with this, he threw it away side, because he believed that it was utopian, something, and nicholas ii, well, well, one might say, so, figuratively speaking, he took from the basket what the pope threw away, tried, so to speak, this peacemaking idea, or what, to implement, well, then there were several such famous works that really had an impact on society, it was such an austrian baroness von sutter, she lived in russia for quite a long time, she wrote , so to speak, a book, such a pacifist down with weapons, this book was then very popular it also influenced, so to speak, the views of the then still young emperor, he took this into account and a diplomatic mission was created, as a matter of fact, here

are the first two hague disarmament conferences, in this, yes, the great merit of nicholas and russian diplomacy, it must really be noted, maybe somewhat reducing the pathos that these conferences were beneficial for russia , why, russia was losing the arms race, yes, then the arms race in our country is mainly associated there with the times of the cold war and so on, in fact it was going on the arms race in the field of the navy, especially between great britain and germany, especially germany and france , great britain and france, russia, was clearly completely lagging behind, so introducing the idea of ​​disarmament was beneficial to russia, despite the fact that at the same time russia pursued a rather aggressive policy in the far east , which is why there was some kind of living contradiction here, there is a widespread myth that nicholas ii was a characterless person, so... eh , it’s probably worth saying right away that

he wasn’t spineless, he was confident that he was chosen by god, but he had a quality, i think you’ll agree, uh, he was amazingly incapable of choosing people for himself, he inherited all of his father’s ministers. the next minister, in my opinion, just garimykin then from the post of minister of internal affairs, or durny, now i’m afraid to make a mistake, left, it was necessary to appoint someone new, and nicholas ii turned for advice to two opposing figures surrounded by the victorious butte, they nothing with each other didn’t coincide, they had polar views, he asked, what about the candidate and sipyagin, vita was a man, such a courtier, an intriguer, and he answered very streamlined, said that the spit is of course a man of great intelligence, but in the modern situation, his his mind is not flexible enough, and his methods are not pure enough, they can cause criticism, there are social problems there and so on , and sepyagin is a man, of course, an honest, honest person, but quite clever in the current situation, he was not a victorious courtier, he answered simply: sepyagin is a fool,

spit scoundrel. what did nicholas ii do? first he appointed sepyagin, who was killed by the esrs, then plevya, who was also killed by the esrs. this is the brightest illustration. that is, he did not listen to smart advisers, even if they had polar views, even when they coincided ; he appointed people, in general, who, among other things, pushed the country towards revolution, the first russian revolution. and finally one more thing. it is known what influence the german emperor welgel had on nicholas ii, because a very interesting point, alexander ii was very contemptuous of wilhelm, he called him a dancing dervish, because he had such a gait, as alexander ii said of such a pros officer who swayed when he walked, and he alexander ii was like that, an upright man, big, large. and he suppressed this wilhelm absolutely

; there is a scene of wilhelm running to the peronica , meeting alexander ii, to give him tires. and when our power changed and nicholas ii came, the roles changed diametrically. wilhelm simply put psychological pressure on nikolai and he succumbed, including him pushed for a war in the far east , because it was beneficial to germany, and nikolai succumbed, yes, he was called there, i don’t know, admiral, so to speak, of the pacific ocean, there of the far east. that is, no matter how he seduced him into attacking, well, i must say that there was no need to seduce nicholas ii much, he wanted to go to the far east, and witte himself teased his appetites, because when the agreement on the chinese eastern railway in moscow, in 1896, then russia built a railway from transbaikalia to vladivostok

through northern manchuria, received opportunities, well, formally this railway was the property of a joint stock company. in fact, it was the russian territory of this railway, russia gained predominant influence there, began to peacefully develop northern manchuria, but nicholas ii became immortal, on the initiative of wilhelm, indeed, the germans seized a port in china, and russia captured the port of arthur, violating its own agreement with china, and about the protection of its territorial integrity, which would actually allow russia to have preferences in china peacefully. then there was the boxer uprising, the khatuanian uprising in china. russia is suppressing it, among other things, russian troops are entering beijing led by general linevich, well, they robbed it, not without that, but russia does not withdraw troops from manzhuria, after the uprising was suppressed, the japanese ask when you will withdraw the troops what russia answers, russia is silent. in general, he was warned about the great risks of this war by the same kuropatkin, who visited japan a year before, the minister of war,

i saw with my own eyes, so to speak, the potential of the japanese, so he was aware of all these matters. and then he had to conduct military operations , so witta also warned, and then he had to sort out the failure and conduct very difficult negotiations with the japanese about peace, in portsmouth, yes, yes in portsmouth, he did, it seems, everything possible, nevertheless, he performed half sakhalin, therefore, well , nikolaev awarded him, so to speak, the title of count, and the press... made fun of this, calling him the count of half-sakhalin, his mother warned him and was categorically against this idea of ​​the russian-japanese war, she is generally the smartest woman and did a lot in order to somehow correct his behavior, but from the very beginning of the reign, this was not possible,

let’s remember the walker, this tragedy that happened, bloody stampede, bloody stampede. yes, yes, yes, yes, they rushed for some circles, there was something else there, well, in general , in short, a tragedy, in general in such cases they declare, i don’t know, a trauma, a national one, well, i don’t know, but in in any case, they don’t behave the way they behaved nikolai in this situation, he of course wrote in his diary that yes , something unpleasant happened, that’s all, it’s not good, that’s it, but at the same time, uh, despite his mother’s protests, he went to a ball at the english embassy after that that the same day, on the same day, and he waltzed, so to speak, with alexandra fedorovna, this caused a very negative reaction in society, in general he was condemned, the foreigners themselves who were there, they were shocked by such behavior, it turns out that in in general, nicholas ii,

waltzing with his wife, did the first steps towards the abyss, moreover. marxism had nothing to do with this; these are purely personal matters, so to speak. at the same time, they appointed some kind of colonel there, accused him, yes, and the tsar declared gratitude to grand duke sergei alexandrovich, the tsar’s uncle, for arranging the celebrations, help for the victims was of course allocated, but the connation celebrations turned out to be much more expensive than the help allocated, respectively, to the dead and wounded as a result of ha, and the mother just demanded the punishment of the grand duke, well... and who later in moscow hated they called prince khadynsky prince alexandrovich in the end russia really didn’t lose that much, half of sakhalin lost port arthur, but the most important thing is that this is the result of this war, which of course should be the topic of a separate conversation, this is a huge topic, but one of the results of this war, that in the west they stopped being afraid of this russian pore roller,

the russian army, the army discredited itself, in accordance with this, germany will then develop its strategy for the first world war. no longer afraid as before the war for two front, and this of course played a role in subsequent events, including for russia itself, well, yes, we can add to this that it contributed to the first russian revolution of 1905, of course, the russo-japanese war. yes, the russian-japanese war, of course, is a topic for a separate conversation, follow our podcast, we will continue this topic. all episodes of the historical podcast of russia west in the pumping of history can be viewed on the website of the first channel 1tv.ru. veda vodka, a product of stellar group. this is a history podcast russia and the west are on the swing of history; today

we are dealing with the controversial figure of the last russian emperor nicholas ii. an interesting topic, such family relationships in the royal family, because under autocracy, any step is taken at the very top. then echoes downstairs, one way or another, and here various moments are very curious, and alexei’s illness, and the very fact of his late birth, because his daughters were born late, therefore so understandable in a completely human way, love for his son and so on, which influenced in many ways politics, in this sense, i would like to remember the confrontation between my mother - nikolai, maria fedorov and alexandra fedorovna, but these two figures, they were, of course, in a very difficult relationship, and this

was not a matter of contradiction between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law , a common thing, so to speak, no, they both fought for influence on nikolai, but it was not a fight for family influence on nika, but for political influence, because they were. antipodes, if maria fedorovna believed that the well-being of the dynasty depends on the well-being of russia itself, therefore stability in russia means stability for dynasties, and stability for russia was largely connected with the need for certain reforms, so maria fedorovna supported in every possible way both vita first and then stalypin. she was ready for a constitutional monarchy, she was ready for concessions, because well, in her native... denmark there had been a constitutional monarchy there for a long time, and her sister, so to speak, ruled in england, there was also a constitutional monarchy there, as for alexandra feodorovna, then she had a completely different position, she was categorically

against any of the slightest concessions by nicholas ii, in this sense she influenced him, because she believed that everything should be left as it is now to a little one, that is, or a ray of sunshine, as she called so to speak, his son, that’s all. i understand, everyone should understand, so to speak, the mother’s desire, so to speak , to do everything for the good of her son, but she, well , i don’t know, maybe the parallel is not very appropriate, and even rude to some extent, but, well, peter the great sacrificed his son for the sake of russia, and alexandra fedovna thought that russia was obliged to do everything. only for the sake of everything remaining as before for the little one, she, having converted to orthodoxy , accepted some kind of mystical,

somewhat hysterical version, this despite the fact that she listened to lectures at oxford on philosophy, and she strengthened nicholas ii in every possible way , who was still somewhat more skeptic about some mystical things, he was also infected by them, but to a lesser extent degree, in that his power is god-chosen. is that any attempts at his power are crimes against god ’s will, she supported him in this, she wrote to him about this, she cultivated to a certain extent some of these personal stubbornness when she wrote to him shortly before the february revolution that all ministers are fools, generals are idiots, literally in almost these words, yes, in what is needed, you must be peter peter, you must be ivan the terrible, you must hit the table with your fist, that is, she tried from him, from nicholas to make ivan the terrible, yes, that was absolutely perfect. utopian and completely out of character, impossible in the situation in which russia was then, but the influence of his wife grew sharply, of course, during the first world war, when he went to

headquarters and when he trusted in petrograd, petersburg with the beginning of the first world war, as everyone remembers, it was renamed from german -speaking st. petersburg to russian-speaking petrograd, and uh, when he trusted her most of all, when, under the influence of rasputin and his wife, state affairs find themselves in the hands of in general, well, what is called a clique, a court clique, this discredited the monarchy itself, because there were rumors about it, the rumors greatly exaggerated the influence of his wife and rasputin, and uh, nicholas himself began to be perceived as some kind of completely henpecked man, which he really is in fact, to the extent to which it was presented, it was not, all this together, of course, struck at the authority of the monarchy, just as it struck the figure of rasputin, a clever peasant, such a peasant who played on these mystical moods of the royal couple, who supposedly treated alexei, of course, of course, he didn’t treat him, of course, he couldn’t treat him, especially since they didn’t

know how to treat hemophilia at that time, rasputin managed to creep into trust and that’s why nikolai valued him, because for nicholas, it was a connection with the people, here is razutin, who blows his nose in the curtain, who gets drunk, debauched and writes about it himself, notes to the emperor, nicholas did not understand this at all, how much this would discredit the emperor, he really looked at all this much more soberly mysticism for other things than alexander fedorovna, this is pointless, i think that what prevailed here is that since putin was not expelled, he did not want to, and this is also very important, because stalepin, who also tried, so to say, about, about rasputin to talk to the sovereign, i heard the following from him, yes, but i can’t , i can’t, i can’t from the sovereign emperor , of course, dictated by purely family

personal relationships, yes, he did a lot, but he couldn’t, because he would then upset alexandra fedor, but at the same time advice from our friend, as it is in correspondence, friend with a capital letter, he accepts, accepts, he accepts, including in the personnel policy of the ministerial cord, too, but also, but also not most often, far from directly, again through alexandra fedorovna, this is its role, a huge role, russia is sliding towards war, russia is concluding after the russo-japanese war. the agreement on the division of spheres of influence with england is conceded, accordingly, what is called the big game ends, well, this stage of the big game ends, meaning the confrontation between russia and england in the east, russia cedes a sphere of influence in tibet, russia undertakes to respect the demarcation line with afghanistan, russia withdraws from central and southern iran, iran's spheres of influence are divided. by the way, a small detail , because of this, for a long time , railways went only from west to east, they did not go from north to south, so as not to intersect

the spheres of influence of england and russia. god forbid that they don’t compete, well, yes, but russia is sliding towards the first world war, gradually, russia tried, nicholas ii tried to prevent something there, like by corresponding with velhelm, but in the end the war still began, but the emperor was warned that he had warned that after the russo-japanese war decades of calm would be needed, almost the same thing, word for word. stalypin, yes, give me 20 years of peace, but where did i get 20 years of peace then? nicholas ii, all this advice from different people, bad ones at that, witt and stalypin each mutually did not tolerate each other, yes, but they were sober people, but they absolutely united in this, what does nicholas do, russia finds itself in the first world war, what, as a result, it cost russia, from the beginning of the february, then the october revolution , yes

, the only thing that can be said to justify nicholas ii is that if he got into the russian-japanese one largely on his own initiative, then here the water drain simply sucked in a weak swimmer, so to speak, the situation was simply this: nikolai also did not want to fight, and yet he fell into this waterfall and it dragged him in. here it must be said, of course, that war is a well-known fact, all the warring countries were not ready, no one expected that it would not no one expected, but russia turned out to be more unprepared than everyone else , well, thaler at one time during the french revolution, he said that everyone is to blame for the revolution, in general, it seems to me that yes, nicholas ii, of course, a significant share of the blame rests on his

shoulders. there are, but many are to blame, the revolutionaries are to blame, the tsar is to blame, uh, the liberals, who, so to speak, played at war, in many ways played at war, if we talk about the personality of nicholas, and look at him in another critical situation in the first russian revolution, let's go back a little now, then also, his behavior does not demonstrate this idea of ​​spinelessness; it must be said that during... the first russian revolution, which begins, well, with a terrible story, with bloody sunday, which the tsar knew about, that is, not about the blood of bloody sunday, but the fact that the troops are preparing to disperse the rebels with armed force is also something. a separate big topic of the first russian revolution, but nevertheless he treats this completely calmly, he mobilizes troops, gives dictatorial powers to grand duke vladimir alexandrovich, whom he later again, he will thank, yes, for what happened, and, his reaction is the following

, his documents have been preserved, yes , vitta reports, vitto then held the post, after the manifesto of october 17, after the first attempt to establish a constitutional monarchy took place in russia , holds the post of prime minister, yes. lays out about the commander of a punitive expedition in the baltic provinces, which in general show excessive enthusiasm, mass floggings, executions without trial, and so on, means the highest resolution on the report witt, oh well done, that means they are shooting at a working demonstration, several dozen people are dying, nikolai ’s resolution, it’s a pity that it’s not enough, the same thing, the law on courts-martial is being introduced on stolypin’s initiative, but nikolai forbids submitting a petition to him for pardon . here and there, despite the fact that there a certain rebel city was peacefully brought into obedience after negotiations, nicholas imposed a resolution, all this was preserved, it was necessary to destroy

the entire city, that is, nicholas ii regarded all this as an attempt on his unlimited, god-given autocratic power, this is cruelty, tenderness in the family, yes, a good family man, this cruelty was still present in the character. this is a historical podcast of russia and the west on the swing of history, discussing nicholas ii today. question: nicholas ii. this is really the main culprit of the revolution, or perhaps these problems that were revealed by the first world war, or is it still, of course, therefore, of course, answering the traditional russian question, who is to blame, of course, not golabi. he's to blame, but once again i repeat toleran’s phrase that everyone is to blame for the revolution, including the west, since we are talking about the topic of russia and the west, then the west is undoubtedly to blame. the west supported - not

only liberals, cadets, let's say, yes, but, it supported in every possible way. and after the revolution, by the way, many people believed that the revolutionary center... well, after the february revolution, the revolutionary center was in the english embassy and the british ambassador, george bugnan, is almost the organizer, so to speak, of everything, this is a very strong thing of course, a very strong exaggeration, he did not sit with melyukov and did not draw plans to seize the telegraph, telephone, etc., and the station, but they really supported it in the most active way, well, first of all, they themselves admitted, the same bukinan about this wrote that in order for russia not to leave the war, that is, they wanted the russian soldier to fight to the end, to the last russian in general, including in

the interests of britain and france, but at the same time they, in general, then, through, so fingers looked even at the radicals, the radicals themselves, before the start of the war, in a number of european countries the revolutionaries felt great, before that the populists, then the marxists, so to speak, and so on and so forth, so yes, the west is also very guilty of the russian revolution, they were once again mistaken, they miscalculated, and of course, they counted on the victory of the moderates, the maximalists came to power, and in many ways, yes, thanks to the west. still, i would say that the russian revolution is still primarily an internal problem, of course not, first

of all yes, again, if we return to first russian revolution, then here is a very characteristic episode with how the famous manifesto of october 17, 1905 was signed , which almost made russia a constitutional monarchy, why was it almost not, because it was then actually canceled, largely canceled, during such called... the june coup in 907, in general the behavior of the king’s personality again at this moment, we mentioned bloody sunday, after bloody sunday the king, this also needs to be guessed from a propaganda point of view, forgave workers for the riots that took place, wonderful, yes, and this was published, i quote: you allowed yourself to be misled by the deception of the traitorous enemies of our homeland, strikes and rebellious gatherings only excite the crowd to the kind of riots that the authorities have always forced and will force... in fact, it was a manifestation of the idea , which also received the support of the authorities

of police socialism, cooperation of the police with moderate workers' organizations, as in the spirit of faith in the good king, to the good king, it means to present a petition, a petition it was radical, to be honest, but what could be done, many contemporaries wrote about it, accept a delegation from the workers , talk to them graciously, stall for time, reach some compromises, this is not even considered and this is not even discussed, as a result punitive measures and a sharp decline in authority, because the nickname bloody appears after bloody sunday 905, and the number of victims of which is still disputed, from several hundred to more than a thousand, and it is quite difficult to understand exactly this issue, in general, there of course, a lot has accumulated, bloodshed, the russian-japanese war, the lena execution, this is already the twelfth year, yes the twelfth year, no , well, all this is added to the piggy bank, so to speak, the nickname of the bloody nicholas, yes, when the tsar signed the manifesto, he didn’t want to, manifesto, witt wrote, witt understood that

to save the monarchy in the conditions of a general strike, which could escalate into an armed uprising, the army was already thinking in that direction, it was shooting, the manifesto was like this, a kind of tranquilizer pill, the tsar did not want to until the last, maria convinces feodorovna, whom you were talking about, she convinces him to sign the manifesto, he is convinced by grand duke nikolai nikolaevich, the tsar’s uncle, who threatens to shoot himself in front of his eyes if the tsar does not sign, the tsar signed was very offended, he believed that the manifesto was snatched from him, he ... understood that this is what saved the monarchy, the marxists turned out to be the most lenient towards nicholas, in the sense that they believed that no matter what nicholas did, no matter how he behaved, no matter what the reasons were, it was all the same , the revolution was inevitable, the collapse of nicholas was predetermined, here in connection, in brezhnev's time, in my opinion, a joke appeared that nikolai aleksandrovich romanov should be posthumously awarded the order of the october revolution for his services in creating a revolutionary situation in russia and in general

there is some truth in the joke, yes yes, when events begin in petrograd, this is also a separate big topic of the february revolution, the events began with lines for bread , of course, yes, there are many conspiracy theories, but it all started with lines for bread, no bread was brought to the capital, well, this is already a suicidal story, nikolai, being in headquarters, does not understand what is happening in petrograd, and he believed that all this could be calmed down again with punitive measures, and then he agreed to the ministry of people's confidence, but then, when the question was already raised, when the train had already left, the train had left, he again he was late, once again, that’s a good phrase, he was late, in fact, the entire reign of nicholas i was permanently late for the train, i would say this, when we were talking about peter the great, i once said that russia, here on pulled that historical moment out of the deck. because it was very successful, very