A serious illness, by the way, marta married just such a man, and he lived to be 90 years old, but i always tell men that you need to get married, if you dont live alone, youre not the same as 90, and half of this term, women not only give birth to us, they are us they are reviving, so, well, alfred hitchcock. The director of many such tough urban films, once said that there was an episode in my childhood when i was fined for something and my father wrote a note and asked me to take it to the police, i am his friend , that friend read that he put me in a solitary confinement cell for half an hour, i was scared during those half hours, so scared that i have been trying to pour out this fear for half an hour with these films all my life, and he is not kidding. We dont really understand what its like to spend a month in prison there, for someone who hasnt experienced it, its scary, even if there are some who treat you more liberally, thats why i wouldnt judge you in any way, thats why he made such a decision, because he would have died, its obvious in the camps , you can imagine what its like, well, we know what the camps are like , these are not american prisons, this and he would simply for, he chose life, he chose life. And therefore we must respect the choice of a person who brought, did many more things for ukraine, which would not have happened if he died in the same camps, and look what happens, that is , it is a compromise, it is a compromise, i remember the poem iryna iryna zhelenko, a wonderful poet, ukrainian, from kyiv, he, she wrote that dzyuba was in love with the whole, intellectual, intelligentsia of kyiv and lviv, where he appeared, of course, everyone gathered around him, everyone loved him very much, for his crystal honesty and subtle emotions, as she writes, and look, she dedicated ivannina dzyuba to him, she dedicated a poem to him, these are actually iryna zhilenkos lines, on parquet floors, on sofas. Dirt, saliva, blood and piety. John, the forerunner with gentle eyes, was baited here. And it turns out that ivan dzyuba, the leader of the generation with whom everyone was in love, has already been rejected by this generation, because ms. Marta mentions in the film that when he came out of this syzo, he was only met, she says, a kochur, yes, a tobacconist , grihyr, and several other people, all the rest of the transition. On the other hand, and some people, people simply condemned his ukrainian intelligentsia, yes, in particular the luminaries, in particular stus, stus wrote terrible words about ivan dzyuba, and on the other hand, some people were afraid of him as if he was not loyal to the authorities, how do you answer for myself, in relation to this compromise, where is the limit of compromise, now there was a story, i also prepared and wrote it out for myself, so there was a story when last year, literally last year, the Kyiv City Council, the Kyiv City Council was approached by the people of kyiv who wanted bazhana avenue, amrosiya street buchmy, the street of Pavlo Tychyna and Leonid Pervomaiskyi in kyiv was renamed because these people cooperated, collaborated with the soviet regime, where for you is the limit of collaboration with the soviet regime . By the way, Mykola Bazhan had such a telling episode, les tanyuk once told me about it, this was a club of creative youth in the early 60s. He says i invited my favorite, mykola platanovych, he says, he went on stage, there are young people sitting in the hall, and suddenly the whole hall began to chant, well, so quietly, as if such an inner voice, a person is standing in the sunlit kremlin, well , the film is famous, famous a poem is desirable about stalin, dedicated to stalin, and i say, well, its clear that how it is. Poems, this is the main thing for us, dovzhenko, who also made huge compromises, you understand, but they held the sky over ukraine, this is necessary, this the main thing, not, not compromises, and compromises allowed them to survive and survive them, their muse, oh this is the main thing, and this muse was ukrainian, yes, she made compromises with the communist totalitarian system, but well. What if everyone went for yes, vasyl stus had the right to say that to ivan dzyuba, because he sat in the concentration camps, he put his whole life on the line, but he had the right, but most of the people who sat in their warm apartments did not have such a right to say to dzyuba, because they had the soul had no deeds, but the deeds of the beak were deeds and how many were there, by the way, on. Oksana pakhlivska wrote a brilliant text about it once on Ivan Mykhailovychs anniversary, and she answered those already in their 80s who started saying what the 60s had ordered, that they didnt they were fighting already at the turn of the 90s and zeros, they say virgins, tens, here is where ivan dzyuba wrote with. Only he is a workaholic, by the way, he is a man, he, when you asked about the anniversary, he wrote a whole antianniversary manifesto , he hated anniversaries, hated, because they take away time, they take away time from work, he worked for ukraine, for ukraine, he is like the minister of culture, er, the first minister, well, the second minister of culture, who laid the foundations of cultural policy, strategy, what is still going on. Absolutely not, and so on , that is, this is the person who did, imagine that all this would not have happened, the compromise was justified, but if after this compromise, to put it bluntly, Ivan Mykhailovych became angry, oh, then if we said, well, then we wouldnt be talking about what and about who, but he, he overcame it and he did so much for ukraine that god give his critics even a hundred. But after doing that, you already started talking about how brave he was, and he really was, i read somewhere that he, he came out at some writers plenum or somewhere, he said, and what do you think, you will lie here, and i will remain silent, and this is how he did not remain silent on september 4 , 1965, by the way, we will now talk about what happened at the premiere of parajanovs film shadows of forgotten ancestors, but it is interesting, it seems to me an absolutely brilliant move, was in the film ivan and marta by sergei bukovsky. Serhii bukovsky takes two sirens for such glue, as a basis. The siren that sounded on september 4, 1965 in the cinema of ukraine, where the premiere of tine of forgotten ancestors was held, and where dzyuba was the first to speak and said that today is a tragic day, today is a happy day, but also tragic, and began to enumerate, who was arrested from the ukrainian intellectuals then. And so. In response to this, the administration of the cinema of ukraine turned on the siren, this is where serhii bukovsky begins the film about ivan dzyuba, and with this he the film ends, but this siren already sounds later, during the russianukrainian war, in the first months of 2022, what did you do when you first heard about what happened in the Movie Theater . At the ukraine theater in 1965, you know when, i heard already in the early 90s about what happened in 1965, when you learned about it, no, well, in 1965. I was still a schoolboy in alexandria and i definitely did not hear about it, well, you understand that at that time any information was blocked, well, in kyiv they knew about it, so i was already somewhere in the third or fourth year, someone, someone told, well, about porodzhanov , there are a lot of all kinds of things, well, including, they told, and you know how it was there, how it was, how it ended for paradzhanov, in general, this whole story with this protest for paradzhanov, well. Nothing, Ivan Mykhailovych said, i was terribly afraid that paradzhanov would say, well, why did you record the premiere for me, with such a political gesture, he says, its not that he wasnt offended, its not that he wasnt angry, he says, he had the impression that , that this is his excitement , this is what he loved, but only give paradzhanova, paradzhanov, on the other hand, loved such sharp , nonstandard actions, all the more related to them with. And he says that after the film he took marta and i by the hands and led us to his home, and we were at his place until morning, because, well, he was afraid that we, well, not us, but ivan would be arrested, well, they werent arrested, then, by the way, marta volodymyrivna tells me humorously, there are versions, she says, and he says that he walked with ivan khreshchatyk all night, and that, well, after all kinds of years, but it was like that, and this. Sometimes they really say that this is the first maidan, it is right there next to the maidan, which, unfortunately, is already deceased no no cinema ukraine, because lets hope that it will be revived after all, but it was an action, this, this is a brave, a person boldly speaks about, declares about what was talked about only in the corners, what did he say at first , he said first that there are arrests, then chornobyl, so he added. Said that those who are against arrests, stand up, and by the way, very few people stood up, and well , it couldnt have been any other way, this is the 65th year, the 65th year, they say that there are about 700 people in the hall , 5060 people got up, well, no more, yes, no more, and so on its still a lot, as in those days, because it pops up, not everyone knows, then stos said the same word, yes, then between series, somehow during the break, stos also said, there was no series, no break. There wasnt a movie for somehow , somehow, there was some kind of break, no , no, no, as far as i wasnt there, but he told me so much about it, no, yuri lenko told me that he left the hall altogether, well, when it started watching, sat down in the square opposite and says, here he saw several military vehicles drive up, one of them soldiers with machine guns shouted, in fact they surrounded the cinema, but it would seem that there was only such a small local protest in the cinema, and what about the system, they brought out a battalion of soldiers who surrounded the cinema, well, then they scattered, that is, not so clearly , but this is so to say, this is the case with such things, the fear was driven away, as soon as you stepped forward, you would be hit. So that you understand that the next time they will hit you in such a way that there will be a wet spot left from you, poetic cinema, lets have more we will have time to talk about poetic cinema, in fact, in fact, it was also Something Like that, you talked about the russian critic of the soviet bleiman, yes bleiman, mikhalen bleiman, who spoke, who criticized this myth of poetic cinema, how poetic cinema was dangerous for the soviet authorities, or why. It was under such, under such a ban, why was everything put on the shelf in the end . Once a moscow film expert explained to me, he said, everything that the soviet official did not understand, he was terrified of it and tried to ban it, well, since he did not read it, he cannot decode this text, so it is better to hide it somewhere, and mythopoetic cinema, why a myth, because it was based on a myth, on myths. What are the shadows of forgotten ancestors, these are folk, folk rituals, thats all there is to it, now we re showing it, its babylon 20, were showing excerpts from ivan mykolaichuks film babylon 20, well, its also the same mythopoetic movie, and by the way, it is based on the novel by vasyl zemlyak, a brilliant, well, philosopher of the people, this ivan played the role of this fabian there. Such a philosopher, in which the features of Grigory Skovoroda and vasyl zemlyak, he also walked all the hills of kiev, philosophizing, that is, he wrote one novel there in. 7 years, and more than that he spoke, well, like ancient philosophers, and he liked to speak like that on the go, they ponder, by the way, that time kyiv life in the 1960s and early 1970s, it was largely carnivalized, well, the same parodzhanov, he was at the center of this group, which included mykolaichuk, ilyenko, and balayan. Many younger and slightly older cinematographers, and they met almost every day, not only in parajanav, by the way, lets say in yanukovychs apartment, oh my god, yakutovych, it was also such a band, and they , they are like paradzhanov, its a holiday all the time, festivity, there are a lot of stories like that, Roman Balayan still, when he hears something. Its as if its true the version from porodzhan, says seriozh, he was telling the truth, well, the same mykolaichuk, what a fantasy, once, when i spoke with him for the first time, well, not the first time, well, during the first period in the house of creativity, and we left after a long conversation, and leonid cherivatnyko, who knew him much better, looked at him like that zori, he says to me, he says to me well, how about you, i say, well, its great, as long as he didnt tell everything, he says, and still hes lying, he says, but how beautiful, because ivan was also carried, like parajanov, when he i saw in front of me that this maidan, if in 2004, when i was standing there on the maidan in the most orange, it seemed to me that paradzhanov was standing somewhere and rejoicing, because this is his element, this is it, this is the fair, the fair these people who, well, its a holiday, a collective, collectively, the collective came out, and this, and this is a holiday of freedom, because everyone is free here, everyone takes off their masks, puts on different ones, this is a holiday of freedom, and he is in this carnival, he forgot, they say that paradzhanov was very afraid of prison, but he forgot so much that you have to be careful, do you remember anything about it, how did he behave in general in this regard. I am familiar with pradzhanov, because when i entered he was already arrested thats why i couldnt know him, i saw him several times when he came to kyiv in the late 80s, but even then he was absolutely like that instantly well, a simple example is 40 days of mykolaichuks death , paradzhanov arrives late at baikovo and immediately has the feeling that he is in the center, everyone around is like that, and he is like that, he looked around, then, oh, and there, across the grave, is a monument on which it is written, an orphan , he approaches, hugs the monument where the photographers are, the orphan paradzhanov, instantly he made a collage here, and i remember paradzhanov at mykolaichuks grave, and he opens beach after beach in this way. Champagne and sprinkles the grave with champagne, mykolas grave, this is also such an action, that is, it must have been something in his imagination, he, he, yes, as far as i know, i dont know him at the moment, but there are a lot of all kinds of stories, he really used to create such performances all the time, as he asked his wife, well, they divorced quite quickly, i think they lived for six years, svetlana ivanivna sherbatyuk, i i say svetlan ivanna, what about you . They left, she left parodjanoy even before the shadow, and she said well, how could i, a woman with a child, here is a theater 24 hours a day, she says, all the time, and he tells me how you are, how you are dressed, so, you need to change clothes, you need to buy a harp and so on, that is, she is always in she was an actress in his theater, he says, well, its 24 hours, at least 8 hours with some. With some kind of break, its a total such theater, and that s it, he got tired, the same novel balayan told me more than once that he says, i always wondered what seryozhin was like when he was alone, because it was impossible to imagine him alone, a carnival, thats what, and this is in his films, why would a shadow seem to him to be an armenian and he was so immersed, and thats how he got to know all this, well, together with. His other colleagues, and precisely because it is this, he got into this paradise his, this is his, this is terribly close to him, it was close, this carpathian, this hutsul carnav. Let me return to the question with which we started, how did poetic cinema threaten the soviet government . I miss it not only because she did not understand cultural codes, but i think that it is precisely because the soviet authorities understood the cultural codes that are there, that are sewn in, so to speak, in this poetic cinema, lets go back, why why all these films, including babylon, i understand correctly, he was also on na shelves, am i wrong. All poetic films, but before that, in the film osyka, there is ilyenka, parajana, they ended up in the police, that is, some dogs were not caught, they were simply pushed away, it is not always a well for the thirsty, it was forbidden, the shadows of forgotten ancestors were forbidden after being imprisoned, tried and imprisoned in this. Parajano, well, under such conditions, it means that the directors work is not shown, well, according to those stupid rules, although he was imprisoned for his, under the article , not antisovietism at all, but he was humiliated , you know, it has been articulated more than once that this is also the government and the government at that time and its characteristics, that they let him go, because for these prisoners, under which article they imprisoned him, this means that he is, well, well, a man of the bottom, i. E. He was practically doomed, he was destroyed there, because these convicts simply in one way or another, but paradzhanov came into contact with them, they appreciated his very carnivalesqueness, this festivity, he was a holy man, fellow human beings, yes, in him, in he had such an abyss, such an abyss of human positives. That even these prisoners, who, of course, that these people were often, and balayan told me with mykhailo belyk, they visited him in the camps, and after that, he always introduced this conboy, he said, he has 100, look, he is a genius, he has 100 stories, write down 10 and there will be 10 masterpieces, after that these convicts came here to the belikovs there and. And and that is, with a note from parajanov, that is, he was able to see even in some convict in some convoy his talents would be appreciated, and people felt this, and that is why he survived at the expense of others so that he could see this rich world in people human, he saw people in people, and the authorities didnt like that, the authorities didnt like his and. In the films of mykolaichuk, ose kilenko, others, the other day i watched grigory kokhans bread and salt, a brilliant film of the 1970s stelmakh, this is also, in principle, a poetic film, but i did not like the fact that it is a ukrainian film, er, that it raises the layers of ukrainian own culture, as quoted by you at the beginning, that there were always. In sarimakers, in vashevanks, but the fact is that ukrainianism was reduced to such sarimaking, i. E. To this ethnographic, if it was of such a low culture, it should be, this is the basis, but then you moved to the city, came to the city, and you have to build on this basis other, another culture, russianspeaking, oriented not at all to ukrainian sources, to ukrainian ones. Codes for ukrainian narratives, all this had to be erased, and these sixties refused to erase this layer, on the contrary, they began to build it up, and at the same time, malanchuk becam