possible to ignore, please excuse me, please excuse me, i'm just asking, i'm going to quote olesya khromaychuk, the director ukrainian institute in london, but before that i will explain what we just showed. in fact, we were showing one of the positive examples of the restoration of the correct attribution of decolonization. this is actually last year's replacement of degas paintings from the russian name of degas paintings from russian dancer to a dancer in ukrainian dress in the national gallery in london and in the metropolitan museum of art in new york, and if i'm not mistaken, this was actually initiated by a private person, so miriam nayem started correspondence about it, it seems. in the case of the national gallery in london, i don't remember if it was so, but it seems that it was a private initiative, she corresponded with them, and she pushed them to do it, that is , the initiative was not from that side, it was from our side initiative, there were several such initiatives, not a few such initiatives, and for example, there is still one the ukrainian art critic oksana semennyk, who i

western european american museum asked itself the same questions. by the way, i promised to quote olesya khromaychukdirector of the ukrainian institute in london, and she wrote a year ago for the german magazine spiegel, i will quote the quote and ask you, is it already, or is it already? is it not relevant anymore, or at least not as relevant as it was a year ago? olesya writes: every trip to a gallery or museum in london with art exhibits or cinema from the ussr, reveals a deliberate or simply lazy interpretation of the region as a single , infinite russia. curators have no problem calling jewish, belarusian or ukrainian art russian. it is very rare that a ukrainian is not called a russian. we can... say that over the course of a year, some understanding took place and that some internal work took place, i would say that i am very, very similar to agree with olesya hormaychuk in this quote, this is exactly the state of affairs, let's say for 2021 , 100%, but there has been an awareness of this as a problem, no one has yet occurred really very noticeable, super noticeable work. but this problem is

questions were asked by the western european american museum. you remember, i promised to quote olesya khromaychuk, director of the ukrainian institute. in london, and she actually wrote for the german magazine spiegel a year ago, i will quote the quote and ask you, is it already, is it already outdated, is it no longer relevant, or at least not as relevant as it was a year ago. olesya writes: every trip to a gallery or museum in london with exhibits of art or cinema from the ussr reveals a deliberate or simply lazy interpretation of the region as a single, infinite russia. they call jewish, belarusian or ukrainian art russian without any problems, it is very rare when a ukrainian is not called a russian, we can say that this year something has happened, some understanding has taken place and that some work has taken place internal, i would say, i am very, very similar, i agree with olesia khormaychuk in this quote, this is exactly the state of affairs, let's say for 2021 100%, but... there has been an awareness of this as a problem, there has not yet been any really very noticeable, super notable