Theatrical perversion of Eduard Boyakov: from Orthodox braces to Buzova

Theatrical perversion of Eduard Boyakov: from Orthodox braces to Buzova

Theatrical perversion of Eduard Boyakov: from Orthodox braces to Buzova
News

10 June, 12:06
Culture
Initially, I did not want to participate in the hype called "Buzova and the Moscow Art Theater". Neither the Moscow Art Theater, nor the Moscow Art Theater, nor other theaters, let alone Madame Buzova, are of interest to me. I'm interested in Boyakov - a character, in my opinion, extraordinary and rather curious.

Sasha Sokolov

Several years ago Boyakov publicly renounced liberal values, sprinkled ashes on his head and proclaimed himself a conservative, traditionalist, bearer and promoter of spiritual bonds.

Understandably, the liberal crowd anathematized him and kicked him off, which was predictable. It seems to me that he was counting on such a reaction.

But something happened that Boyakov could not have expected. Orthodox, to whom he briskly rushed with a cry: “I am mine! Own!”, Suspiciously squinting, they say, we smell something wrong here, they took and accused Boyakov of fast air change, devilry, far-reaching secret intentions, criminal conspiracies and other deadly sins. And a good half of the Orthodox press and bloggers began to beat Boyakov "In a Christian way", but in a way that we, liberals, never dreamed of.

Obscurantism is pure water, but the fact remains: our hero found himself between heaven and earth. As the unforgettable Alla Borisovna sang: "You left your native shore, but you did not stick to another.."

The former, few fans of the Moscow Art Theater of the times of T.V. Doronina, left the auditorium. In two years, the new leadership not only failed to create its own viewer, but also failed to build a repertoire policy.

Today the Moscow Art Theater is full of vinaigrette, consisting of writers and poets, Eastern yoga and Orthodox round dances, monarchists and Stalinists, Natsiks and priests, Buzova and Galkin, Peter and Fevronia, Romanovs and Stalin, and blah, blah, blah, and braces, braces, staples ...

And Dugin spread his black wings over all this wampuki - a gloomy, odious, scary personality, but most importantly, it is completely unclear why this demon is in the Moscow Art Theater?

Where Dugin appears, the process of destruction, death begins, and not only creative, but also physical. Suffice it to recall the fate of Gubanov, Zverev, Kuryokhin, Letov and many others with whom this ideologue-occultist came into contact. Was it not Dugin's dark energy that launched a jungle cat into the Moscow Art Theater and the destructive process now began here as well? If I were Boyakov, I would be careful not to make friends with this sociologist-philosopher, let alone drag him to the theater.

However, this is none of my business, just as it is none of my business what kind of performances Boyakov puts on, who gives roles in them. Even if this is the heroine of House-2 Buzova, the apotheosis of immorality, a synonym for vulgarity, which has nothing to do with the theater or the profession of an actress at all. It is true that in one interview Boyakov mentioned that Otar Ioseliani shot non-professional actors in his films. Well, firstly, comparing myself with Ioseliani is at least immodest, and secondly, cinema is not a theater.

Cinema is when you get together, shoot, run away. The theater is a living organism. Each theater is the guardian of traditions and values accumulated and built by generations of directors and actors.

Only a superficial person, far from the theater, can fail to understand how important this is. In other words, a temporary worker.

But I would not have written about this if Boyakov had not agreed to the point that he called Buzova the bearer of meaning.

Here, brothers, I perked up. What's the point? So far, I see only semantic hallucinations of the artistic director, and one of them is to compare Buzova with Warhol, putting an equal sign between them.

Warhol is a powerful, talented creator and creative of himself. Around his personality, a creative space was formed, collected, formed.

Buzova is an animated creature who jumped out of House-2 like a devil out of a snuffbox. She is not a singer, not an actress, not a musician, not an artist. She, not her own animate object, a fake, a skillfully cobbled together business project. Like Danya Milokhin, she is two gaping voids that bring dividends to their pygmalions.

This is where the meanings of Buzov's are buried. And there is no need to vparivat about spiritual bonds. Boyakov himself was asleep, saying: “23 million of Buzova's subscribers are people who intuitively feel the main trend of the time ... generally ridiculous - only 5 million) - there are some root properties - profession, family origin, husbands, background, etc. ... ".

Imagine a picture of how the artistic director of the academic theater sits on Instagram, examines the accounts of bloggers inflated with botex, counts subscribers and chooses which one to bring to the stage of the Moscow Art Theater?

Only as a bearer of spiritual bonds Boyakov will now explain to the youth, about whom he cares so much, that it is necessary to study, master a profession, knowledge, that intellect and culture are needed? No shit is needed now! To become Olya Buzova or Danya Milokhin, to receive fees comparable to Buzova's fees at the Moscow Art Theater, it is contraindicated and even harmful to study. Children should start with the HYIPs on the Web!

“As for those who are angry,” Boyakov continues, “who think that we called Buzova for the hype, they are either fools or simply envious. At the same time, it is important to recognize that a small number of people envy the Moscow Art Theater successes, and the overwhelming majority envy the number of Buzova's subscribers. "

Yes, Boyakov says everything correctly, and you need to earn money, fill the halls, and create a HYIP. Disingenuous is just not good. There is nothing to envy here. There are no Moscow Art Theater successes. There are no performances. But Buzova has subscribers. This is true. Therefore, Buzova is in the Moscow Art Theater solely for the hype and cash. I am writing about this, not a fool or an envious person.

As for theatrical experiments, who is against? But not on the stage of the famous Academic Art Theater. Open an experimental workshop at the theater, call Praktika-2, and go!

And then it doesn't matter that milokhins, buzovs, morgensterns appear on this experimental site, without charm, talent, without a profession. We are just accustomed to this. Our country has long been ruled by non-professionals: a journalist is in charge of space, a Chekist controls agriculture, General of the Army and Minister of Defense - a builder, moreover, he never served in the army.

The fact that Buzova is at the Moscow Art Theater, Milokhin at the economic forum, and Morgenstern was recognized as the person of the year by GQ magazine - it is not their fault, and even Boyakov is not guilty. They are all cogs in a huge mechanism called the state machine.

Demand creates supply. The demand is created by the public, and the public is formed by the state and financial elite. This whole damn business, corrupting and corrupting everyone and everything.

Everyone was outraged by the participation of Dani, a drug addict and a fagot with an oligophrenic face, at the SPIEF. However, thanks to Dan, each ruble brought Sber a profit of 12 rubles. As soon as Buzov was brought to the stage, all the tickets to the Moscow Art Theater were sold.

Boyakov is not to blame. He is the same hostage to the system, like the rest of us. But only to think of himself as a great theatrical reformer and create nonsense at the same time, to oppose himself to the whole world - there is something very unhealthy in this, and above all, in relation to himself, their capabilities and abilities.

And those who disagree, trying to enter into a dialogue or, even more so, objecting to Boyakov, immediately register themselves as enemies, envious people, note haters and couch clever people (this is also Boyakov's definition)

In a sense, Boyakov is a tragic figure; his attempt to win over an Orthodox audience in two years was unsuccessful. The aggressive attitude of the majority of Orthodox Christians to everything new, conservatism, ponderousness, sluggishness, and inertia played a role here.

And then, tired of fighting with windmills, the former bright, daring producer - provocateur woke up in Boyakovo, while spirituality, braces and other Orthodox gimmicks were blocked (temporarily or permanently, Buzova will show)

The result was not long in coming: the most talked about theater today is the Moscow Art Theater, the person of Buzov, and all the tickets have been sold. Therefore, the box office has been made.

However, there are still no performances worthy of the stage of the great renowned Russian theater of the Moscow Art Theater.

However, there is. Only one. The main Moscow Art Theater performance of these years is the story of the artistic director Eduard Boyakov.

Found a typo in the text? Select it and press ctrl + enter