Steamed rap. Dmitry Bykov about the battle Oxxxymiron vs. Purulent. “I’m interested in your opinion about the atheism of the Strugatskys”

Although God has forbidden duels, and it is unlikely that the regime will introduce them, you are so... (tired) that we will probably allow it. Friends of “Eaglet” and “Zarnitsa” have been honoring officers since they were five years old; you are crossing boundaries - and we are ready to cross. Since you are striving for such trouble of your own free will, and if you no longer want triumph in your own court, and since you beat our children, and not one of you has suffered in this way or that. , - then why not a duel? After all, even Pushkin, the Russian genius, was militant that your Sarmatian; You just need a couple of clarifications to understand the format, otherwise the challenge is informal.

Navalny hurt your honor, but, so to speak, Navalny is sitting. It turns out that you want to sit down?

Although you are a military commander, and your breasts are decorated all over, and in karate you are by no means a teapot, and, of course, in judo, but since you called the prisoner, then, reasoning in your mind, in order to mutilate this little body, you have to go to him .

If only for the sake of a duel, go down to the prisoners for a moment; By God, a nice picture - the head of the Russian Guard among them. Let force come out against force, let the troglodyte answer. Otherwise it turns out ugly: you’re not sitting, he’s sitting...

But for the sake of honor and citizenship, since you don’t want to go to prison, you can wait until he gets out and meet him at night. What a delight, what photos for young bloggers in Moscow: Navalny is sneaking out from behind bars, and here you are standing, in full parade , as if in a frame, in a cap, in a vest, seriously, threatening his hands and feet on that one’s ass. With a foot, with a swing, in semicircles, then with a hand between the eyes... However, the one called is free to choose a weapon, even though he is a thinking one otherwise, it’s an enemy, and a rogue, and rotten, and rotten... Otherwise, it will be a fight, and not a duel at all.

We know that you, of course, have the right, having first hung all the dogs, in our free superpower to beat him up just like that, even with five of us, without any rules, diligently, amicably, ardently - Peskov has already lent his reliable shoulder to you! We know that Navalny is a badass. He’s free to go out of his way! But, I repeat, this is a fight. Then, sorry, what does honor have to do with it? Of course, you are free to beat Navalny out of revenge; We don’t expect any special honor from the new symbols of the country, like oranges from aspen trees, like fat pensions from scrip...

But you said: a duel. You said it, not us. Navalny is not your “Pussy riot”: a man weighing about a hundred. Let him choose a weapon - be it a firearm, or anything else.

Of course, you are the boss, but during his house arrest he pumped himself up quite well and eats Doshirak regularly. The opponent, I think, is worthy. You will end the year gloriously: the rap battle “Oxymoron and Purulent” will have a rest against this background. Otherwise , seriously, they have adopted the fashion - with the approval of their fathers, to unleash unarmed freedom on fighters with batons! As soon as someone comes out, there you go: both in the brains and in the paddy wagon... Hey, a duel in this format is getting boring before our eyes. The question has already come up urgently: I myself am for power and for the regime, but if you are armed, let’s arm everyone ?Otherwise it’s not a duel and it’s not called that, but what? “Russia is in chaos.” “Shame.” “Dishonor.” “Mess.”

And in general, I’ll tell you, brothers, I don’t need to make “calls”, but you’ll get tired of fighting if fights are allowed! Weren't you expecting such surprises? I'm afraid that in our times the last way out is a challenge, and there's no better chance. We have descended to such a level - salvation is in a sword and a cloak. Neither court, nor complaints, nor fines help at all. We can It’s a rag to bend your neck, but we can suddenly turn on our minds: are you calling? Excellent! But we can call you too - let God’s will judge us! Let him give the last sign!

And we know a lot of words. Much cooler than “slug.”

Petr Sarukhanov / Novaya Gazeta

And on September 18 last year, Russia 24 discussed a topic whose very name completely breaks any pattern and causes acute forms of cognitive dissonance, to say the least. Former Minister of Culture Mikhail Shvydkoy called Purulent to your program on the “Culture” channel. "Festering on Culture". Yes, you didn’t think so, everything is so.

I rarely watch TV, but this, if I may say so, collision simply threw me into a stupor. Ironic presenters discussed the bad guys with indignant experts. Well, just a dressing down at a Komsomol meeting, nothing less. I had to look.

I must say that I also watched the battle itself, although I had no intention of watching it. The fact is that my good friend, leader of the Rostov group “Church of Childhood”, esthete and journalist Denis Tretyakov praised Gnoyny very much. He wrote that he was a genius. I trust Tretyakov’s opinion, because he is a more than well-read person and understands What there is a culture, how it lives and breathes and how it dies from time to time. That is, the opinion of Denis Anatolyevich is the most authoritative.

And, apparently, I’ll watch the battle again sometime. Although, in general, given my age, it’s probably time to start grumbling “the youth have gone!” Experts are grumbling... And they hope that good fellows will come to their senses. I’m very interested in what they themselves listened to? The late 80s - early 90s marked their rebellious youth, and, of course, I can imagine...

The last thing I want in this article is to analyze the battle itself. In fact, many have already done this. And justify why I agree with Denis Tretyakov. Basically, Dmitry Bykov partly this, in its own way exaggerating, explained everything. Well, that's how he sees it.

“He is a well-read person, his rhymes are excellent, he has an excellent command of rapping technique and memorizes huge chunks of text, and in case of memory errors he easily improvises. This is a gifted person, but much more rude, much more often getting personal. And for me it is absolutely obvious that all the so-called ideological patriots took his side and did not take it by chance,” Bykov asserts.

And, having come to his senses, he begins, as often happens, to contradict himself, arguing that for patriots “rough is synonymous with native, flat is synonymous with strong.” That is, the guy is practically a genius, but he is rude. Rude genius. How wonderful it is!

Objectively, Gnoiny is an ideological, well-read, educated guy, and at the same time he knows how to transform this ideological, well-read and educated spirit of his not into unreadable, unreadable dull you-know-what, but into killer texts that are listened to by millions. Profanity and so-called “reduced” language?

And let's talk about this. Why is that? Why does a smart guy in his thirties “work” in this format and be perceived not only by kids, who “don’t care what, as long as mom and grandma gasp,” but also by fully grown people?

In my opinion, one must grow to accept such creativity. Otherwise, nothing is completely clear. That is, first - Russian and foreign classics, and then - the battle between Purulent and Oksimiron. If otherwise, well, yes, bro, your parents will groan, but you’re unlikely to get it.

In my opinion, the fact is that the intelligentsia gradually discredited itself. And your style of behavior - including. Parodying aristocrats without being them. Yes, yes, the same thing - “not to be, but to seem.”

As the writer quite correctly noted, speaking at the Tradition festival last summer, Zakhar Prilepin, classical Russian literature was created by people from noble families, who were not only writers, poets, critics and philosophers. Perhaps first of all, despite all their rebellion, they were patriots and, when necessary, did not raise a howl about “zinc boys” and “imperial ambitions”, but went to fight, and not because someone forced them, but simply because it was correct in their coordinate system.

Such were the Russian intellectuals, Russian aristocrats, who, without any questions, went to expose their heads to bullets wherever the Empire sent them. Pushkin, Lermontov, Derzhavin, Davydov... They fought Napoleon, participated in the suppression of the Pugachev rebellion and the Polish uprising, annexed Finland, fought with Sweden. And, of course, the Caucasus, so well known from the school literature course, glorified in poetry and prose!

The so-called “sixties” became a parody of the “Golden Age” of Russian culture, Russian literature, although they loved to talk about continuity. It was these cultured, swear words, which seemed to be unknown, that were slowly eroding a great country, my Motherland - the USSR. They rejoiced at the shooting of the White House, the death of people...

“For me it was the ending of a detective story. I enjoyed it. I couldn’t stand these people, and even in this situation I had absolutely no pity for them,” these are, if anything, the words Bulat Okudzhava. Doesn't fit with his songs, but still.

Among the signatories of “letter 42,” which demanded that the government carry out repressions against patriots, there are many such thought leaders, in particular Bella Akhmadulina, Yuri Davydov, Rimma Kazakova, Anatoly Pristavkin, Lev Acceleration, Marietta Chudakova, Lyudmila Alekseeva, Ales Adamovich and others.

“Crush the reptile!” - screamed Akhedzhakova in 1993, addressing Yeltsin. Well, yes, “the conscience of the nation”, “the voice of the people”... Not like, as they now say, the Vatniks and Colorados who opposed them Alexander Prokhanov, Vasily Belov, Yuri Bondarev, Vladimir Bondarenko, Valentin Rasputin...

A little later, the same “consciences” and “voices” of not very clear which nations and peoples morally and informationally supported, surprisingly, partly the Yeltsin regime, partly the Chechen separatism with which he fought. The reason for this seemingly schizophrenia is simple: all this was rapidly destroying what was left of the Soviet Union, which they hated so much. And they hate those who, due to age, are still alive and strong...

This public showed itself brightly and prominently in very recent times - Crimea, Donbass. The culture, with extremely rare exceptions, turned out to have a rotten bottom. You can list all those who, then and now, are shouting that it is necessary to return Crimea and withdraw imaginary friends... that is, imaginary Russian troops from Donbass and stop supporting the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics. That those who died in Odessa are to blame themselves and that in general it was a provocation of the Russian special services. And, of course, the crowning one - “they fired at themselves!”

You know, you can list all this abomination endlessly... But it’s very unpleasant. But this is what seemingly educated, well-read people say and write selflessly. Surely they can quote Russian classics by heart. I can imagine what Pushkin and Lermontov would have done with them... Makarevich, who was recently outraged by the installation of a monument to the designer in Moscow Mikhail Kalashnikov, and before that he demanded the return of Crimea, I am silent about his position on the Donbass, it is so wild - would he start shooting with Lermontov, that is the question.

Using the example of many of my friends - artists, poets, writers - I see how Russian culture is stratified. And this, in my opinion, is correct. You can't sit on two chairs. Avoiding conflict is always fraught with two conflicts. If you want to “not offend anyone,” everyone will come. Usually, those who like to sit still find themselves in the crossfire, and as a result, both “camps” dislike them...

One of the extreme consequences of this stratification is in a number of cases the rejection of the “intelligent”, but in fact, of course, with the prefix “pseudo-”, way of behaving, speaking, etc. Thus, the poets of the Silver Age went to cheap taverns, to , as they said then, “rabbles” - not because they had fallen low, but because the thoroughly rotten “bohemia” was too disgusting for them. Yes, in quotes.

It is at this point, looking at the binge-watching cultural woman, that you want to do anything to be as far away from her as possible. So that she herself tries to be as far away as possible. Don’t write in a “lofty calm”, but fight – with attacks and swearing in the very heart of a drunken raging crowd of teenagers. Not because the level is such, the level is “calm” as it allows and even beyond that. But because it became disgusting, and the energy of denial of the “little world”, “paradise” resulted in a rap battle. And, if anything, yes, this is culture.

As in the song of the group “Instructions for Survival,” a dedication to the poet of the same Silver Age, Alexei Kruchenykh: “I will become a cop, a p***ast, a poet, a monk! Anything to make you not like me!”

Or, in the words of Gnoyny, in which, in order not to completely shock the public and Roskomnadzor, we will slightly replace one word: “I’d rather die with a stupid noname than become famous and become you!”

https://www.site/2016-03-30/spiker_mid_rf_vstupila_v_poeticheskiy_batl_s_literatorom_dmitriem_bykovym

“Who needs Hesse’s delights? After all, we have no one to play with beads with.”

The speaker of the Russian Foreign Ministry entered into a poetic “battle” with writer Dmitry Bykov

The official speaker of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, tried herself in the role of a poet, responding in verse to the writer Dmitry Bykov. The reason was the latter’s poem, published on the Sobesednik portal and dedicated to the creation of the People’s Football League, which was opened by ministers Sergei Lavrov and Sergei Shoigu.

Bykov ridicules the scale of the event, comparing the opening of a football league to the search for a national idea. “So the wheel turned: Having been glamorous for the sake of appearance - Go to the yard! Dvorovo everything: War, culture, speaker of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,” writes the writer.

Zakharova published her answer on her Facebook page. “Who needs Hesse’s delights? After all, we have no one to play glass beads with. Now we have begun to compose verses for the forest orderlies,” her poem says. Also in the opus addressed to Bykov, it is noted that “the courtyard style was set by you.”

For the convenience of readers, we present both poems in full so that their literary merits can be compared.

Dmitry Bykov:

I can't contain my emotions

And I’m cold with delight:

Found Lavrov, discovered Shoigu

National idea!

She is no worse than the Brazilian one.

Play, people, move your feet!

Let's get everyone out of the garages

And we'll tempt you with the football league.

They threaten to take away the World Cup

(They won’t be able to take it away, but they threaten) -

And we are ready, we are not sorry,

Nobody will feel remorse.

We are well protected

Your sanctions are unhealthy

And we will conduct it within the country

Championship of yard teams.

This is how the wheel turned:

Having been glamorous for the sake of appearance -

Let's go to the yard!

Yard everything:

War, culture, Foreign Ministry speaker.

Lavrov and with him Shoigu -

Two kings of trump suit,

And I would be an external enemy

Everything became clear a long time ago.

The gloss has been discarded, no longer useful.

People's cinema has arrived

People's sport and people's leader.

The money is gone, the work is gone,

There's a howl on the air, there's nothing in the budget.

Our era will be called

Sometimes street football.

Maria Zakharova:

The courtyard style was set by you.

"And we? We don’t shine with anything.”

For ease of understanding only

We're talking in the yard.

Who needs Hesse's delights?

After all, we have no one to play glass beads with.

Creative editor of the site Dmitry Bykov talks about the reasons for the popularity of fights between rappers.

The genre of battles (verbal duels) has become incredibly popular in our country.

Some time ago, Girkin-Strelkov clashed with. The battle took place in the form of prosaic debates, with no clear winner. But the recent fight between two rappers broke all records: about 5 million views! What is behind this phenomenon?

More Purulent won

The idea of ​​holding debates, elections and a direct line between the president and the people in the format of a rap battle has already been expressed. Gnoiny, aka Slava CPSU, aka Karelin, aka Vyacheslav Mashnov, and Oxxxymiron, aka Miron Fedorov, set the main format of the coming era in the August St. Petersburg competition.

There have been rap battles for a long time; in the last three years, this format has spread widely in both capitals, but neither has attracted such attention. There seem to be two reasons.

Firstly, no matter how you slice it, Oksimiron and Gnoyny are two of the most famous and scandalous characters in Russian rap: Gnoyny (b. 1990) - a patented troublemaker - managed to offend almost all his comrades and quarreled with the Chechens, to whom he had to apologize for a joke about Chechen girls (the same text also mentioned Armenian and Chinese girls, but Armenia and China do not have charismatic leaders). This gave Oksimiron a reason to call him in the recent battle “the man tortured by Ramzan” - with an exquisite reference to Ilf and Petrov.

Purulent actively and not always appropriately swears, is inventively rude and calmly, not to say indifferently, accepts oncoming attacks. It's all like pus off a goose. Oksimiron (b. 1985) is the complete opposite of Mashnov, despite some - and inevitable - similarities in techniques: he is considered an avant-garde artist, his albums have long stepped beyond the boundaries of rap and staked out a special genre - romance in tracks. This is “Gorgorod” - the most famous and discussed rap album in recent years: it is not just a cycle of eleven ballads, but a story with a tragic plot and political overtones.

Oksimiron is often, and not without reason, called a serious poet; writers who follow fashion trends consider it good form to speak flatteringly about him and attend his concerts. Compared to Slava CPSU, Oksimiron is pure sophistication, and therefore the more Purulent one predictably won the sensational battle. In fairness, we note that the texture of poetry - rhymes, metaphors, puns - is no thinner in Slava CPSU, he’s just rougher, but he read no less poetry.

As long as there is a battle, there will be no Maidan

The second reason for everyone's attention to battle is that the genre of the year is duel. Everything is going to the point that the stars, showmen and politicians of the second row (in the first row we have one person, and he is not inclined to public battles) will have to tear each other apart in front of an admiring public. There is no need, in my opinion, to see this as an encouraging sign: like everyone is tired of lies and censorship, they want discussions and bright actions. No, the current general longing for bloody showdowns is akin to the craving of late Rome for gladiatorial fights, which, however, were later banned anyway.

Let me remind you that the victorious gladiator could receive freedom - and today's victorious slaves can also receive something like a guaranteed right to publicly express themselves out loud, as well as a kind of immunity (there is no other freedom now).

General fatigue with censorship - this, by the way, really exists - is expressed not at all in interest in classified information, but in a protest rampant of obscene language; the lack of prospects and widespread rot lead not to protests, but to impotent anger, which is discharged in transport, on the roads and in the family. Battle is the main genre of modern Russian life, and the authorities like it, because as long as there is a battle, there will be no Maidan. After all, taking out irritation on each other is the surest way to maintain the existing state of affairs.

If we evaluate the duel between Miron and Slava from a purely literary point of view, both did a great job, jerked off, so to speak, but there was no smell of improvisation here. I am, however, a supporter of carefully prepared improvisations. The poems are strong, sometimes cool: “How I have changed, although sales are as they were! You, like me, apologized - but you weren’t even beaten!” “You have become, like me, a businessman, but in words you are a commissar.” The rhymes are quite decent: Grishaeva - scoured, the screen - played, Olimpiysky - on the list... Reading and listening is contagious, and, damn it, bitch, really gradually, step by step, you yourself begin to rap. It’s not that this is all graphomania, hooliganism, drunkenness, mutual arrogance - to hell with it, the problem is different: it’s also a high art for me to throw shit at each other! It's not fun and tasteless.

Rap as the main trope of modern poetry

The tradition of poetry competitions has deep roots in both Europe and Asia. Troubadours and trouvères competed in glorifying their beautiful ladies. Dzhambul Dzhabayev - there was such a legendary akyn, although disputes about the authorship of his songs do not subside - he became famous as a repeated winner of aitys, singing competitions, when performers, just like in a rap battle, stand against each other and conduct a poetic dialogue. The most famous ballad of François Villon was written at a poetry competition in Blois: Charles of Orleans gave ten poets a theme (or line) and chose the best variation. Competitions between minnesingers, ashugs and Russian folk geniuses (one was just described by Turgenev in the story “Singers”) were no less popular spectacles than knightly tournaments or wall-to-wall battles.

One thing is sad: when singers compete in singing the praises of ladies (like troubadours) or in exposing social injustice (like akyns), this can lead to the appearance of masterpieces and generally elevates the soul. But when they inventively shit on each other, recalling little-respected facts from little-known biographies, or compete in knowledge of fecal vocabulary, this only indicates that society has no other entertainment left than to humiliate and dominate.

Of course, one should not take all these mutual invective seriously: I admit that in life Gnoyny and Miron are the most tender friends and there is no more mutual hatred in their attacks than in a boxing match. One should also not, like Gennady Onishchenko, be indignant at the decline of morals: poetry, even if it is 100% hateful, is still nobler and more spiritually beneficial than no matter how sublime prose in the mouths of hardened people’s representatives. Unfortunately, it’s also not worth exaggerating the popularity of rap in teenage circles: my son, for example, listened to “Gorgorod” many times, but he and his circle are still not representatives of the masses.

Rap, for all its rudeness, is in no way a thieves’ culture, and certainly not chanson. Rap is the modern, most vibrant and successful form of existence of Russian poetry, which previously transformed rock in the same way, pushing music into the background. The basis for the success of “Aquarium” and “Nautilus” was still the poetry of BG and Kormiltsev, their vague, flickering precision. The only bad thing is that in any Russian competition today, the one who is shameless and simpler wins. But this is not so bad - Akhmatova said that poetry should be shameless.

But the terrible thing is that the most arrogant and cheeky futurists after the revolution obediently became state poets and turned poetry into a kind of industry. So if I see Gnoyny in the new “Windows of GROWTH”, there will be nothing to be surprised about.

The generation of atheists in Russia was brought up by mediocre teaching of the Law of God, which is very bad, but there is such an effect. If they are now being fed militarism, it means they will grow up to be staunch pacifists. We should be happy about this.

“You expressed the idea that Russian culture is based not only on Orthodox roots, but also on pagan and atheistic ones. How great, in your opinion, was the element of paganism and atheism?

Very big. Let's see what the element of paganism is in Russian Christianity. It's huge. And the ritualization of Russian life is also pagan things. You know, there is a very good joke about Russian Christianity. The trio decides where to spend their vacation. God the Father says: “We should probably visit Israel - after all, my chosen people.” The Holy Spirit says: “We should probably go to Europe - they’re greedy there.” And Christ says: “And I, perhaps, will go to Russia. It seems to me that I have never been there." I have a feeling that Christianity has yet to truly come to Russia, that Christianity is still our future. I have a feeling that it hasn't really been mastered.

“Your opinion about the atheism of the Strugatskys is interesting.”

There is nothing to argue about here. The Strugatskys, of course, were atheists. Another thing is that they behaved in a Christian way: courageously, in solidarity. This often happens to atheists. It seems to me, even no less often than with believers.

“You call non-believers “earthworms”- whistle, never in my life. - Do you really think that a person who does not want to share the generally accepted mythology is less moral, caring or humane?

No, I do not think so. On the contrary, I am very fascinated by atheists. They are moral and without the idea of ​​retribution, and in general for them there is no miracle in the world. I sympathize with them warmly. But what kind of “earthworms” are they? They are sufferers.

“A non-believer relies on common sense, and not on reasoning about what no one understands. This is at least fair."

No, that's not fair. You see, calling a reduced, strictly rational picture of the world honesty is such cheap empiricism! I like people who admit the possibility of a miracle, this is interesting to me. For some reason, some atheists insist with particular malice that miracles do not happen. They want the world to be only what we see. Firstly, we see a very small part of the world, and we do not see deeply enough. Secondly, everyone sees what they want, and this is completely obvious. If it is more convenient for someone to live in a world in which there is no miracle, for God’s sake, please. I can't interfere. Just don't call yourself honest. It’s like Chekhov’s Doctor Lvov: he always calls himself an honest man, but sees only nasty things.

“In one of the programs you expressed the idea that atheism as a worldview seems uninteresting to you. Could you clarify what you meant?”

Well, what is there to explain? That the visible world is the limit, the visible world is what we can count on to the maximum? That there is no mystery in the world, everything can be scientifically explained? You see, this may arouse scientific curiosity, but it does not arouse in me that high, transcendental, mystical interest that the hypothesis of God still arouses in me. Therefore, it just seems to me that atheism is a flatter picture of the world, that’s all, and religion is such a 3D thing. Many people think the opposite. I don't force them to think my way. Let them too (forgive the rude word) shut up.