for him this represents, as it were , the main core of the christian tradition, but then , eh, let's say, there is the teaching about eternal hellish torment, yes, for him, as for many others, but it represents, of course, a deep internal problem, and he obviously leaned toward the idea that ultimately salvation is available to everyone, well, the attempt to see god not dogmatically, to see god in the light in some symbol is not real, this is where faust ends, everything is an endless symbol of comparison, this symbol yes... to see what is before your eyes, here to try, yes, it would seem that this is this given, but to see it, to realize it, not only rationally, but also spiritually, it is not so simple, this is part, again, of goeth's.

contemporary to him this new european natural science, yes, which lacks precisely this, lacks precisely the humble peering into nature, which allows one to recognize the divine presence there, well, let's at least time is inexorable, and... than much, but let's still talk about goeth and the scientist, also in general it is not typical on the one hand, but for at least for a poet it is absolutely certain, on the other hand it is absolutely obvious that the contribution to science we have already partially and a little more precisely said about it, although as it is customary to say yes in such cases, that in different sciences or there the scientific contribution is not ambiguous, that it is not equal, yes, that is, there are things that really are of interest today, there are things that in general remained in history.

it is there, yes, that means, here in the presence of this all-pervading some divine energy, so it is very significant that he is in various fields, yes, and this is really, this is optics, and botany, meteorology, geology, so, well , accordingly, yes, anatomy, comparative anatomy, actually his first significant , such a really generally recognized scientific discovery, is the discovery of the intermandibular bone. in humans, which finally proves, so to speak, the continuity of the transition yes from there from all other forms of life to humans, yes, this is like a clear, understandable empirical argument in favor of that nature is one, that nature is whole, yes, that it is all permeated, that is, by a single principle of organic, organic connection, organic life, and yes, and the organic connection is very interesting, this famous poem is one, everything that is inside is found in the outside, and today. i am addressing again to

modern literature, to modern philosophy, this is confirmed in a unique way. in 1975, benoit mandelbrod invented the fractality of the universe, and this does not mean that he invented it somewhere like this empirically from somewhere, he spied it in nature, this similarity of things, the great similarity, it is amazingly present in goethe. for the first time, articles appeared, for example, about goethe's doctrine of sound, he studied music, rewrote with his own.

teaches: what i created in the doctrine of color is worth everything that i wrote as a poet, this is the greatest book, nature itself can envy me, although in some other place he complains that he... wasted his energy on something that is not the main thing, by the main thing, as i understand it, i mean poetry, the main thing is still faust, you see, there really is no escape from this, but faust contains a huge number of things, that's what concerns this poetic view again, and by the way, faust, if we throw such a bridge, after all, faust is also some kind of eben bilt görtes, his double, you see, because goethe himself constantly strove for this knowledge, knowledge not only of himself, but also of what is around, and faust is absolutely, of course, not a medieval mystic, he is absolutely such a character of the age of enlightenment, and there is a very such an interesting quote too, shortly before his death, when faust was already completed, sealed, goethe writes in a letter to humbaldt, here again, as far as sciences are concerned, an amazing

letter, there are magnificent words, on everything that i created in faust, i threw clothes, so that each new generation will discover something of its own, and then he... approaches the idea of ​​the conscious unconscious, this is from the point of view of psychology, goethe says: the conscious and the unconscious move in the human mind like warp and weft, conscious and unconscious, he corresponds with carus, with a romantic, with an artist, with a psychiatrist and he looks into these, as it were, abysses of the unconscious, long before the appearance of jung, freud and others, that is, a most interesting thing, and of course faust in this regard is not only, as they say, the crown of creation, but it is also a reflection of all his searches, in terms of religion, by the way, in terms of love, ninel - the premiere of a multi-part film from monday on the first. don't tell me only about men that they fall in love. valentina titova

- one of the most beautiful women of the soviet screen, she always gave the impression of a socialite, a woman who is surrounded by the care and love of her famous men, but it turns out. the impression is deceptive: men were always afraid of me, and my husbands had no influence on me, from someone else's husband's wife, move away, how basov reacted to your pregnancy, disappeared, who accompanied you in the maternity hospital, i do not know, his assistants, everyone pitied me in the maternity hospital, how valentina titova left vladimir basov and what the director wrote in statement to the court, filed for alimony, why didn't you take the children with you, and where is the mother's, right? now you want to ask, where did i put the money? confession of valentina titova: a cuckoo mother or a victim of love, can a beautiful woman or actress be happy at all? no one can stand it when a person hunts only for you, a knife in his hand. exclusive with dmitry borisov.

the premiere is next saturday, on the first. 275 years of the great goethe, we gathered our thoughts. and this is just when he was working on the second part, does this have any historical grounds, it is a legend, which probably arose in the same way as the legend about the feather, which goethe once passed on to pushkin,

all this is of course not true, another thing is that at first in russia they became acquainted not even with werther, but with goethe's play clavigo, it appeared in such a rather, perhaps weak translation, and then the era of werther began and so brightly. that mikhail sushkov, a nobleman, this is also a well-known fact, wrote his werther and ended up, just like his hero, hanging himself, although he was from a rather educated family, and then in some amazing way goethe enters, i would say, probably, into the flesh and blood of the reading intelligentsia, and so much, i really like this comparison, that in turgenev's hunter's notes in the first story the ferret kalinych, he later erased this, turgenev writes, the ferret was similar to goethe, and kalinych more to schiller.

what is important, and then this long history of the translation of faust began, which has not ended to this day, and neither the translation of kholotkovsky, nor the translation of pasternak, the translation that appeared in... regarding the reading of russian culture, add something here well firstly i wanted to say two

things: firstly, of course, werther and faust are definitely leaders in russian reception in relation to everything else, but neither goethe's prose was so actively perceived in russia, yes, yes, nor his lyrics, although of course we have brilliant translations, and adaptations, we have mountain peaks, and mountain peaks, which of course we can't forget about either, these are of course the goethes, but... still the lyrics did not have such a strong influence, yes and apparently, this faustian theme, yes, it turned out to be so fundamental, yes for russian reception, that it runs like a red thread through the 19th century, yes adoevsky, turgenev, yes, well, of course, bulgakov already in the 20th century, yes, this is of course, a continuation of this very line, yes, well, and another important theme is what pyotr valerievich spoke about, this is the reception of just... his religious and philosophical ideas, which are connected with anthroposophy, had a gigantic influence, of course, on russian symbolism, andrei bely

it is impossible to imagine, yes, without goethe, yes, these two lines, they interact in some mysterious way there, yes, through some secret internal connections, yes, and i think that it is possible that other aspects of creativity are still waiting for their russian perception, you know, dear friends, with great gratitude to you for this conversation, i would like to finish with this: nikolai karlovich medtner, the composer, had such a criterion, without which i can live, yes, without this in music, he says, without this i can live without this, i want to change it a little to ask you at the end of our conversation, without what in goethe you cannot live, taking faust out of the brackets and disregarding, perhaps , the fact that we have already designated russian culture, here you personally, without what in iota you cannot live, if such...

in the positive unity of opposites, which always generates something new, it

seems to me, this is an idiotic nerve, yes, which is everywhere, everywhere in everyone, in every line. thank you, what i discovered for myself in goethe 25 years ago, and really, without what, probably, it would be difficult even now, this special attitude to the world, which i try to somehow perceive from him, it is very difficult, this amazement before life, this constant surprise, because as soon as you say that you know everything... or everything is clear to you, science ends there, life itself, and as soon as this interest arises, and i am also interested in everything, i am interested in everything that happens around goethe, in this field, i am interested in what is happening in life in general, this perception of life, well, let's say, on fingertips, which are really in his lyrics, i absolutely agree here, are in his prose, are in his absolutely amazing novels and are in faust, this is of course the most amazing, if you do not understand this, then goethe will be boring. declarative, probably too philosophical and absolutely out of date, when we feel

this living beat of life, we forgot that he was also a theater director, and in general all the theatricality of his life and staged a play and in general was a director before the era of directors, if i may say so, because he created rules for actors, which are still quite interesting to read today, this is absolutely very difficult to achieve sometimes amazement before life, which we see in his poems, before amazement before a loved one. ringed from the beginning - and quotes and opportunities to get closer to the genius, it seems to me that everything turned out so elegantly, thank you very much, dear friends, the conversation about goethe is not over, i think that we will definitely continue it, i thank you, pyotr ladislavich rezvykh, pyotr valerievich abramov, i am vladimir ligoyda, we were gathering our thoughts about the great goethe.

you can watch the full version of our episode about goethe, all other episodes gathered their thoughts, on the official pages of the podcastlab project. hello, dear friends, this is the podcast life of the remarkable with you, i am its host, writer alexey varlamov, and we have two wonderful guests in the studio today, the director and founder, which is very important, of moscow. we have gathered here to talk about something truly super wonderful, super a wonderful woman vera mukhina, about her life, about her work, and let's start with the objects that are here on

the table, here are three faceted glasses, there is a version that it was she who invented this glass and thus the range of her work from the glass to this wonderful sculpture, tell me, is it true or not that this is vera mukhina's invention? well, i think it's not true, that is, it's absolutely not true, you know, there are different versions of what exactly... vera mukhina did, but i want to say that i understand why this legend stuck to her, yes, because she was a great sculptor, a great artist, really very talented, she was in charge of a lot, she was the artistic director of the leningrad art glass factory, of course , under her signature, after the khotsovets , a lot of things went into production, well, because the art director, as always, even now in

the modern world also signs everything into production or into production, so there were probably glasses and... and glasses for water, for wine, and there are many stories about how she i tested everything myself, even if at the artistic council, for example, they were making a wine glass, she would say, let's pour it from a decanter, let's pour some water, let's try how convenient it is to sculpt from this, by the way, you can look, yes, but specifically about the faceted glass, it seems to me that it was a kind of journalistic duck, when there was a celebration of some anniversary of the creation of the production of faceted glass, there were some millions, so they took such a famous...

i discover some completely unexpected people for myself, for example, when i looked at this brief information about the fate of this woman, she amazed me, by god, she captured me, because imagine that in 1889, by the way, in the same year anna akhmatova was born, in riga, in the family of a very rich industrialist, philanthropist, a girl was born, who, it would seem, was promised a wonderful, happy life, there

are loving parents, a family, but then the parents die, die, or rather, yes, at first ... somewhere in the smolensk region , she rolled down a mountain very unsuccessfully, a twig injured her nose so badly that she was practically left without a nose and had to have eight plastic surgeries to restore her face, and of course, here are her girlish dreams of a happy life, about balls, dances, she has all this...

fate, that's what's interesting, yes, for some reason we have two guests in the studio today, that on the one hand, working collective farmers, yes, firstly, a working collective farmer, you said it very well, yes, you will be a worker, you will be

a collective farmer, well, that means, vera ignatyevna is known, yes, as a monumental sculptor, if that's the right word, yes, and as a clothing designer, that is, this woman there was such talent, such energy, so much was enough, well, probably, alexander, you will tell more, probably it is better to say that women may be more interested in everything that is connected specifically with design, but it is interesting that in the twenties the situation was already very difficult in general, that is, literally nothing to eat, no materials at all, it was impossible to get even the most basic things, but women still want to look good, dress well, wives there was even more of a story not about dressing well, but about that such an offer was received to present new models of soviet clothing at the exhibition? of the year in paris, it was an exhibition of decorative art, and there were different aspects of what was presented in the soviet union, it was architecture, and

graphic design and fashion, well, in general, they absolutely wanted to show everything, we amazed everyone with our constructivism and melnikov built a pavilion, and there in fact they showed all aspects of constructivism, when the whole world celebrated, they even call the art deco style the style of a thousand. 925, because that everyone either built in a national style or some kind of historicism, or art deco, here we suddenly have, a beast completely unknown to science, we gave birth to all constructivism, and of course, it was necessary to show different directions, how soviet design, architecture, art developed, in general, they offered lamanova nadezhda, and vera mokhina, together with her, evgenia pribylskaya, the three of them began to develop. new clothes and there was absolutely nothing to do it from, they lamanova, she was a very famous fashion designer and before revolution, she worked in st. petersburg, and

dressed the ladies of the court and our imperial family, actually, all of these very many artists, who were famous even before the revolution, who had established themselves, they later became important figures. already in soviet art in soviet design and architecture, and of course, it was necessary to turn, it was necessary to rely on something, nadezhda lamonova, as a professional fashion designer, understood this very well, and since this new country was a country of working peasants, to workers, it was difficult to turn to the aesthetics of workers, it was difficult to find any interesting references, then they began to look at peasant life, at traditional embroidery, at traditional forms, women literally opened their chests, what they had left from their grandmothers, grandfathers, parents, and began to see what they

could do with it, because there was nothing, there was nothing new, they took a towel, took scarves, and began to work with what was there, that is, as if there was only the most ordinary canvas, the most like yes, cloth, the simplest, or was

there a lot that was produced at that time, this is for the overcoat. what's interesting is that this is 1925, how many 12 years will pass, in 1937 in the same city of paris there will be this famous exhibition, and there will be a working collective farmer, in principle these would be, these are the same exhibitions, yuri, probably this is more of a question for you, in general, what kind of exhibitions were these, who was invited there, what was it, yes, everyone was invited, everyone who could afford to buy a pavilion or rather land for the pavilion, everyone, everyone was invited, and how often were these exhibitions? they happened, i haven’t studied the special history of these exhibitions, i think that, well, let’s say, in 1937 there was an exhibition in paris, in new york there was one in 1939, yes, they were held quite often, that is , they happened quite often, again they have a tradition of these expos, they have a tradition, what is continuing now, yes , it is continuing now, it has been going on, in my opinion, since the middle of the 19th century, for example, this so-called crystal palace, also there was 1861 or something, yes, that was also the case.

a country where the civil war had recently ended and which was in a difficult situation, nevertheless finds the means to buy this land, to build a pavilion, by the way, these women, about whom you spoke, are wonderful, lamanova, mukhina, did they then go to paris to present their products? you know, i can’t say whether they went or not, because not everyone was allowed to go there, i know that alexander rotchenko, he was the artist designer of our main pavilion, so to speak and our exposition, not the pavilion but the exposition

of the soviet union. and i know that melnikov went, and my wife with great difficulty got away to him, because they did not want to let her go, that is, not everyone went there, because as i understand it, it was also expensive to send a large delegation from us, so only those who were really good went, alexander, and if we still return to the topic of design in mukhina's work, and what else did she do besides these wonderful costumes and this exhibition, she had very broad interests, in general she was very fascinated by the synthesis of the properties of the material, that is, you have to adapt to it, then there will be natural forms, that is , it turns out in fact that she was not a sculptor in the literal sense of the word, as an artist, as we imagine, she was a figure who, like the people of the renaissance, yes, such a person who can work in any direction, i think that if perhaps architecture was offered to do, she

would also have made a rather integral and some kind of. confident object, because in in principle, she also made dishes, if you look at what they are showing us now, yes , these are her works, yes, you know, i have never seen this particular item, but it looks like it, yes, but the other vase, she always made such flower vases, asters, tulips, that is, design is not necessarily clothing, design is anything, it can be, it can be dishes, for example, her first projects that were not realized, she made sketches, she made watches, for example, she made writing utensils and... items some for the table, for a writing set, she supplemented them with small figurines, that is, she still thought as a sculptor, had already begun to make some objects, in fact, and the earliest period of her creativity, as if creative path, then even when she was a member of the art commissions in the council and lfz leningrad, and lfz is what we have, the leningrad factory, porcelain factory, yeah.

was there in the management, but in general she lived in leningrad or in moscow, in general, as far as i understand, she lived in moscow in leningrad, but in leningrad she had two such very serious positions, this is the artistic director of the leningrad art glass factory, and accordingly, this is also her work, yes, yes, this is her work, she was on the artistic council of the leningrad farkhorov factory, she is also interested in these works of hers, which she made red lfz, because... she very carefully selected clothes for her sculptures and for when the reliefs and three-dimensional sculptures were she looked at how they would be exactly so that it was, firstly, logical yes for character, secondly, so that it would be harmonious with the character itself, so that the clothes she would consider that they complement, complement the image she researched a lot, that is , all her works were based. on

pre-project research, for example, before making glass, she studied the archives of the russian museum, everything that was connected with glass and the hermitage, that is, in fact. now in the modern world designers work exactly like this, before making some project, well, any project, not only a designer, an architect, yes, all people who design, who they are engaged in activities, they primarily look, follow everything in this direction, that is, she did not have a purely creative interest, but she really wanted to do - the life of every soviet person is better, so that they would have some normal dishes there, and normal objects in the interior, of course it was difficult, but at least she did everything she could. dear friends, we continue our conversation about vera mukhina, my guest is the founder of the moscow design museum, and the director of this museum alexandra sankova, and architect, artist, yuri avakumov. well

, what happens is that this woman, yes, who made these nice things that are so necessary in everyday life and which, it would seem, are so far from any ideology in general, yes, this woman, probably already to you then yes... boris efan in this whole story, that is, the author of the pavilion - the soviet one in paris on a very difficult site, a competition was announced and even it seems more than one competition, but in general, a commissioned competition was attended by

architects like the same milnikov or that shchusev, and he bypassed them, he bypassed them , he really had, even if you look at it with today's eyes, he really had the best project, even better than melnikov. industrial and all built on such a kind of stratified movement, so in this pavilion in particular, such a knockdown happens all the time, a stepped knockdown, and the form stretches, as if it was filmed in

slow motion, it is all stratified, and at the same time it is the style of the holders, in these corrugated suitcases, in clothes it manifested itself in all sorts of ... there is a corrugation plise and so on, this is the style of this, well, i don’t know, aerodynamics too, and how is it literally translated from french art deco, art and decorative, and deco, decorative, yeah, well, and the site was really difficult, because we got, although we bought a large site, it was above the highway, so the only thing that could be done was to make it very long, firstly, that is, it was 160 there and something meters, very narrow, literally 20 m wide, it turned into such a vanfilade of exhibition spaces, that is, people entered from one side and exited there from the tail of this pavilion, there at the top at the culmination point, iofan started

a sculpture, and he imagined a certain sculpture, a two-figure composition, he had some of his own examples of this from greece, there the tyrant fighters, let's say, and then on to this... if we compare it roughly with the statue of liberty, then in general it certainly wins , it's our statue of liberty, only better, well, it's different, although if i had to compare mukhin with someone, i would rather turn to of course to bartholde, to the author

of the statue of liberty, i will allow myself, so to make such a very short find a connection between the classical figure, which in particular we know in the image of the vetruvian man. vetruvia, who had his proportion of a person back in the first century bc, well in his ten books about architecture, he had a connection between the proportions of a person and the proportions of architecture, so this has been going on for a long time , this connection, and this connection, in fact, it is expressed in the fact that we begin, we considered for a long time until the eighteenth year in russia, and we considered in sozheniyami, yes, of course, yes.

and well and so on, these interconnected human modules, it - through them we moved on to design, where, as sasha rightly says, to ergonomics, this is this connection of the huge with the simple, it all for me, at least, is read through the connection with antique proportions, well, on the one hand we are talking about ergonomics, yes , which is directly related to design, on the other hand... about materials, because this sculpture was made of steel,

and this was very unusual for that time, that is, they hadn’t done it before, no, they hadn’t done it, she was delighted when they suggested making sculptures out of steel, because bronze, bronze, sheets of bronze, were hammered around in exactly the same way there, and how did this idea with steel come about then, i think that it came about for some reason, because even then this regime of broad discussion had been adopted, yes, they invited, we are participating in the expo, yes, that means, as is usually done, we are participating in the expo, meeting. government, directors of large, so to speak, enterprises are invited to it, everyone is asked the question: so, what are we going to exhibit? and some say: oh, and we are there, we can send two planes and indeed chkalov, boydukov, ferried planes to an exhibition in paris in 1937, someone says: and we will be there, well, i don’t know, showing paintings, yes, in, someone else says: oh, and we can offer you chromium-nickel steel, and how do you , and we... well, you have everything there sculpture, well, of course, i’m exaggerating, i didn’t sit in on this

meeting, but this is roughly how it happens, there was such a proposal, it was naturally defended by representatives of this metalworking enterprise of some advanced, suddenly it turned out that this steel , with its half a millimeter thickness, it is quite plastic, plus it is not assembled on rivets by welding. how she generally thought outside the box, in

the fifties there was an exhibition in russian.