Well, more, so to speak, of kievan kyiv than the one who gave dont listen levetsky is gone, there is no, there are no traces, there is nothing left, so to speak, i have returned you, lets return to mykola, to Mykola Makarenko and to your petition, because it is very important, then it was called Alla Tarasova street, and by the way, as it turned out, there is a rather powerful lobby, which means which exist there is the presence of the same alva tarasova in the kyiv area, but let us do our thing, let us do our thing, we will now show the qr code, it is very important, in fact, we will show the qr code by which you can vote, name this street, which is otherwise, it is subject to derussification and decolonization, to be named after Mykola Makarenko, who fought and gave his life to return it. To us both cathedrals, but as far as im concerned, its simply our duty, not only to kyivans, to all ukrainians, at least to everyone who regards kyiv as their capital, and it would be very nice and a symbolic gesture for the purification of the kyiv space, well and then further, so stop me, what is it called, because i am simply carried on this topic, and oksana, thank you, thank you very, very much, it is important, you have said enough important things , we will meet with you separately and we will talk, because i understand that the topic is not exhaustive, one way or another, i ask everyone or for these by qr code to come and support the petition of oksana zabushko regarding the renaming of ala tarasova street to Mykola Makarenko street, or simply through kyiv digital, it is very easy for kyivites to enter and it takes a few seconds to do this, thank you very much. And we come back, back to the conversation with vakhtan kibuladze. Vagtanze, how do you like this story with Mykola Makarenko, with the fact that he is still not in the city. Its a pity that its not just that, its not just an isolated moment like this, its from the time of dzyuba, yes. This question was raised, it means that 30 years have already passed, and there is such an opinion, i am not a historian, but that we were brought up already in postsoviet times with the idea that churches were undermined by the bolsheviks as religious buildings, but there was one more very important motive, the thing about which mrs. Oksana said that it was kyiv that was being destroyed, these tenements of the church, because there were more churches in kyiv than in any russian city. And it was a real orthodox capital, yes, no matter how you treat it, that is, there could not be more stoned churches in kyiv than in moscow, lets say, and it was, so it was not only bolshevik policy, it was again after all, the Imperial Russian policy of destroying the Cultural Heritage of our native city, and what happened to mykhailivskyi, is only one of stories, what happened then, you know what torments me a lot, we were recently in sosnytsia, chernihiv oblast, in the museum of Oleksandr Dovzhenko, and there we were told that we cant , well, its like we cant talk about him, that he is an ambiguous poet, so look, in the 31st year, when the question arose, they started talking about the destruction of mykhailivskyi, Oleksandr Dovzhenko gives his voice, and look at what he writes, he writes like this, i think that during the development. The last problems of the construction of the cultural park of the mykhailivskyi monastery are requested to leave, he has revived his age, it is absolutely unacceptable to even think that anyone needs these walls. And what to do with it, how to talk about it, he later repented at the end of his life, yes, but how to talk about it, because Oleksandr Dovzhenko is part of our cultural canon, absolutely, but here we started with the canon, yes, and dovzhenko well, not only a film director, he is a writer, and a very cool writer, and well, the enchanted right hand, we will mention that in a moment, and therefore. It is obvious that Oleksandr Dovzhenko belongs to our canon, it is obvious that, say, the film earth, despite , that as on me, the holodomor is being legitimized there, in fact we dont talk about it, but it is also there, and it is no coincidence that he received the stalin prize, as far as i know, precisely for this film, but dovzhenko cannot but belong to our canon, after all, whatever what an artist, this is a rather controversial figure, thats why we admire it. Art, because such onedimensional stereotyped figures do not create interesting art, but what came to my mind was when i read andruhovichs book love of justice, and we met with him immediately after that to the zaporozhye toloka, and i told him, we were sitting, i said listen, it seems to me that you have done something very important, you see, in this book there is such a message that is very important for me, and what is this book about, it is a book about criminals , yes, about. Their criminals in our history, yes, and i say that for me, well, in addition to the literary value of this book, there is an important, important political message, a politicalhistorical message, a politicalhistoricalcultural message , that we have to create not only the pantheon of our heroes, but also the besteary of our criminals, ourselves we have to do it, russians or other europeans should not come and tell us who is who in our country. Whether americans or anyone, anyone, no, we ourselves must speak, this, this, this is part of our history, and whats more, it often happens that in one period it is a hero, and in another period and the person himself, such things are assumed, and we ourselves have to talk about it, and in many ways what is imposed on us, primarily by the russians, why, because we simply have a vacuum, we have not talked about our traumas, and we and and to where there is no our position. The enemy enters there and begins to manipulate, the same with dovzhenko. Listen, anton rubovych , the director of the institute of national remembrance, will now tell you that here is bulgakov, and here he is, actually, he does not tell you what he is, that he should be included in the bestiary of the list, in the bestiary of criminals, but he says that we need and should only talk about bulgakov. In kyiv, because if he sinned in any way, yes, then he sinned here. Do nt you think that bulgakov is such a character that he should be included in this list . No, bulgakov is obviously not our character. Bulgakov thats exactly why i said, said that we need to deimperialize our consciousness, our culture. Bulgakov is an emperor, the most important thing, as far as i am concerned, if you take his portrait, he is an imperial writer, and, and. We are not an empire and we do not claim to be an empire, we claim to be liberal democracy, i hope so, after all, well, this is how i see our country and what the struggle is for, in the end, but we do not want to be either part of the empire or the center of the empire, bulgakov the emperor, bulgakov a xenophobe, he is not just a ukrainophobe, bulgakov is a xenophobe, he is a chauvinist, he hates everything that is not russian, and when these manipulations take place, they say that you cannot identify the author with. His hero, but you cannot, this is from the standpoint of literary studies, it is not very correct , but all the same, the characters speak partly from the author, besides, take, take his works of art, take his caucasian diaries, fierce hatred for the caucasus, for what wonder, he practically did not live there, he hardly knew that caucasus, but he he is hated, and absolutely a xenophobic, chauvinistic and characteristic position for russians, it is the same today, towards the caucasus, towards ukraine, towards moldova. To the baltic countries and further and further, so if you distinguish bulgakov is not just not our writer, he is a russian writer and he is a very dangerous writer, and precisely because he is a talented writer, there are no questions, yes, he is even more dangerous, but there are two moments, when they talk about bolgakov, what drives me, lets say, why do we rush with the authors of the white guard, which is obvious to me ukrainophobic. And in order not to write, not to say, this is a ukrainophobic novel, i remember when you mentioned that we went to sosnytsia, and once penam and i were in kherson, and we met the director of kherson there. Of the theater, oleksandr kniga, and he said that when he was arrested by the ephesians, firstly, when they entered his office and saw the russian literature there, they told him you read the right books, and the second question was, do you put a white guard, well, these are not idiots understood that it is possible to set days of trouble, yes, because days of troubles is a play, and white guard is a novel, but they know that white guard is a chauvinistic russian novel, and today it is absolutely. Embedded in russian propaganda, thats why bulgakov obviously hated kyiv, he treated kyiv, ukraine, petlyura, he hates the idea of our independence in general, he puts into the mouth of the white guards, you remember, admiration for the bolsheviks, why, because they are russians, this horde of russians is coming to kyiv, and what did muravyov do in kyiv , it was practically scaled to the size in kyiv bucha, kyiv was in the blood for a generation, and what the russians repeated in buch is the same. Well, butch is already such a name for all their crimes, and you started talking about what makes you angry, angry, for some reason we dont talk about the city of pidmogilny, a modernist novel, really modernity, and ill tell you why we do nt , because we dont know it, well we, we do know, no, i say we, as we, as society in the broad sense and those we havent read, we dont know demantovychs girl with a bear, we dont know no to. But if you even compare, im not a literary critic, and here stones may fly in my direction, but in my opinion the white guard is a masterfully written novel, but this novel is very secondary, in my opinion, it is not an experimental novel, on the contrary, the city is experimental, then modernity is a novel, well, let the literary experts they criticize me for that, if they dont agree with me, i do. Thinks, likes, doesnt like, then another question, this is a ukrainianlanguage modernist novel about our city, another question is interesting, there is another russianlanguage novel about kyiv, which written by a native of kyiv who loves kyiv, it is in the hometown of nykrasovs hometown, why these bulgakovs, yes, these fans of russianspeaking kyiv do not mention the fact that only the sign hanging in nikrasov seems to be in the passage where he lived, nor the museum. There is no, there are no mentions, despite the fact that in the native garden it is written with great love for kyiv, and if there are any fans of russian literature still left here, then let them get along better with viktor nykrasov, why not viktor nikrasov, because bulgakov in spite of his like that antibolshevism and anticommunism, he is inscribed in the russian imperial canon, absolutely inscribed, in fact, he sought to be inscribed, that is why he writes about stalin, batum, and he. He, a sycophant who tries to fit into this new communist canon, and not fits in, and by the way, what is interesting, bulgakov will happen on the 21st, correct me if i am wrong, on the 21st, when he flees, he flees to moscow, although the white emigration that he praises does not flee to moscow, the white emigration flees, and he has a play, the white emigration was not a favorite stalin, she is running away. To paris, to europe, and nikrasov in the 70s, when it was much more difficult to leave the soviet union, he leaves and he lives out his life in paris in exile, not in the soviet union, because he did not fit into this the imperial canon, bulgakov perfectly fits into the imperial canon, as a chauvinist, as a xenophobe, and he has a place there, thats why the problem we started talking about, bulgakov is clearly a russian writer and. He is clearly a very dangerous russian writer. Its not ours bestiary . No, this is not our bestiary. Nikrasav is a russian writer, but he loves kyiv, he writes about kyiv with love, he writes a very ambiguous novel, in general, i dont know how he can because of the fact that he received the stalin prize for bakopakh of stalingrad, and he was given the opportunity to print , to print this novel, which was later completely destroyed, but read it, i dont want to spoil those who havent read it, but again, despite. The fact that nykrasiv is a kyivan who writes with love about kyiv, this is part of russian literature, and so on it is necessary to believe, and today it is also dangerous, precisely because it is talentedly written, and as for bolgakov, again, i know that there will be a scream from the fans here, it seems to me that he is generally a very overrated writer, he is a star number one only in this corner of russian world literature, because those who fight with the masters. Here it seems to me that we all read it very young, for example, when i read master margarita in my second year at the university, i was naturally astounded by the white guard, but maybe you should reread it, but its the way you reread it, no, so that you, so that you understand, yes, that is, when you, i, when i reread it , i rewatched it, i realized that its not as strong as i thought then it seemed, that is, for a 20yearold child, and a young person, it can be wow, and then you understand, its like a steppe wolf hermange, 20 years you admire. Then steppe wolf should be read in the german original, this is a different story, and bulgakov is a masterful writer, there are no questions, but he is not a genius of mankind, and thats it he is very overrated in our country, because he is no longer so well known in the west, what triggers him so much, well, why so much, why such storms, here was the conclusion of the institute of national remembrance, so regarding the inadmissibility of glorification, which started screaming again, how do you say this document could have provoked, i read it before going on the air, it is written in a terrible language in such a cando, the conclusion of the institute of the nation is yes, that is , according to the message, i agree, but how it is done and in the same place, mostly the reaction, how it is done, but also the museums answer is also there you can find many internal contradictions, i say. Again, we are a democratic country despite the terrible war that russia is waging against us, and that russia is waging against us, and we cannot ban writers, the question is not about whether we banned bulgakov or not, we will not come to libraries, private ones, and remove these books, or burn the books of russian writers in the squares, as they do with ukrainian literature, like real nazis, the question is not that , the question is that bulgakov, which pushkin, is a marker imperial, no. There cant be monuments to these imperial writers on our streets, it cant be, i would, for example, the museum should be kept as a research center, or i would, for example, call it there a museum of research, research of russian chauvinism , for example, that buvakov is a chauvinist, a chauvinist, but not only him, i imagine what the reaction would be to the employee, to the manager, maybe it would be terrible, but i am radicalizing it so much, you can find a formula. Uhu, and researchers should investigate, even such a metaphor was born in me once, what is russia, this the plague barrack of history, but who should go into the plague barrack, well, in order to treat, why should we treat, doctors, risking health and life, in the same way , writers, philosophers, historians should go into the cultural, conditionally plague barrack of history, social researchers, psychiatrists even, yes, because im sure its also a mental gathering. If a person proudly says that i am russian, well, today i am, well, okay, but there are schizophrenics, there are maniacs, and someone has kidney diseases, you should consult a doctor, but if this person is proud, if he says it with a sense of guilt, then, well, then you can still listen to this person, but i have not met such a person, so it is necessary to investigate, it is impossible not to investigate, the enemy must be known, but it should not be a subject on our land. And when we erect monuments, when we name houses, when we open or preserve museums in honor of these people, we simply mark the presence of the russian empire here, which is already killing us physically, look, we have three minutes left, i cant help it ask about another initiative, it is also written in a very interesting language, so there is position, there is such an Initiative Group that arose, as i understand it, in the bowels of the kyiv music academy, so. We say, the tchaikovsky conservatory, and so an Initiative Group was created that says that people who have ukrainian should be returned to ukrainian culture roots, despite the fact that they even created imperial culture, for example, they say about chekhov, aivazovsky, kuindzhi and, i quote, a descendant of the cossack family chayok, tchaikovsky. Theres a lot mixed up here, but. Its just interesting to see what you think about this initiative, because theres quite decent people who signed it, for example, akhtem saytablai, viktor yushchenko, and also many other cultural figures, what do you think about this, well, first of all, we must understand that if we treat historical issues as scientists, and this is a question of history, then the argument is ethnic origin, it is not scientific, it is some kind of primordialism, that ukrainianness is what comes from. I repeatedly repeat this formula of Benedict Anderson nations are a narrative, nations and narrations, nations are products of the public imagination, and therefore weighs what language, we form these ideas, and it doesnt matter where a person was born, you can be born in ukraine, have ukrainian surnames and be a russian nazi, as we can see many of the outcasts who are in moscow today, ethnic ukrainians, they call to kill us, or is it there is no initiative to simply preserve tchaikovsky. I think that it is commercial, i think that it is a commercial initiative in general, because it is necessary to sell seats for foreigners, lets say those who want to, i know, a lot of chinese came to study, and tchaikovsky, yes, this label is tchaikovsky, but it is a russian label, there is nothing you can do about it, tchaikovsky, although with literature it is easier, there the marker is language, with music it is more difficult, although again, why is it more difficult, the most famous operas of tchaikovsky, they are related to russian plots , yes, lets not discuss it now and. Russian literature, yes, with ballets differently, as a wellknown lake, he generally conceived in bavaria, in the south of bavaria, seeing this lake near the castle, but tchaikovsky, we still have to understand the historical context, tchaikovsky is everywhere is perceived as a russian composer, and we remember these times more. There you remember the swan lake, when the