Two views on "geopolitics", or how Stalin Bulgakov helped
I put the word “geopolitics” in quotation marks, because it’s not a global political game that is unfolding “in all its glory” in Ukraine. And about my book “Geopolitics. How it's done". That is, two views on this "geopolitics". And in general - let's talk about books, journalists. And blatant incompetence.
Look first. Informational and impartial.
Reading the information tape, I read a few interesting lines the other day.
RIA News published a material “Testimony of the officer of the“ Berkut ”in which you can read the following:
“The border between Ukraine and the Crimea that appeared spontaneously today is already very similar to the real state border. There is not yet put any marks in the passport, even if you travel with a passport. There are no customs officers here either. But the border guards and the police are already there - from the Ukrainian side, and from the Russian side. When you go from Ukraine, the last one is inspected by the famous "Golden Eagle" - now a division of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia.
Above the roadblock, folded manually from heavy blocks, the flag of St. Andrew flies. At the post on the stool is the book “Geopolitics. How this is done ”, which at leisure, apparently, is read by one of the policemen.”
It's nice that my gift to "Berkut" immediately went into business. Being in Simferopol during the Referendum, I considered it my duty to come to the Berkut base to shake hands with these courageous fighters and convey to them words of support and admiration on behalf of all the patriots of the Russian world.
During the referendum at the base there were very few fighters - the rest ensured order. So that I could only shake hands with a few. But the book presented.
Second glance. Liberal and biased.
Novaya Gazeta publishes a book review under the “absolutely neutral” heading: “Kiselevshchina on the shelves.”
The clarity and clarity with which today on Russian TV news outlets call things by their proper names, liberals do not like. In my opinion - the most interesting news release makes Dmitry Kiselev. I am pleased to watch his program.
But here is what Novaya Gazeta writes. She not only does not like Dmitry Kiselev, but does not like ... books. “Independent journalists” do not like the fact that citizens of Russia can freely find books in bookstores of patriotic authors who are trying to help an ordinary citizen to understand world politics and stories. They are more liberal in their liking for the situation in Ukraine, where Russian TV has already been turned off ...
“The largest book network in St. Petersburg is inundated with books that tell about the global conspiracy against Russia and other conspiracy theories. Why was Kiselevshchina digging on the bookshelves?
In "Bookvoed" explain: this is a business, people are interested in just such work. Some experts believe that booksellers not only satisfy, but also artificially impose demand ... For example, sales hits in the “History and Politics” section were “Geopolitics. How it is done ”by Nikolai Starikov (founder of the organization“ Trade Union of Citizens of Russia ”, whose activists at one time tried to sue Madonna for promoting homosexuality),“ The National Liberation Movement of Russia. Russian Development Code ”Yevgeny Fedorov (State Duma deputy, who proposed to equate“ anti-Russian articles of journalists to a state crime ”),“ A blow to Russia. Geopolitics and Premonition of War "by Valery Korovin (Deputy Head of the International Eurasian Movement), as well as" Through a dull time. Russian view on the need to resist the spirit of the century of this "TV presenter Maxim Shevchenko".
We have to explain to an “independent” journalist: do you want a market? So he is in the book trade in full.
“Director General of“ Bookvoed ”Denis Kotov categorically denied any censorship, if only because“ it is physically impossible to read the thousands of books that come to us. ” “We have only two criteria: the relevance of readers and the availability of publications from suppliers, that is a logistical issue,” the entrepreneur emphasized.
We have to explain to the “independent” journalist that there is no conspiracy and violence against the reader, and the writer Zakhar Prilepin: “Now Starikov’s position has become close and understandable to people - and in this sense, the shops are led by readers. They sell Starikov’s books not according to the intention of the Kremlin or anyone else, but because they sell well. Businessmen will sell what is in demand - be it Starikov, Marinin or Akunin. ”
And then the author of “Novaya Gazeta” lays out the favorite trump of the liberals. Once bookstores sell books by those who dislike the USA and respect Stalin, then booksellers ... cynical people.
“Making money is an inevitable, but not the only task of a commercial publishing house. And when I see, for example, works about Stalin and Bulgakov - the executioner and the victim - standing on the same shelf, I understand that in the degree of cynicism with the publishing business, we can only compare oil and funeral. ”
Well, what can I say. I do not want to offend a lot of honest journalists, but judging by the publications of the “independent media” on the degree of cynicism with journalists of these publications it is useless to compete. As well as the level of competence in the issues about which they write. After all, what Novaya Gazeta published is the height of incompetence. Beyond. Stalin executioner, Bulgakov victim? But the “independent journalist” Alexander Garmazhapova wrote so that there was a feeling that Bulgakov was the victim of Stalin. Neither more nor less. Why, Alexander, so brazenly and shamelessly lie? Or do you know literature and history only from publications of Novaya Gazeta?
I'm in my book “Stalin. We recall together ”devoted an entire chapter to the relations of Stalin and cultural figures. And so now I’ll just bring a fragment from there to O Stalin and Bulgakov. Stalin went to the play "White Guard" Bulgakov about ten times! And he loved her very much. Watched other plays repeatedly.
“In December 1928, the then fighters for the purity of the ranks (members of the“ Proletarian Theater ”association) wrote the so-called“ revolutionary letter ”to the country's leadership:“ Dear Comrade Stalin! .. How to regard the actual “most favored” most reactionary authors like Bulgakov, achieved the production of four clearly anti-Soviet plays in the three largest theaters in Moscow; besides, plays that are by no means outstanding in their artistic qualities, but standing, at best, at an average level)? ” 2 February 1929 of the year they received the Stalinist reply: "Therefore, it must be that there are not enough of their plays suitable for staging."
For zealous purists of purity, Stalin explained: “As for the play“ Days of the Turbins, ”it is not so bad, because it gives more benefits than harm. Because thanks to Bulgakov, the whole world, watching this play, is convinced that “even people like Turbines are forced to put down weapon and to submit to the will of the people, recognizing their work as completely lost ... ". [1] Despite the fact that Stalin expressed support for Bulgakov, the persecution of the writer by the" colleagues "continued - by July 1929, his plays had ceased to go in all Soviet theaters. Mikhail Bulgakov was virtually without livelihoods. In desperate condition, 28 March, March 1930, the writer writes a letter to the Soviet government. In it, he describes his position with the words “now I am destroyed,” “my things are hopeless,” “the impossibility of writing is equivalent to burial alive for me.”
At the end of his letter, which is simply a cry of despair, the writer asks to let him go abroad, since he is not needed at home, and is not needed ...
And then Stalin acts unconventionally for that time. He does not call Bulgakov to himself, he does not charge anyone to deal with this problem. Without delaying the matter indefinitely, he personally calls the writer. Calls through 4 the day after Mayakovsky's death - 18 April 1930. The head of the country calls the persecuted writer with whom he is not familiar and has never met.
“... - Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov?
- Yes Yes.
- Now Stalin will talk to you.
- What? Stalin? Stalin?
And then he heard a voice with an obviously Georgian accent.
- Yes, with you, Stalin says. Hello, Comrade Bulgakov.
- Hello, Joseph Vissarionovich.
- We have received your letter. Read with friends. You will be favorable
The answer is to have ... But maybe the truth is - are you asking to go abroad? What we do to you very much
fed up with?
(MA said he did not expect so much of this issue - and he did call at all
I didn’t expect it - I was confused and didn’t immediately answer):
- I thought a lot lately - can a Russian writer live outside
homeland. And it seems to me that can not.
- You're right. I think so too. Where do you want to work? In the Art Theater?
- Yes, I would like to. But I talked about it, and they refused me.
- And you apply there. It seems to me that they will agree. We would need
meet, talk to you.
- Yes Yes! Stalin, I really need to talk to you.
- Yes, you need to find time and meet, definitely. And now I wish you all
good. "
This call changed the life of Bulgakov. His life was immediately adjusted - “the fighters for the purity of proletarian art” retreated. 19 April 1930, Bulgakov was enlisted as an assistant-director at the Moscow Art Theater. His plays again went on the stages of theaters, he had new orders, he was given permission to travel abroad. Mikhail Bulgakov got some money and his half-starved existence ended. The writer was grateful to Stalin for his help — he admitted in one of the letters: “At the very time of despair ... the general secretary called me ... Believe my taste: he led the conversation strongly, clearly, stately and elegantly. Hope was kindled in the heart of the writer ... ”.
However, his meeting with Stalin, which they agreed, did not take place. Although Bulgakov really wanted her and even wrote to the General Secretary a letter 30 of May 1931: “... I want to tell you, Joseph Vissarionovich, that my dream of writing is to be called personally to you. Believe me, not only because I see this as the most advantageous opportunity, but because your conversation with me on the phone in April 1930 left a sharp line in my memory ... I am not spoiled by conversations. Touched by this phrase (you said: "Maybe you really need to go abroad ..."), I worked for a year not for fear as a director in the theaters of the USSR ... ".
What is significant - despite the patronage of Stalin, the persecution of Bulgakov again resumed after a while. Stalin was not omnipotent, and no one was afraid enough to once and for all leave the writer whose plays the general secretary looks at 18 once and for all. Stalin had what is called in manual mode, to point the plays of Bulgakov to the theater’s repertoire: “According to the artist of Vakhtangov O. Leonidov,“ Stalin was twice in the “Zoykina apartment” (Bulgakov’s play - Ed.). He spoke with an accent: a good play! I do not understand, I do not understand at all, for which she is allowed, then forbidden. Good play, I don't see anything wrong. ” In February, 1932, the year Stalin watched the play of A.N. Afinogenov “Fear”, which he did not like. “... In a conversation with representatives of the theater, he remarked:“ Here you have a good play “Days of the Turbins” - why doesn’t it go? ”He was embarrassed and was told that it was prohibited. “Nonsense,” he objected, “is a good piece; you have to play it, put it.” And within ten days the order was given to restore the staging ... ".
Anyone who begins to study the life of Bulgakov, will see that Stalin played an extremely positive role in it. Helped, read, respected. Do not hesitate to call first and lend a helping hand. Anyone who begins to study the life of Bulgakov will see this.
In addition to "independent journalists." They know that Stalin was bad, Russia is always to blame for everything, and the United States is the “Empire of good”.
So from books and politics, we moved into the field of knowledge, or rather their absence, and emptiness. Which is filled with myths.
Nature does not tolerate emptiness ...
Look first. Informational and impartial.
Reading the information tape, I read a few interesting lines the other day.
RIA News published a material “Testimony of the officer of the“ Berkut ”in which you can read the following:
“The border between Ukraine and the Crimea that appeared spontaneously today is already very similar to the real state border. There is not yet put any marks in the passport, even if you travel with a passport. There are no customs officers here either. But the border guards and the police are already there - from the Ukrainian side, and from the Russian side. When you go from Ukraine, the last one is inspected by the famous "Golden Eagle" - now a division of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia.
Above the roadblock, folded manually from heavy blocks, the flag of St. Andrew flies. At the post on the stool is the book “Geopolitics. How this is done ”, which at leisure, apparently, is read by one of the policemen.”
It's nice that my gift to "Berkut" immediately went into business. Being in Simferopol during the Referendum, I considered it my duty to come to the Berkut base to shake hands with these courageous fighters and convey to them words of support and admiration on behalf of all the patriots of the Russian world.
During the referendum at the base there were very few fighters - the rest ensured order. So that I could only shake hands with a few. But the book presented.
Second glance. Liberal and biased.
Novaya Gazeta publishes a book review under the “absolutely neutral” heading: “Kiselevshchina on the shelves.”
The clarity and clarity with which today on Russian TV news outlets call things by their proper names, liberals do not like. In my opinion - the most interesting news release makes Dmitry Kiselev. I am pleased to watch his program.
But here is what Novaya Gazeta writes. She not only does not like Dmitry Kiselev, but does not like ... books. “Independent journalists” do not like the fact that citizens of Russia can freely find books in bookstores of patriotic authors who are trying to help an ordinary citizen to understand world politics and stories. They are more liberal in their liking for the situation in Ukraine, where Russian TV has already been turned off ...
“The largest book network in St. Petersburg is inundated with books that tell about the global conspiracy against Russia and other conspiracy theories. Why was Kiselevshchina digging on the bookshelves?
In "Bookvoed" explain: this is a business, people are interested in just such work. Some experts believe that booksellers not only satisfy, but also artificially impose demand ... For example, sales hits in the “History and Politics” section were “Geopolitics. How it is done ”by Nikolai Starikov (founder of the organization“ Trade Union of Citizens of Russia ”, whose activists at one time tried to sue Madonna for promoting homosexuality),“ The National Liberation Movement of Russia. Russian Development Code ”Yevgeny Fedorov (State Duma deputy, who proposed to equate“ anti-Russian articles of journalists to a state crime ”),“ A blow to Russia. Geopolitics and Premonition of War "by Valery Korovin (Deputy Head of the International Eurasian Movement), as well as" Through a dull time. Russian view on the need to resist the spirit of the century of this "TV presenter Maxim Shevchenko".
We have to explain to an “independent” journalist: do you want a market? So he is in the book trade in full.
“Director General of“ Bookvoed ”Denis Kotov categorically denied any censorship, if only because“ it is physically impossible to read the thousands of books that come to us. ” “We have only two criteria: the relevance of readers and the availability of publications from suppliers, that is a logistical issue,” the entrepreneur emphasized.
We have to explain to the “independent” journalist that there is no conspiracy and violence against the reader, and the writer Zakhar Prilepin: “Now Starikov’s position has become close and understandable to people - and in this sense, the shops are led by readers. They sell Starikov’s books not according to the intention of the Kremlin or anyone else, but because they sell well. Businessmen will sell what is in demand - be it Starikov, Marinin or Akunin. ”
And then the author of “Novaya Gazeta” lays out the favorite trump of the liberals. Once bookstores sell books by those who dislike the USA and respect Stalin, then booksellers ... cynical people.
“Making money is an inevitable, but not the only task of a commercial publishing house. And when I see, for example, works about Stalin and Bulgakov - the executioner and the victim - standing on the same shelf, I understand that in the degree of cynicism with the publishing business, we can only compare oil and funeral. ”
Well, what can I say. I do not want to offend a lot of honest journalists, but judging by the publications of the “independent media” on the degree of cynicism with journalists of these publications it is useless to compete. As well as the level of competence in the issues about which they write. After all, what Novaya Gazeta published is the height of incompetence. Beyond. Stalin executioner, Bulgakov victim? But the “independent journalist” Alexander Garmazhapova wrote so that there was a feeling that Bulgakov was the victim of Stalin. Neither more nor less. Why, Alexander, so brazenly and shamelessly lie? Or do you know literature and history only from publications of Novaya Gazeta?
I'm in my book “Stalin. We recall together ”devoted an entire chapter to the relations of Stalin and cultural figures. And so now I’ll just bring a fragment from there to O Stalin and Bulgakov. Stalin went to the play "White Guard" Bulgakov about ten times! And he loved her very much. Watched other plays repeatedly.
“In December 1928, the then fighters for the purity of the ranks (members of the“ Proletarian Theater ”association) wrote the so-called“ revolutionary letter ”to the country's leadership:“ Dear Comrade Stalin! .. How to regard the actual “most favored” most reactionary authors like Bulgakov, achieved the production of four clearly anti-Soviet plays in the three largest theaters in Moscow; besides, plays that are by no means outstanding in their artistic qualities, but standing, at best, at an average level)? ” 2 February 1929 of the year they received the Stalinist reply: "Therefore, it must be that there are not enough of their plays suitable for staging."
For zealous purists of purity, Stalin explained: “As for the play“ Days of the Turbins, ”it is not so bad, because it gives more benefits than harm. Because thanks to Bulgakov, the whole world, watching this play, is convinced that “even people like Turbines are forced to put down weapon and to submit to the will of the people, recognizing their work as completely lost ... ". [1] Despite the fact that Stalin expressed support for Bulgakov, the persecution of the writer by the" colleagues "continued - by July 1929, his plays had ceased to go in all Soviet theaters. Mikhail Bulgakov was virtually without livelihoods. In desperate condition, 28 March, March 1930, the writer writes a letter to the Soviet government. In it, he describes his position with the words “now I am destroyed,” “my things are hopeless,” “the impossibility of writing is equivalent to burial alive for me.”
At the end of his letter, which is simply a cry of despair, the writer asks to let him go abroad, since he is not needed at home, and is not needed ...
And then Stalin acts unconventionally for that time. He does not call Bulgakov to himself, he does not charge anyone to deal with this problem. Without delaying the matter indefinitely, he personally calls the writer. Calls through 4 the day after Mayakovsky's death - 18 April 1930. The head of the country calls the persecuted writer with whom he is not familiar and has never met.
“... - Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov?
- Yes Yes.
- Now Stalin will talk to you.
- What? Stalin? Stalin?
And then he heard a voice with an obviously Georgian accent.
- Yes, with you, Stalin says. Hello, Comrade Bulgakov.
- Hello, Joseph Vissarionovich.
- We have received your letter. Read with friends. You will be favorable
The answer is to have ... But maybe the truth is - are you asking to go abroad? What we do to you very much
fed up with?
(MA said he did not expect so much of this issue - and he did call at all
I didn’t expect it - I was confused and didn’t immediately answer):
- I thought a lot lately - can a Russian writer live outside
homeland. And it seems to me that can not.
- You're right. I think so too. Where do you want to work? In the Art Theater?
- Yes, I would like to. But I talked about it, and they refused me.
- And you apply there. It seems to me that they will agree. We would need
meet, talk to you.
- Yes Yes! Stalin, I really need to talk to you.
- Yes, you need to find time and meet, definitely. And now I wish you all
good. "
This call changed the life of Bulgakov. His life was immediately adjusted - “the fighters for the purity of proletarian art” retreated. 19 April 1930, Bulgakov was enlisted as an assistant-director at the Moscow Art Theater. His plays again went on the stages of theaters, he had new orders, he was given permission to travel abroad. Mikhail Bulgakov got some money and his half-starved existence ended. The writer was grateful to Stalin for his help — he admitted in one of the letters: “At the very time of despair ... the general secretary called me ... Believe my taste: he led the conversation strongly, clearly, stately and elegantly. Hope was kindled in the heart of the writer ... ”.
However, his meeting with Stalin, which they agreed, did not take place. Although Bulgakov really wanted her and even wrote to the General Secretary a letter 30 of May 1931: “... I want to tell you, Joseph Vissarionovich, that my dream of writing is to be called personally to you. Believe me, not only because I see this as the most advantageous opportunity, but because your conversation with me on the phone in April 1930 left a sharp line in my memory ... I am not spoiled by conversations. Touched by this phrase (you said: "Maybe you really need to go abroad ..."), I worked for a year not for fear as a director in the theaters of the USSR ... ".
What is significant - despite the patronage of Stalin, the persecution of Bulgakov again resumed after a while. Stalin was not omnipotent, and no one was afraid enough to once and for all leave the writer whose plays the general secretary looks at 18 once and for all. Stalin had what is called in manual mode, to point the plays of Bulgakov to the theater’s repertoire: “According to the artist of Vakhtangov O. Leonidov,“ Stalin was twice in the “Zoykina apartment” (Bulgakov’s play - Ed.). He spoke with an accent: a good play! I do not understand, I do not understand at all, for which she is allowed, then forbidden. Good play, I don't see anything wrong. ” In February, 1932, the year Stalin watched the play of A.N. Afinogenov “Fear”, which he did not like. “... In a conversation with representatives of the theater, he remarked:“ Here you have a good play “Days of the Turbins” - why doesn’t it go? ”He was embarrassed and was told that it was prohibited. “Nonsense,” he objected, “is a good piece; you have to play it, put it.” And within ten days the order was given to restore the staging ... ".
Anyone who begins to study the life of Bulgakov, will see that Stalin played an extremely positive role in it. Helped, read, respected. Do not hesitate to call first and lend a helping hand. Anyone who begins to study the life of Bulgakov will see this.
In addition to "independent journalists." They know that Stalin was bad, Russia is always to blame for everything, and the United States is the “Empire of good”.
So from books and politics, we moved into the field of knowledge, or rather their absence, and emptiness. Which is filled with myths.
Nature does not tolerate emptiness ...
Information