What's wrong with public investment?

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

I read in the news today a statement by the Russian Minister of Culture, on whom I even slightly depended: “If in the evening from the stage you express active public dissatisfaction with the current state power, then it’s probably not very logical in the morning to go to the same power for a grant. There is no need to try to feed from the hand at the same time and at the same time secretly bite."

This is a seemingly obvious thing that, it turns out, has reached the Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation for years. A thing that concerns a lot of creative people, either playing in an easy opposition, or pretending to be ardent opposition to the "bloody regime". Their darkness. And what is most interesting - now are not Soviet times, free times, including in terms of who should be financed by the state. In this regard, it owes nothing to anyone. This is all true, from the kindness of the soul. Grants and budgetary funding for all kinds of studios, theaters, funding for films, festivals, various cultural projects. Despite the fact that sometimes from the performances of these theaters you just feel sick to vomiting, and the money there is mercilessly plundered.

Well, many art workers consider it their duty to necessarily throw mud at the state from a variety of sites and in a variety of words. This is exactly what the minister is talking about - at the same time they feed from the hand and secretly bite it. With all this, the output is not particularly impressive. In the Soviet times, hated by this public, in the kingdom of censorship and artistic councils, creative people did not have any freedom. And the state was not particularly generous with money. The same censorship played another role - the role of a filter that filters out not only according to the principle of ideology, but also according to the principle of quality. As a result, everything that was created in Soviet times, for example, in the cinema, in the worst case, just good films, and in the best - real masterpieces, of which, by the way, there are quite a few. And this applies not only to cinema.

The level of cinema in free Russia does not, to put it mildly, reach the level of the Soviet one. Despite the fact that there is no censorship, shoot whatever you want, they will even give you money. Basically, this is not only about cinema, it can be said about the whole culture. Given that the culture is strongly supported by state money. It turns out that this is just throwing money down the drain.

Today there is another interesting news - out of 68 films that received state support in 2019, only eight paid off. Eight. Outstanding public investment performance. And, however, there is nothing to be surprised at. Everything is quite in the logic of what has been happening to Russian culture since it was covered by complete and unconditional freedom.

Another event happened recently - a conversation between the director Sokurov and President Putin. The director Sokurov gave Putin smart advice, in large quantities. Because, of course, he understands much more about governing the state than Putin. In particular, he insistently advised Putin to talk to the opposition, especially those who fell under the hand at protests in Moscow related to the elections to the Moscow City Duma. Earlier, he called on Putin to release one director who is also a terrorist, and it is not known what is more in this person - a director, or a terrorist, given that he made only one film. Probably next time director Sokurov will advise Putin to give Crimea to Ukraine, and Kaliningrad to Poland or Germany. The director is well-known, authoritative. True, for all the fact that all his films are met with noise and delight by film critics and various aesthetes, the people somehow do not care about his cinema. No, I'm not saying that films are bad. I just mean that it would be good to do only films and not get involved in politics. And don't give advice to the president. He has counselors. Who do not make films, but are very well versed in politics.

What is most interesting, if these creative people are now removed from the state allowance, a terrible howl will rise that freedom is being stifled in the country, that there is censorship in the country. This audience will screech very loudly, they know how. Moreover, it has appointed itself "the conscience of the nation", appointed itself. But, nevertheless, the state in terms of culture must take tough measures. And this is not censorship. You just have to let all this fraternity go to free bread. They constantly talk about how talented they are, how wonderful they are, how they are in demand. So they will surely feed themselves. Well, no - let them retrain as house managers, on the advice of one great schemer. And even better - in welders, locksmiths, turners, in those who really need the country's economy. But then, of course, I turned it down - these people in their lives never held anything thicker than known things.

The state must support culture, this is an axiom. But at the same time, culture should be a culture, and not some kind of profanation, while culture should not shit on the state. How much money is simply thrown down the drain? On performances with bare asses, from which the whole country is sick, on films that cannot be watched because of their wretchedness, or disgusting from lies on a historical theme. That's for sure - it would be better to give all this money to the elderly and children.

And one more piece of news - a certain Norwegian artist received help from the state. Some years. In total, I received about four million euros. Well, what is it - a creative person, and art must be supported. But there is one caveat. This artist painted his paintings by spraying paint from his ass. Many Russian cultural and art workers are also confidently moving in this direction. And it's worth thinking - is it worth feeding these asses with billions of state rubles?