Russian mentality about the law in proverbs and sayings

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

Proverbs and sayings recorded the attitude of the Russian people to the law - an attitude that has absorbed centuries of experience. An attitude in which there was not the slightest courage (they say, whatever we want, we will turn it back), but also not the slightest certainty that the law of EVERYTHING can be solved and all problems can be resolved.

The law is not a stake - you can’t manage it. Not every rod is bent according to the law. The law is not a toy. The law is that the drawbar, where it turned, went there (old). The law is that you can turn a horse wherever you want (old). That's what the law is for, to get around it. Laws are good on paper. There are many laws, little sense. Until the law comes to us, they will twist from all sides. The law does not look at the bow. The law is that a spider web; the fly will get stuck, and the bumblebee will slip through. Laws are peacemakers, but lawyers are jibes. The laws went fiery, and people became stony. Where there is law, there is fear. Where the law is, there are many grievances. That's just the law, as a judge is familiar. The strict law creates the guilty.

Comments, as they say, are completely unnecessary: having turned the “law” this way and that, having tested it with life, our people gave a rather spacious description of what dangers await a person who relies only on the law: from the belief that “a strict law he creates guilty ones "until" the laws have gone fiery, and people have become stony! " In Russian culture, until recently, it was not accepted to insist that "law" and "life" are in strict mutual dependence (determined). Rather, on the contrary, they saw such significant gaps between them, which made it possible for some to maintain sanity and to take advantage of these “voids” for another.

Our and Western attitudes towards the Law have always been substantially different.

Yes, in Europe the law is always respected: a car parked in the wrong place will always be fined. While any of our drivers knew: we could forgive and regret (let go without a fine, after listening) harsh traffic police officers. For a Western person, a Latin in essence, legalism in blood is a kind of religion that allows you to create the illusion of the absolute! The absolute of sinlessness of the head of the Roman Church. Absolute equality: everyone is equal before the law. Law and justice in the cultural consciousness of a European happily coincide. It's easier. It's easier this way. The functions, so to speak, of your personal choice are delegated to the law, and you, within its framework, do not have to strain.

This is not the case with us. Not about the notorious Russian prowess and breadth, which "should be narrowed", now we are talking. Submission to the “unknown force” of the new law on domestic violence caused such rejection because paternal “cultural mechanisms” have started working in our people, which (if you listen to our media and read sociological polls) do not seem to work in him for a long time.

In our country, it is different: if a person (any) relies only on the law, then this means that he has freed himself from the work of a strictly human-personal, from moral responsibility, which no law can contain by definition!

Look: a few days ago I was shown a video of the play "Pink and Blue-3" of the "Activist theater-booth MERAK". This children's theater in Komsomolsk-on-Amur is part of a certain cultural structure (presumably an NGO) and recently the head of MERAKA, a feminine activist, was under house arrest and, as I understand it, she was charged (in a different case). “Merak” is also a “star” in the constellation Ursa Major, but the same word is translated from Arabic as “groin” (an ambiguous play on words is generally characteristic of feminist cultural products).

There is no pornography as such in the play. But … I saw with my own eyes children (from, probably, 5-7 to 14 years old) dressed in clothes without gender signs; but … no one will convince me that the lgbt theme has nothing to do with it (very much even "and" - "pink" and "blue" color-markers). The director who staged a play directed against allegedly any prohibition-violence for the sake of the idea of "personality" (all children want "their own business" or "their own business", and some elders do not give them due to gender or other "old man's beliefs" entertainments that are demonstrated by dances that almost lead to a trance, and some "others" interfere with them) - in fact, the director forgot that "becoming a person" is somewhat more than having your own hairdresser. That there is a significant difference between wanting to “want everything” and “not wanting” what you cannot do at 6 or 14 years old. The very fact that children of different ages are involved in the play - without taking into account their ability to understand what is happening to them in the play - this fact speaks volumes. The play puts in them the problem of violence, which is understood as any, including reasonable, prohibition: something goes not according to my desire - that means this is violence! And then the law on domestic violence came in time - and the children, as soon as they are taught to use it (and who and where will teach, which NGOs, psychologists and agencies - no "state" can keep track of!). And if all age restrictions are lifted (leaving only 18+), as required by the law "On Culture", then such performances from children about "pink and blue", formally not having the corpus delicti of a pornographic crime, will generally become a fad.

The director of the play "Pink and Blue" recently participated with him (presenting a video) at the feminist festival "Ribs of Eve" in St. Petersburg (hopefully not within the framework of the Cultural Forum!). If she did not have (as the defenders assure) any other than simple goals (to awaken the personality in the child, although the methods of this awakening also raise questions), why did she take the video of the performance as her “creative report” to St. Petersburg to the activists? feminists and other "istam" ?!

Today, neither high culture, nor mass culture at all reflect reality (as was customary in the "age of the classics"), and do not transform it aesthetically - (as was customary at the same time). Today, cultural reality is created as a project reality with the help of new humanitarian technologies: the "trichinals of time" infect everything and everyone.

Classics is a dangerous place

The struggle against the classics of some of our contemporary directors is known to everyone (the Orthodox community sometimes intervenes and brings the results of this directorial struggle to the attention of the general public). I have spoken many times about what is associated with cultural violence - all this was written by me long ago.

If we are actively implementing the law on domestic violence, then I strongly urge its developers to include points in this law or write a new law on cultural violence! After all, it already deals with physical, economic and psychological violence.

If violence is some kind of action taken against a person or society against their will (as in the draft law), then we have every reason to assume that we also have cultural violence and it is worth somehow and not to be legally enforced! Why so offend cultural figures! - In the family, the wife will be issued “protection orders” (so that the husband does not approach 50 meters, so that he does not appear in his eyes for a year, so that he does not live in the same square, etc.). So viewers who have suffered from cultural violence directed by Bogomolov or Serebrennikov (or someone else) should also issue "protection orders." And the "measures of restraint" can be as follows: to return the money for tickets and also to compensate for moral damage (a ticket to Bogomolov's premiere performances cost 5 thousand rubles or more;, the anti-concept of the "Prince" - "The Idiot" according to Dostoevsky (and according to ours). In it, Nastasya Filippovna is a girl of about seven, whom all the men around her “fuck” all the time (according to “Nastenka” herself, who does not pronounce the letter “r” in the aforementioned word).

Yes, we are talking about violence against the classics.

In A. Zholdak's play Three Sisters, long before the draft of the new law, the director had already inspired the public with the idea of domestic violence: teacher Kulygin rapes his wife Masha all the time (close-ups are provided by cameras that display the scene on the screen). Masha is the embodiment of hysterical suggestion; she was already in childhood corrupted by sexual cohabitation with her father (a fashionable Western theme of abuse); and now she also has a carnal connection with Colonel Vershinin (and not highly romantic love). The duel between Salty and Tuzenbach is justified by the director through homosexual jealousy. What does all this have to do with Chekhov? Isn't this the imposition of the newest themes and meanings on the classics? It's strange that there hasn't been any harassment yet!

And it is no longer necessary to say that such a theater does not form reality! I saw men in women's dresses in heaps on stages of all kinds, up to the Youth Theater. Ugly naked bodies and imitations of sexual intercourse are innumerable; texts like "the lesbian cradled me / on her hairy arms" - too. Well, and of course “low”, shocking techniques - the main “weapon of violence” in the arsenal of modern theater: for Bogomolov it is “oral sex with dildo pistols and mops …”; in "Boris Godunov" "the stabbed prince is erotically twitching on a close-up screen, and the vampire-like Grishka Otrepiev is very sexually licking the blood from his wound"; "The message is read in full by the third scene of the first act: Russia is ruled by criminals, nothing ever changes in it" … Well, of course, as one fashionable provincial director (led by the "narrowly corporate" party of the capital) said before the production of "Eugene Onegin": “I only work for young people. She has no authority. In principle, they do not care whether the great work "Eugene Onegin" or not, they can outrage him or not. They will not be hurt by sexual intercourse on stage - they have no complexes. " That is why the performance begins with sexual intercourse … Disingenuous, of course. If only young people watched the play, and only those who do not care, then there would not be the necessary scandalous "effect" from such a defective production. Classics are a serious communication channel. Classics are the circulatory system of culture through which violent interpretation penetrates us. The classic is the code for accessing the deep in the viewer.

Just don't talk about my "obscurantism". Obscurantists are they. It is they who substitute the ALL theatrical community under the law on cultural violence (and it’s psychological at the same time)! And if a law on domestic violence is adopted (and these difficult issues are ALREADY regulated by administrative and criminal law), then our most freedom-loving community cannot avoid such a law! I warned. He who has ears, let him hear.

And one more thing: all the petty dirty tricksters love to bring history under their "excrement-experiments" (how unpleasantly close the words!) Like, after all, the classics themselves have so much violence. Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment" - and family, and sexual, and criminal. No need to trivialize. And if you see nothing in Dostoevsky, except that this is a novel about a "criminal" and a "prostitute" - I can do nothing to help. So you really need a law on cultural violence, and you are culturally dangerous for society.

Outside the law

There is no doubt that the law on the prevention of domestic violence will not fundamentally solve anything. Will not help anyone. Nothing will improve - and I, as you understand, are categorically opposed to men, women and children suffering physically and mentally from each other.

Can we lower the cultural curtain?

No.

Can we stage our (and not our) classics differently?

Can. They put it. Only about creative work, and the one that lives according to the principle "Do no harm!" the country knows very little.

Others are in sight - fighting the classics with the above methods. Vile.

Consequently, the whole question is enclosed within the person himself - small and adult If in his inner experience there is no feeling of love for brother and sister, mother and father; there are no ideas about the inevitable for any personal choice of good or evil, there is no compassion for others (he is protected from the form of old age, illness and ugly weakness); there is no joy in reading Pushkin, who has not sung a single rotten and dirty feeling; there is no admiration for the talent of Tolstoy, who wrote "War and Peace" with a "family thought"; there is no Christian teaching to forgive forty times forty times; there is no understanding that being a person is all the time “working on oneself” (“the soul is obliged to work day and night”); if there is no understanding that it is impossible to be an abstract “personality in general” (without nationality and Fatherland, without attachments and responsibilities), if there is no all this, then, of course, you will need a law so that other people's uncles decide for you and punish you.

How simple it seems to be: to take your inner work, the Christian and traditional culture of forgiveness, understanding and reconciliation (husband, wife, father, mother, son, or artist) to transfer to law enforcement agencies and the judicial system!

Not for a long time and it is difficult for ourselves to get out of the crisis for the sake of a higher goal (preserving the family), but to file a lawsuit, believing that all problems will be quickly resolved. I understand that there are and will be judgments and divorces, misfortunes and troubles. But culture as an institution can also teach a person a lot - a deep aesthetic impression can “turn the soul over”. Well, what about the court? For him, you still need to have nerves with a diameter of a ship's rope. And I can draw a perspective: a person in general in the future may be excluded from the process of litigation and competition. Do you think you cannot create a program that will automatically consider you guilty by a set of words spoken in the heat of the moment ?! Can.

The family, even with all its difficulties, is a living place for the growth of a person's self-constancy, his personal dignity. The family is also a place for idealism in the world - a world that is increasingly cynical and practical. There will be no family - the legislator (and behind him there is always a popular need, then there are the interests of lobbyists with world interests) will not know any restraint at all. The family will collapse - the sovereign state will collapse.

While our Russian culture is still alive (as in the times of Metropolitan Hilarion), the source of the life of a person rooted in the people and the people themselves is still not in the law, but in Grace. “The last limit of violence is the complete disappearance of the ability to reproduce a cultural tradition among its carriers” (sorry, I don’t remember whose words it was). And no matter how much the "people of art" may look at the tradition, it is not worth pushing our person to the limit. Prior to the requirement of the Cultural Violence Act.