remind you of the background, this is the story when you agreed to meet on the same platform with masha hessene is already an american citizen, as far as i know, but, uh, a russian journalist who, you know, masha gesen, an american citizen since 1981, oh, this, this. it's fair to say, it seemed like five years to me, and she was already an american citizen, well, good for him, although, for her, no, for for them, i know that she's not a binary person, right a long time ago, so it's also important not to get confused with the correct representation here, uh, i know that your colleagues have been quite, some, your colleagues have reacted quite harshly to your decision, and i know that you've already explained why you didn't... from this meeting and this conversation on the same platform, can you tell me why? well, you know, the situation that happened in may of this year, in new york, it was really unpleasant and unacceptable for the ukrainian participants . artem cheh, artem chapai, as well as our writers, came to speak at the new york festival organized by peno, an american, they knew and agre

but maybe not as soon as we want, panic, there is one more such question, because one thing is masha hessen, who, despite the fact that she produces an imperial narrative, but none the less. there somehow still stands for ukraine, that is, it is strangely combined with her, and, but for the general public, masha hessen is incomprehensible, and, if we talk about her, they, and they do not know about, their existence, yes, meanwhile , we have different tv channels which are financed from the state budget, where the so-called good russians... give them the floor very often, and they do not have a discussion with kurkov, because for kurkov there is probably no need to explain what ukraine is, what is bad for ukraine, what is good, yes, but these people happen there, i don’t know if dmitri bykov is still around, his dmitri, yes, this writer who a few weeks ago, as i literally saw him talk, and he considers himself good, then he can't report on the armed forces, because it's killing my people anyway. this people can be, this and because that one is his, and this one is not his, although he is a g

they, for example, decided, i understand, there was some kind of decision that we are boycotting masha hessen, it's not, in fact, it's a conditional general decision, i think the majority. ukrainian intellectuals and writers, which is not written down, and which, people who adhere to this decision, they demand that everyone obey this decision, in principle, i do not want to talk about collectivism again now, which manifests in this and about another thing, that is, there is a difference between collectivism and solidarity, ugh, is not one hundred percent mandatory, and solidarity, it requires, in principle, an analytical approach to each individual case, when questions arise, to do it or not to do it, and of course, in such a situation, in a war situation, any situation, which goes beyond the boundaries of what everyone considers to be correct behavior, it causes conflict. this was the case with buloch andruhovych when he met with mykhailo shishkin, this was the case with oksana zabushka when she allowed to publish the russian translation of his work in england, this happened to me, this will

not saying that you need to talk to russians, to all russians and so on , that is, for america, masha hessen is not russian, that is, no one perceives her as russian, but i believe that there are cases, especially when this audience is very important for ukraine, and the meeting took place in toronto, and the audience was very serious, including representatives, one might say, of the country's leadership, so i believe that at such meetings, the voice of ukraine should be heard, that is, such scenes cannot be shown . russians or people who connected with russia, from your own feelings, does the attitude toward ukraine and russia change in principle, well, we understand that russia is on these sites, relatively speaking, on university sites, in the faculties of slavic studies, which in reality were rather faculties of russian studies all this time, it is always present, it has been present for decades, and it builds its narratives, imperial, non-imperial. nihilistic, whatever, but it's still there, and what do we have to do to change it, or can we try to cancel russian culture both abroad and

andriy kurkov with masha hessen. i also always respected and i respect mr.rii, but i do not agree with this step. and actually, why? because we have now also entered the phase when such a frontal boycott - mutually with the russians - probably no longer works on international platforms. and you need to approach each case individually, look, for example, well, first of all, what kind of person, what is the format of the conversation. what will be the benefit, what is the efficiency of this conversation, and will the benefit of this conversation be greater than the harm, as from the division of the community, which is caused by such a choice, and in this particular case, i do not agree with step mr. andrii, absolutely, i don’t see the point in this conversation, i read its synopsis on babel, i don’t think it was a heated discussion in which anything was proven, it was a complimentary conversation that allowed masha hesen to clean her pores publicly after that story in the spring, when artem cheh, chapai and ira tsylyk refused to participate in the festival in

show it in the media we still don't have the channels enough allies , and precisely because what masha hessenher fake , regarding a very transparent and very understandable situation in which ukrainian writers were involved, that is why she, they seem to me, are not the interlocutors with whom you can be on one panel, but despite the fact that i don't understand andriy kurkov's position. i think he didn't do anything that would cause such a wave of hate, eh, there is that, there is rhetoric that andriy cheh chose, and it was exactly what it could have been, and it is the rhetoric of the srach, which appeared afterwards, which already spoke about the fact that we will not be able to come to an understanding, or in the end understand why andriy made such a decision, because between us, who have questions, and andriy, who can give answer, there is this wave, and what should we do? so that the waves do not prevent us from understanding each other, because it is obviously a matter of communication with colleagues from russia, with russians, it must find some form, but while this senseless aggressi