Dmitry Bykov: I will always be proud to have worked with Efremov
Dmitry Bykov: “Of course, most of the questions and expectations are related to how I will react to the tragedy that occurred on Smolenskaya Street. It is already quite obvious that although there will be an investigation and no one should be called a murderer until the court decides, it is already quite obvious that the worst thing that could ever happen to Mikhail Efremov has happened to him. The fate of Sergey Zakharov, the victim of this incident, is terrible. If you think about it, this is more or less my generation, although these people are four or five years older than me, but, in general, this is the fate of the generation that was so slaughtered by the 90s: people who were trained for life in the USSR, but they had to live in completely different conditions. It's terrible that Zakharov, a man in his fifties with a higher technical education, worked part-time as a courier in Moscow and delivered orders in this miserable pickup truck, a car that was almost double the size of the impact. The fate of his grown children is terrible; the fate of his civilian wife (the one who comes to talk shows and talks about him there) is a terrible tragedy. Of course, there can be no attempts to mitigate Efremov's fate, and he won't accept such attempts to mitigate it himself, because, as far as I understand, he himself has been completely crushed, and everyone who loved and loves him has been crushed.
I'm not going to give up on my friends, although a lot of people would enjoy it. Here, one bastard — I will not mention his name — has already written: “Dmitry Bykov vaguely said that a monstrous tragedy has happened.” Why is it “vague”, bastard? What should I have said? I should have shouted “atu!” with you and howl? Or maybe publish my opponent's earnings, like you tried to do? I am so proud that the Oleg Tabakov Theater ordered me to translate School for Wives. I am proud to have worked with Efremov. Before this happened, Efremov was one of the country's most beloved and famous actors, and one of its most worthy actors. And of course, a lot of people are settling scores with him now, both out of envy and for his civic position. I'm not accustomed to renouncing my friends, even if they do terrible things, and I'm sure this act was done by him madly. There will also be a psychiatric examination to see what happened and how it happened. This is a huge tragedy. And for me, this is also a huge tragedy because although I talked to Efremov relatively little, during this conversation I admired his intelligence, talent, and absolute honesty. I know he is now executing himself in a way that no hooting mob can execute him.
And you, people who are trying to derive political dividends from this, are you doing really terrible things. You see, this isn't even cynicism — it's something hellish, transcendental. I understand that now everyone is constantly watching each other: who will stumble? You can't stumble now; now the most correct thing is to keep silent altogether. I have already said many times that my most cherished wish now is to leave the public field altogether, from any public space. Not only don't comment to vultures — I don't do that anyway, but don't open your mouth at all, because no matter what you say, everything will be used against you. There was no one left but haters.
You see, I sometimes think: what is the hopelessness of the current Russian situation? After Stalin, there could be a thaw, and after Brezhnev, there could be perestroika. But after what is happening in Russia now, I have no idea whether it is possible for Russia to revive some kind of resuscitation process, some way to regain its former values. After all, there were some taboos back then; today they don't exist at all. I absolutely agree with my favorite film critic Elena Stishova: we have lost all the good things we had. Yes, we've gotten worse.
You see, a tragedy happened to a man: he killed him unintentionally. By the way, the same words — “tragedy” — apply to Zakharov's fate, to his terrible fate. This man deserves understanding, compassion, and respect for death at least now, so as not to dance on bones. Do you think you're all perfect? No, it's not like that. And if someone, as it seems to them, did not condemn Efremov radically enough, then making a pretext for bullying out of it is completely transcendent. On the other hand, so much transcendental things are happening in the world right now that, against this background, what can we say...
Of course, I cannot help but reply to two “outstanding” publications. I think this is a training manual because the opinion of one writer and one screenwriter too much coincided. I'm just not going to name them so as not to do them too much PR, because I'm not going to go to court, am I? But they write: “(I'm quoting the screenwriter) I can't help but think that what happened was some kind of karmic response for moral chaos, which, with the full cultural support of Moscow officials, was arranged by Efremov's creative colleague, Mr. Bykov. Let me remind you that the rhymodel adorned almost the first major Moscow cultural event after quarantine, the book fair on Red Square, after reading verses that were rather weak in performance and stupidly evil in content, equalizing Russian power and the coronavirus.” My darling, I understand that Pushkin is a weak poet, so what can I do? “Everything is ours,” says Apollo Grigoryev, although he was also an alcoholic, by the way. Of course you're better off saying what? Of course, Pushkin had many weaknesses. But Hymn to the Plague, which I read from the stage, is not about the coronavirus, and it is not one of Pushkin's weak works, but, on the contrary, Tsvetayeva, for example, considered it the pinnacle of Russian verse. Well, what kind of Russophobia is that? You see, not to mention the fact that Pushkin repented for the “sins” of his youth: he wrote “The Slanderers of Russia” and “Borodino's Anniversary”, which are quite strong and very energetic poems. Anyway, he had good essays, so to speak.
Why don't I understand “weak rhymes”? I read the chairman's song, the anthem, and it was posted online, so why didn't you bother to listen to it? Maybe you would love it. You know, it was Pushkin's birthday. I understand that, as another author and writer wrote, “Bykov's speech is comparable to a fatal accident — what he read there with the support of the Moscow authorities.” I would like to inform REN-TV authors that I performed there for free, like everyone else. In general, this was part of the Pioneer Readings. But it was Pushkin's birthday, so I dared to read Pushkin's poems from the stage. I didn't know it wasn't okay, you know? I guess if I said that Efremov should be crucified, I would get away with it. But I didn't know what Pushkin was not allowed on his birthday, gentlemen, what is it, right? He was a good man, and even the Tsar said that he forgave him (though it was on his deathbed). But it was published and not the last people recognized it; for example, Zhukovsky, who was very loyal, considered it a good poem. And here are “weak rhymes”... These are not poems about the coronavirus, but about the plague. And most importantly, this speech is publicly accessible: apart from Pushkin, not a single word was said there, everything was verbatim quotes. What are you guys doing, let's not build ourselves a hell like this?
And speaking a little more seriously, do you understand what the hell of this life is today? The setting is constant. They probably think (those who conduct this choir) that they are helping to unite the nation in this way. No, they are doing exactly what Mr. Patrushev said: they are destroying the integrity of the people. After all, Patrushev specifically warned about this in an interview with Arguments and Facts: you are destroying the integrity of the people, you are setting one part against another: are you really doing this with Western money? I don't actually have access to your financial statements. Basically, it smells really bad.
And the atmosphere that is being imposed is also terrible. The hell in which he found himself, into which Efremov has driven himself, is God forbid; I will not wish this on my worst enemy, because it was a sin and it was his fault. But why do you keep demanding that everyone trample on him. First, wait for the court to conduct a psychiatric examination, order a full examination for him, find out how it all happened, find out the details — and then call him a murderer, but why trample on the law? We don't have much of it anyway. And of course, I will never regret it; I will always be proud that I worked with Efremov and that I knew him back then. What happened to him now and what he's like? I haven't seen him at all in the past year, except for one of our interviews, during which I thought he was absolutely adequate.
But I'm sorry I didn't talk to him much. Maybe I could feel some psychological trouble and save him from something. Because I know so many people whom he has helped at various times, helped by word and deed; and I'm not talking about the fact that it's just not prudent to cross out what he did in art; we don't have a lot of good movies. At the same time, I say again: what was done is terrible, what happened is terrible. I'll say it as many times as you like. But to demand abdication, as they were demanded under Stalin, gentlemen, come to your senses a little bit: if you look closely at each of you, you can see something that, you know, your hair will stand on end. But that's okay, of course.
.png)
