Questionnaire "Initial assessment of drug addiction" (G. Latyshev and others). Baseline assessment of drug addiction (Latyshev G.V. et al.) Latyshev a Lenin and Jews

14 quotes from Lenin that freeze the blood. Declassified telegrams of Vladimir Ilyich and excerpts from the multivolume works of Lenin, from which the blood freezes.On January 21, 1924, Vladimir Ulyanov (Lenin), the ideological inspirer of the October Revolution of 1917 and the first leader, passed away Soviet state.

In the years that have passed since the death of the leader, a real cult of Lenin has been created. His body still lies in the center of the capital as a symbol of an entire era.

We have collected 14 quotes from Lenin that freeze the blood from Ilyich's declassified telegrams:

1 . “… Great plan! Finish it together with Dzerzhinsky. Under the guise of "green" (we will blame them later) we will walk 10-20 miles and outweigh the kulaks, priests, landowners. Bonus: 100,000 RUB for the hanged man ... "
Litvin A. L. "The Red and White Terror in Russia in 1917-1922"

2. “War is not a life but a death war for the rich and hangers-on, bourgeois intellectuals ... they must be dealt with, at the slightest violation ... In one place they will go to jail ... In another, they will be put to clean toilets. In the third, they will be provided, upon leaving the punishment cell, with yellow tickets ... In the fourth, they will be shot on the spot ... The more varied, the better, the richer the overall experience will be ... "
December 24 - 27, 1917 (V.I.

3. "... Can you still tell Teru to prepare everything for the burning of Baku completely, in the event of an invasion, and to announce it in print in Baku."
June 3, 1918 (Volkogonov D.A. Lenin. Political portrait. Lenin handwritten order to the chairman of the Baku Cheka S. Ter-Gabrielyan)

4. “Penza, Gubispolkom. ... to carry out a merciless mass terror against the kulaks, priests and White Guards; dubious to be locked up in a concentration camp outside the city.
August 9, 1918 (Lenin V.I.

5. “Comrades Kuraev, Bosch, Minkin and other Penza communists.
Comrades! The uprising of the five kulak volosts should lead to ruthless suppression. This is required by the interest of the entire revolution, for now the "last decisive battle" with the kulaks has been taken. A sample must be given.
Hang (certainly hang so that people can see) at least 100 notorious kulaks, rich men, bloodsuckers.
Post their names.
Take all the bread from them.
Appoint hostages - according to yesterday's telegram.
Make it so that people can see, tremble, know, shout for hundreds of miles around the people: they will strangle and strangle the bloodsuckers of the kulaks.
Wire receipt and execution.
Your Lenin. "
(Latyshev A.G. Declassified Lenin. M., 1996. S. 57.).

6 "Saratov, (to the representative of the People's Commissariat for Food) Paikes. ... I advise you to appoint your superiors and shoot the conspirators and hesitants, without asking anyone and not allowing idiotic red tape. "
August 22, 1918 (Lenin V.I.

7. “Sviyazhsk, Trotsky.
I am surprised and alarmed by the slowdown in the operation against Kazan, especially if it is correctly reported to me that you have the full opportunity to destroy the enemy with artillery. In my opinion, one cannot spare the city and postpone it longer, for merciless extermination is necessary ... "
September 10, 1918 (Lenin V.I. Complete collection of works. Vol. 50, p. 178).

8. “As for foreigners, I advise you not to rush to deportation. Isn't it better to go to a concentration camp ... "
June 3, 1919 (Lenin V.I. Complete collection of works. T. 50, p. 335).

9. "All those living on the territory of the RSFSR, foreign submitted from the ranks of the bourgeoisie of those states that are conducting hostile and military actions against us, at the age of 17 to 55, should be imprisoned in concentration camps ..."
(Latyshev A.G. Declassified Lenin. M., 1996, S. 56).

10. “… Far from all peasants understand that free trade in grain is a crime against the state. “I have produced bread, this is my product, and I have the right to trade in it” - this is how the peasant thinks, out of habit, out of old times. And we say that this is a crime against the state. "
November 19, 1919 (Lenin V.I.

11 ."T. Lunacharsky
... I advise you to put all theaters in a coffin.
Drug education should be engaged not in theater, but in literacy ”.
Lenin, August 26, 1921 (Lenin V.I.

12 . “... I come to the unconditional conclusion that it is now that we must give the most decisive and merciless battle to the Black Hundred clergy and suppress their resistance with such brutality that they will not forget this for several decades ...
How more representatives of the reactionary clergy and the reactionary bourgeoisie, if we manage to shoot on this occasion, all the better. "
March 19, 1922 (Bulletin of the Central Committee of the CPSU. 1990. No. 4. P. 190-193).

13. “... Take military measures, ie try to punish Latvia and Estonia in a military manner (for example, "on the shoulders" of Balakhovich to cross the border for 1 mile somewhere and hang 100-1000 of their officials and the rich there) ”.
Lenin, August 1920 (Latyshev A.G. Declassified Lenin. M., 1996).

14. “... The court must not eliminate terror; to promise this would be self-deception or deception, but to substantiate and legitimize it in principle, clearly, without falsehood and without embellishment. "
May 17, 1922 (Lenin V.I.
These were 14 quotes from Lenin that make your blood run cold.

Transcript

1 Appendix 7 Questionnaire "Baseline assessment of drug addiction" (GV Latyshev et al.) Long-term studies conducted over the past 30 years have shown that the development of drug addiction is caused by numerous internal and "environmental" risk factors. Moreover, evidence suggests that people who are exposed to several factors simultaneously are more likely to develop drug addiction. Identification of risk factors for drug addiction allows you to reduce or completely eliminate their activity, to reduce the spread and severity of the consequences of drug addiction. The effectiveness of the risk-based approach is supported by research on prevention programs. These studies prove that programs aimed at reducing the activity of risk factors and increasing the activity of protective factors have good results in preventing the use of psychoactive substances. The effectiveness of prevention from these positions is determined by the influence of risk and protection factors in four areas: society, school, family and peer group (individual). Examples of risk factors include the availability of drugs (society), family conflict (family), lack of interest in school life (school), early initiation of drug use (peer group). In turn, protective factors are associated with a decrease in the likelihood of manifesting "unhealthy" behavior (NIDA, 1997). It is believed that by influencing risk and protective factors, it is possible to reduce substance abuse among adolescents. The model of risk and protection factors is based on the process of determining indicators (factors) that affect the likelihood of a person becoming involved in drug use and related problems, and working with these factors identified for a given territory at a given time. both risk factors and protective factors. Thus, in the most general outline, all prevention work is based on reducing the activity of risk factors and increasing the effectiveness of protective factors. Traditionally, risk and protective factors are divided into three groups: "personal", "family" and "social". The latter, in turn, can be divided into those affecting the environment of friends (inner circle), general social and "school", which we single out especially when talking about adolescents. Here is a list of the most important, according to researchers, risk and protection factors. 1. Personal factors. Success in realizing one's aspirations, awareness of life prospects, attitude to the possibility of drug use, attitude to violence, ways of manifesting protest reactions, the level of emotional maturity, the formed system of values ​​and attachments, crisis situations, the level of aspirations and self-esteem, the presence of immutable authorities. 2. Family factors. The system of distribution of roles, rights and responsibilities in the family, the control system, the level of conflict in the family, family traditions and the attitude of family members to the use of drugs and other psychoactive substances, the system of relations and the level of trust between parents and children, the emotional background of the family, parental expectations, competence parents in the context of upbringing and the presence of a unified approach to the upbringing of a child. 3. The environment of peers. The attitude of the “significant environment” to drug use, the level of social acceptability of behavior and the socio-psychological climate of the adolescent group, the role of the adolescent in the peer group, the breadth of the circle of contacts, the attitude of the adolescent group towards adults, the value orientations of the adolescent group.

2 4. General social factors. Norms, policy and legislation on drugs, legislation in the field of youth policy, availability of drugs, development of the system of social and psychological assistance to young people, level of disorganization of the community, prevalence of violence, social traditions, position of the media, organization of leisure, youth participation in public life. 5. "School" factors. Academic achievement, frequent transitions from school to school, participation of teachers in the educational process and the educational system adopted at school, relations with teachers (level of trust), socio-psychological climate, participation of teachers in prevention, communication between family and school, participation in school government, desire to learn, regular school attendance. To study risk factors, it is proposed to use a special research tool that allows you to determine the priorities in the implementation of preventive programs (Shipitsyna L.M., 2001, St. Petersburg). It shows which factors in a given area most significantly increase the risk of substance abuse and which ones, that is, to conduct an initial assessment of the situation. The aim of the study is to identify the most effective risk and protection factors in the problem of drug abuse in the territory. Subject of research: identifying a combination of risk factors and protection from drug addiction. Teenagers are invited to answer the questions of the questionnaire. The research is anonymous. Teenagers only celebrate their age. The instructions emphasize the importance of the personal opinion of each teenager and the need for answers based on their own ideas about this problem. It also notes the need for an independent assessment, without options for joint discussion between research participants. The instructions emphasize the importance of the personal opinion of each teenager and the need for answers based on their own ideas about this problem. It also notes the need for an independent assessment, without options for joint discussion between research participants. To process the results, the following risk and protection factors were identified: 1. Family: Relations with parents (questions 36, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79) Change of residence (questions 60, 65) Control system in the family (questions 67 , 70, 71, 72, 73) Conflict in the family (question 69). 2. Individual: Success (questions 10, 15) Attitudes toward substance use (questions 30, 31, 34, 38, 43, 44, 45, 46) Attitudes toward violence (questions 26, 27, 37) Reactions (questions 28 ) The presence of positive life guidelines (questions 32, 33, 40, 41, 42) Experience of using psychoactive substances (questions 47, 48) The presence of crisis situations (question 66) The slogan of life (question 82). 3. Relationship with peers: Influence of the environment. Association with asocial behavior (questions 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 35) Socio-psychological climate of the microenvironment (questions 63, 81). 4. Community (social): Participation in social activities (question 29)

3 Attitudes towards religion (question 39) Availability of psychoactive substances (questions 49, 50, 51) Social “closeness” with drug users (questions 52, 53, 54, 68) Relationship with the microsocial (questions 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 61) 5. School: Academic achievement (questions 6, 16) Attendance (questions 7) Participation in school self-government (questions 8, 9, 17, 18) Organization of school leisure (question 11) Relations with teachers (questions 12, 80) Socio-psychological climate (question 13) Interest in learning (question 19) Change of school (question 62, 64) Relationship between family and school (question 14). CONTENTS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE Instructions: We invite you to take part in the study of adolescents' attitudes towards their health and answer the questions of the questionnaire. This research is aimed at asking your opinion about certain aspects of your life, including your friends, family and neighbors. Your answers to these questions will be kept confidential. This means that they will remain a secret. Please do not write your name on the profile. The questionnaire is simple to fill out. There are no right or wrong answers here. Read the questionnaire carefully and choose the answer option that seems most accurate to you. The selected answer (the letter of the selected answer) should be noted in the answer form (see at the end of the questionnaire). If you did not find such an answer, mark the one that is closest to you. (Please note that the questions of GV Latyshev's questionnaire begin with the 6th question !!!) 6. What grades did you usually get at school last year? A) Mostly excellent; B) Mostly good; C) Generally satisfactory; D) Mostly unsatisfactory. 7. How many lessons have you missed in the past four weeks? A) None; B) No more than four; D) More than ten; C) No more than ten. 8. In my school, pupils are given the opportunity to self-government 9. Teachers involve me in extracurricular activities 10. My teachers celebrate my good performance and let me know it

4 11. At my school there are ample opportunities for participation in sports, club and other school life 12. At my school, students can freely talk one-on-one with the teacher 13. At my school I feel safe 14. The school informs my parents about my successes 15. Teachers encourage my efforts 16. Are your grades better than most of your classmates? 17. Opportunities are provided for me to participate in the community activities of class 18. Do you feel the importance and significance of the school work in which you participate? A) Almost always; B) Often; C) Sometimes; D) Never. 19. How interesting are school subjects to you? A) Very interesting and developing B) Quite interesting C) Not very interesting D) Not very interesting or not at all interesting 20. How much, in your opinion, are peers mistaken when committing theft

5 C) Slightly wrong; 21. To what extent, in your opinion, are peers mistaken, provoking a fight В) They are slightly mistaken; 22. To what extent, in your opinion, are peers mistaken when they skip school when parents do not know about it B) They are slightly mistaken; 23. To what extent, in your opinion, are peers mistaken when drinking alcoholic beverages В) They are slightly mistaken; 24. To what extent, in your opinion, are peers who smoke cigarettes wrong? B) They are slightly wrong; 25. To what extent, in your opinion, are peers of the same age who smoke marijuana or use other drugs wrong? B) They are slightly wrong; 26. Do you consider it possible to defend your interests with the use of physical force? 27. Do you agree with the statement that the end justifies the means? 28. I often do the opposite of what my parents tell me in order to anger them 29. Are you a member of any informal social movement or social organization? B) Yes 30. What are the chances that you will look cool if you smoke a cigarette?

6 A) None or very few B) A little C) Quite large D) Very large 31. What are the chances that you will look cool if you drink alcoholic beverages? A) None or very few B) A little C) Quite large D) Very large 32. What are the chances that you will look cool if you are active in sports? A) None or very few B) A little C) Quite large D) Very large 33. What are the chances that you will look cool if you study well? A) None or very few B) A little C) Quite large D) Very large 34. What are the chances that you will look cool if you smoke marijuana or other drugs? A) None or very few B) A little C) Quite large D) Very large 35. You and a friend are looking at CDs in a music store. You notice that he / she has stolen the disc. He / she says, smiling, “Which one do you want? Come on, take it while no one sees. " No one is around, no workers, no other customers. What are you going to do? A) Pick up the disc and leave the store B) Turn a deaf ear C) Tell him / her to return the disc D) Play it as a joke and tell him / her to put the disc back in the evening and you are going to friend when your mother asks where you are going. You say, "I'm just going to hang out with my friends." She won't let go of you. What are you going to do? A) In any case, go B) Argue with her C) Come up with some reason, say when you come back and ask permission to go D) Say nothing and stay at home to do your own thing 37. You visited another part of the city, and you don't know anyone your age there. You are walking down the street, and a stranger of your age comes towards you. He is about your height, and could pass by, but he pushes you on purpose, so that you almost fall. What will you say or do? A) Push the person by yourself B) Say "excuse me" and move on C) Say "look where you are going" and go further D) Swear and leave

7 38. You are at someone's party and one of your friends offers you an alcoholic drink. What will you say or do? A) Have a drink B) Say to your friend: “No thanks, I don’t drink” and invite your friend to do something else C) Say: “No, thank you” and leave D) Politely excuse yourself, say that you still have business and leave 39. How often do you attend church services and other religious events? A) Never B) Rarely C) 1 2 times a month D) About once a week or more 40. It is important to think before doing anything 41. Do you consider yourself a “right” person 42. I often act without thinking about the consequences 43. What do you think is the probability of harm for people if they smoke one or more packs of cigarettes per day A) None B) Low risk C) Moderate risk D) High risk 44. What do you think is the probability of harm to people if they smoke marijuana A) None B) Low risk C) Moderate risk D) High risk 45. What do you think is the probability of harm to people if they consume energy drinks A) None B) Low risk C) Moderate risk D) High risk 46. What do you think is the probability of harm to people if they consume alcoholic beverages at least once a week A) None B) Low risk C) Moderate risk D) High risk 47. How often have you smoked cigarettes during the past 30 days?

8 A) Never smoked (a) B) Less than one cigarette per day C) 1 to 10 cigarettes per day D) More than 10 cigarettes per day 48. Have you ever tried drugs? B) Yes 49. If someone from your close acquaintances of the same age wanted to buy beer, wine or spirits, is it easy to do it? A) Very easy B) Quite easy C) Quite difficult D) Very difficult 50. If someone from your close friends and peers wants to buy a cigarette, is it easy to do it? A) Very easy B) Quite easy C) Quite difficult D) Very difficult 51. If someone from your close friends and peers wants to buy drugs, is it easy to do it? A) Very easy B) Quite easy C) Quite difficult D) Very difficult 52. Do you know any adults who have used marijuana or other drugs in the past? 53. Do you know adults who have sold or dealt with drugs in the past? 54. Do you know adults who have done illegal things in the past that could lead to complications in relations with the police 55. If I have to leave, I will miss the people who have surrounded me lately B) Rather not C) Rather yes D) Yes 56. My neighbors notice when I am doing a good job and let me know it B) Rather no C) Rather yes D) Yes 57. I love the area in which I live B) Rather no C) Rather yes

9 D) Yes 58. Many adults live next to me with whom I can talk about important issues B) Rather no C) Rather yes D) Yes 59. People often change in my environment B) Rather no C) Rather yes D) Yes 60. How many times, since kindergarten, have you changed your place of residence. A) Never B) 1 or 2 times C) 5 or 6 times D) 7 or more times 61. There are people among adults who are proud of you when you do something well. 62. Did you change school last year. 63. You feel safe when you are with your loved ones and friends. 64. How many times have you changed schools in your entire life? A) Never B) 1 2 times C) 3 4 times D) 5 6 times E) 7 or more times 65. Have you changed your place of residence in the last year? 66. Are there situations in your life that seem hopeless to you? A) Constantly B) Often C) Sometimes D) Almost never 67. There are clear rules in my family.

10 68. Has anyone in your family ever had an alcohol / drug problem? 69. Members of my family often offend and shout at each other A) No B) Rather no C) Rather yes D) Yes 70. One of my parents always knows where and with whom I spend time A) No B) Rather no C ) Rather yes D) Yes 71. My parents want me to call when I’m going to come home late A) No B) Rather no C) Rather yes D) Yes 72. Will your parents notice if you drink beer, wine or hard alcohol drinks without their permission A) No B) Rather no C) Rather yes D) Yes 73. There is a rule in my family on refusal to use alcohol and drugs A) No B) Rather no C) Rather yes D) Yes 74. Your parents notice when you are doing something good and let you know about it A) Never or almost never B) Sometimes C) Often D) Always 75. How often do your parents say that they are proud of your actions A) Never or almost never B) Sometimes C) Often D) Always 76. Do you share your thoughts and feelings with your dad or mom (or adults who replace them) A) Yes B) No C) Rarely D) Not always 77. If you have personal problems, you can turn to mom or dad (or adults who replace them) for help A) Yes B) No

11 C) Rarely D) Not always 78. What do you usually do in difficult life situations? A) I turn to my parents or relatives for help B) I turn to my friends for help C) I turn to specialists D) I rely only on myself 79. When solving your problems, do you take into account the opinions of your parents A) Yes B) Sometimes C) Rarely 80 When solving your problems, do you take into account the opinions of teachers A) Yes B) Sometimes C) Rarely 81. When solving your problems, do you take into account the opinions of friends A) Yes B) Sometimes C) Rarely ANSWER FORM (GV Latyshev's questionnaire) Enter Please see the letters of the selected answers in the "Answer Form". Question Answer Question Answer Question Answer Question Answer

Questionnaire "Baseline assessment of drug addiction" (GV Latyshev et al.) Long-term studies conducted over the past 30 years have shown that the development of drug addiction is caused by numerous internal and

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND YOUTH POLICY OF THE KHANTY-MANSIYA AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT-YUGRA

1 Appendix 1 to the order of the Department of Education and Youth Policy of the Autonomous Okrug and the Department of Healthcare of the Autonomous Okrug from the Action Plan for the socio-psychological

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND YOUTH POLICY OF THE KHANTY-MANSIYSK AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT OF YUGRA

Republican budgettig psychology-medicine-social duza chedirer top "Sayzyral" State budgetary educational institution Republican budgetary center of psychological, medical and social support "Sayzyral" 1.1.1 of the Ministry of Education

S Verdlovskaya Oblast Municipal government institution "Education Department of the Urban Okrug Bogdanovich" (MKU UO GO Bogdanovich) PRIKA Z "02" March 2016 102 Bogdanovich

Identification of risk factors contributing to the formation of negative manifestations among children and adolescents October 07, 2016 M.N. Utitsyna, Head of Department of the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Karelia Formation

Analysis of the results of monitoring the involvement in the use of psychoactive substances of pupils of 6-11 grades of orphanages and special (correctional) boarding schools of the Stavropol Territory in 2014

Analysis of the results of monitoring the involvement in the use of psychoactive substances of students of vocational education institutions of the Stavropol Territory in 2014

Parents' meeting in grade 7 "Prevention of teenage tobacco smoking." Meeting Questions: What does it mean to be “responsible parents”? What is the role of parents in the formation of children

Municipal government institution Department of Education of the Administration of the Kaltan City District ORDER of 22.07.2019 489 On the approval of the prevention of non-medical drug use

Results and experience of work of the State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education and Science of the Vyborgsky District of St. Petersburg on the prevention of the use of psychoactive substances among students of educational institutions Teacher-psychologist I. I. Kulikova Teacher-psychologist

Results of a sociological study of the level of drug addiction among young people in St. Petersburg (1997). Socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents. This report presents the results of the survey

MOU Arnautovskaya secondary school SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH Topic: Smoking and youth Completed: students of MOU Arnautovskaya secondary school Alexander Chekhovskoy - grade 11 Pasholka Alexander - grade 11

Information and analytical reference based on the results of a sociological survey on the problem of alcohol consumption among adolescents Purpose of the survey: Determination of the level of awareness and prevalence

Guidelines for Parents of a Hyperactive Child "Rules for Effective Communication with a Child" If you want to have a serious conversation with your child, make sure there is a suitable place for it. The TV must

Prevention of alcoholism Prevention of alcoholism remains one of the urgent problems in Russia. The increase in alcoholism in the Russian population indicates the need to develop new concepts in prevention

QUESTIONNAIRE on identifying bad habits for students in grades 5-11. Class Dear friend! We ask you to answer the questions that will help assess the attitude of adolescents to smoking, alcoholic beverages, narcotic

Causes of adolescent suicide. The role of adults in helping a teenager in crisis situations. Suicide heroism or weakness, or a nervous breakdown? Have, tell me, someone has the courage to open

Department of Education of the Administration of the Kirovsky District of St. Petersburg

Scenario of an event for students in grades 6-7 on the prevention of negative manifestations. Author: Valentina Alexandrovna Samoilova, organizer of extracurricular and extracurricular educational work, GBOU SCHOOL 1370

Results of a sociological study of the situation with the use of psychoactive substances among students in St. Petersburg (2016) Comparative sociological study of the situation with use

QUESTIONNAIRE 1 1. Are you interested in the lessons? 2. Do you strive to learn new things in school subjects? 3. Are you trying to find an answer if something is not clear? 4. Are you trying not to be late for lessons? 5. Strive

State Institution "Center for Prevention, Rehabilitation and Correction" Our children are in danger III. Attitude towards the problem of drug addiction IV. Issues related to drug use IV. Questions related to use

Municipal educational institution"Ostashevskaya secondary school" Teacher: Shornikova S.P. Class hour on the topic: "Prevention of drug use" Purpose: to form

Report on the work done in MBOU "Nizhnezhuravskaya secondary school" for the 2012-2013 academic year on the prevention of drug addiction among children and adolescents. According to the Federal Concept of Abuse Prevention

Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine Management of Youth and Sports of Sumy Regional State Administrative Administration National University of Physical Education and Sports of Ukraine Sumy State University of Tiraspol

Date of questioning May 21, 2014 Purpose of the check: Help based on the results of the questioning of students in GBOU 480 who are registered with the PDN. Appendix 6.6.-1 Identify problems of prevention of deviant behavior

Analysis of the psychophysiological prerequisites of adolescents with asocial behavior

WHAT DO YOUR CHILDREN DO ON THE INTERNET? According to the latest data, our country is one of the three states in terms of Internet accessibility. In the social space, information spreads quickly, thanks to technical

From 13.06.2016 to 07.07.2016 an anonymous survey was conducted among residents of the city of Lida aged 16 to 30 years. The purpose of the survey is to study public opinion about the problem of alcoholism. In total, the survey was attended by

Community 5 Positive Future The Positive Future is an example of an outreach program for at-risk youth aged 10 to 19 years. The program is widespread in the UK.

Help on the results of the questionnaire on adherence to the use of drugs and psychotropic substances in schools of the Kazbekovsky district Date: January 2016. Purpose of the survey: to identify

RUSSIAN FEDERATION Administration of the Leningrad Region COMMITTEE OF GENERAL AND PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION OF THE LENINGRAD REGION ORDER November 12, 2014 2420-r About conducting a socio-psychological

Session duration: 40-80 minutes Materials and Preparation: Copy Student Handbook 1 & 2 Alcohol for the First Time for all students or for each pair of students. Purpose: Working methods: Purpose of the assignment

MATERIALS FOR ANONYMOUS SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL QUESTIONNAIRE OF STUDENTS IN THE FRAMEWORK OF EARLY DETECTION OF DRUG USERS AMONG EDUCATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

RESULTS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE “YOUTH AND DRUG ADDICTION” Results of the survey “youth and drug addiction” of group 1243 1. Your gender F (female) - 3 pers. M (male) 5 pers. 2. Your age is 17 years old - 1 person, 18 years old 5

Analytical information on the prevention of offenses in the MOU Kuluyevskaya secondary school for the 2015-16 academic year

Phillips' school anxiety test Purpose: to determine the level and nature of school anxiety. Instruction. Guys, now you will be offered a questionnaire, which consists of questions about how you feel

Municipal autonomous preschool educational institution of the city of Nizhnevartovsk kindergarten 80 "Firefly" Instruction for children and parents on the prevention of illegal actions against minors,

Municipal budgetary preschool educational institution " Kindergarten"Spring" s. Bykov Parent meeting Topic: "Positive and negative emotions" Completed by: Educator Grubnik LV Tasks

I.A. Alekseeva I.G. Novoselsky HOW TO HEAR A CHILD 2 I.A. Alekseeva I.G. Novoselsky HOW TO HEAR A CHILD 2 Moscow 2012 The manual is intended for interviewing children of school age

Information on the implementation of anti-drug preventive measures in the MOBU secondary school 1, bakaly Drugs, tobacco smoking, alcohol is an evil of modern society. And this effect, first of all, are subject to

Results of a sociological study of the situation with the use of psychoactive substances among students in St. Petersburg (2015) Sociological study of the situation with the use of psychoactive

Report on the survey of participants in educational relations GBOU SOSH 564 of the Admiralteisky district of St. Petersburg on the topic "Features of the interaction of participants in the educational process in modern

Explanatory note Russia is a country where alcohol is traditionally consumed. In our society, there are a number of cultural stereotypes of alcohol consumption (about solemn, joyful

1. Explanatory note In the last decade for Russia, the use of alcohol, drugs and other psychoactive substances by minors and young people has become a problem that poses a threat

Municipal educational institution Kuluyevskaya secondary school Analytical information on the organization of prevention of the use of psychoactive substances among students Formation of students' needs for a healthy lifestyle and upbringing of a healthy, physically and morally young

I N F O R M A C I Y on the work of sociological groups of the municipal budgetary institution of culture "Center for Culture and Leisure" Zherdevsky district of the Tambov region for the 3rd quarter of 2015 1. Sociological research

State budgetary educational institution for children in need of psychological, pedagogical and medical and social assistance Center for psychological, medical and social support of the Kirovsky district of St. Petersburg

Phillips School Anxiety Test A study of the level and nature of school-related anxiety in primary and secondary school children. The test consists of 58 questions that can be read to students,

Preventive program "All colors except black" (EMC "All colors except black": Toolkit for teacher M .: Education, 2006) Terms of the program: 2009-2019 Duration of assimilation

A memo for parents on the prevention of suicide! According to a report by the UN Children's Fund, the number of suicide attempts and completed suicides among young people and children has significantly increased in recent years.

World Health Organization Community Education for People with Mental and Physical Disabilities 6 Packages for Children with a Hearing Impairment to Learn How to Learn

Analytical information on the prevention of offenses in the MOU Urzhum secondary school

Be able to say "NO!" An hour of communicative communication Purpose: to give an understanding of the various sources and forms of coercion, under the pressure of which teenagers begin to try and then use drugs; give

Appendix 62 to the order of the director of the Krasnoyarsk branch of the Financial University dated August 28, 2013. 206-UCH PROGRAM for the prevention of drug, alcohol addiction, tobacco smoking and other types of addiction

MINISTRY OF HEALTH OF THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST STATE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH OF THE RUSSIAN

Active work at the I school stage. Active work "I don't want to and I won't!" Topic: Self-Assertive Behavior Subtopic: Avoiding Harmful Actions Learning Outcomes. Pupil: demonstrates in the curriculum

SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF DEPLOYING BEHAVIOR BY ADDICTIVE TYPE (OPIUM ADDICTION) Parfenov Yu.A., Moskalenko G.V. The problem of drug addiction has not subsided for many years, not

“How to say no” Purpose: To promote the formation of a conscious refusal from drugs, To promote the discussion of responsible behavior in situations involving psychoactive substances by children. The course of the conversation Tell the children

Phillips School Anxiety Test The Phillips School Anxiety Test (Almanac of Psychological Tests, 1995) provides a detailed study of the level and nature of school-related anxiety in younger children.

Adaptation program for tenth graders to study at a new level of education. WORK PLAN to adapt 10th grade students for the 2014-2015 academic year. Event Purpose Terms Executor Result

WORK PLAN for adaptation of 10th grade pupils Activity Purpose Dates Performer 1st stage (June-August) Meeting with subject teachers following the results of final exams in 9th grade Acquisition

Shaban O.V., student of the 33rd group of the Institute of Pedagogical Education, Tver State University Influence of the style of parental education on the psychological adaptation of young children to preschool educational institutions Key words: adaptation, upbringing,

Every parent wants to see their children healthy and happy, but does not think about how to make their children live in harmony with themselves, with the world around them, with people. 2 Today tobacco, alcohol and

Lecture on traffic rules “Traffic culture for students in grades 8-11, together with the traffic police. Lecture hall for students "Day of Law in educational institution". The main theme of his work is "Formation

GKU "Kurgan Regional Center for Medical Prevention" Methodological tools for teachers on conducting conversations aimed at preventing the use of psychoactive substances among minors

Many readers will be shocked. Especially the older generation, who honored the name of Lenin and believed that he was the kindest person, but in fact he was cruel and demanded to be shot with his orders. There are about 1,800 monuments to Lenin and up to twenty thousand busts in Russia. More than five thousand streets are named after the revolutionary # 1. In many cities, sculptures of Vladimir Ilyich rise in the central squares. Although, if we knew the whole truth about the great leader, these monuments would have been in a landfill long ago.

Anatoly Latyshev is a renowned Leninist historian. Throughout his life he has been working on the biography of Ilyich. He recently managed to get hold of documents from Lenin's secret fund and the closed archives of the KGB.

- Anatoly Grigorievich, how did you manage to infiltrate the secret funds?

This happened after the August 1991 events. I was given a special pass to familiarize myself with secret documents about Lenin. The authorities thought to find the cause of the coup in the past. I sat in the archives from morning till night, and my hair stood on end. After all, I always believed in Lenin, but after the first thirty documents I read, I was simply shocked.

- What exactly?

Lenin from Switzerland in 1905 urged young people in St. Petersburg to pour acid on policemen in the crowd, pour boiling water on soldiers from the upper floors, use nails to mutilate horses, and bomb the streets with "hand bombs." As head of the Soviet government, Lenin sent out his orders throughout the country. The following paper came to Nizhny Novgorod: “Conduct mass terror, shoot and take out hundreds of prostitutes, soldering soldiers, former officers, etc. Not a minute of delay ”. And how do you like Lenin's order to Saratov: “Shoot the conspirators and the hesitant, without asking anyone and not allowing idiotic red tape”?

- They say that Vladimir Ilyich generally disliked the Russian people?

Lenin's Russophobia is little studied today. All this comes from childhood. He did not have a drop of Russian blood in his family. His mother was German with an admixture of Swedish and Jewish blood. Father is half Kalmyk, half Chuvash. Lenin was brought up in the spirit of German orderliness and discipline. His mother constantly told him “Russian Oblomovism, learn from the Germans”, “Russian fool”, “Russian idiots”. Incidentally, in his messages, Lenin spoke of the Russian people only in a derogatory manner. Once the leader ordered the plenipotentiary Soviet representative in Switzerland: "Give the Russian fools a job: send clippings here, not random numbers (as these idiots did until now)."

- Are there letters in which Lenin wrote about the extermination of the Russian people?

Among those terrible Leninist documents, especially tough orders were for the destruction of compatriots. For example, “burn Baku completely”, take hostages in the rear, put them in front of the advancing units of the Red Army, shoot them in the back, send red thugs to areas where the “greens” operated, “hang them under the guise of“ greens ”(“ we and we will knock down ”) officials, the rich, priests, kulaks, landowners. Pay the murderers 100 thousand rubles each ... ”. By the way, the money for the “secretly hanged man” (the first “Lenin's prizes”) turned out to be the only bonuses in the country. And Lenin periodically sent telegrams to the Caucasus with the following content: "We will cut everyone." Remember how Trotsky and Sverdlov destroyed the Russian Cossacks? Lenin then remained on the sidelines. An official telegram from the leader to Frunze has now been found concerning the "total extermination of the Cossacks." And this famous letter from Dzerzhinsky to the leader of December 19, 1919 about the imprisoned about a million Cossacks? Lenin then imposed a resolution on him: "Shoot every one of them."

- Could Lenin so easily give orders to shoot people?

Here are some of Lenin's notes I managed to get hold of: “I propose to appoint an investigation and shoot those guilty of blatant behavior”; “Rakovsky demands a submarine. It is necessary to give two, appointing a responsible person, a sailor, assigning it to him and saying: we will shoot if you do not deliver it soon ”; "Give Melnichansky a telegram (under my signature) that it was a shame to hesitate and not shoot for failure to appear." And here is one of Lenin's letters to Stalin: "Threatening with execution that slob who, in charge of communications, does not know how to give you a good amplifier and to achieve complete serviceability of telephone communication with me." Lenin insisted on executions for "negligence" and "sluggishness." For example, on August 11, 1918, Lenin sent an order to the Bolsheviks in Penza: “to hang (certainly hang) so that the people can see” at least 100 prosperous peasants. To carry out the execution, select “harder people”. At the end of 1917, when Lenin headed the government, he proposed to shoot every tenth parasite. And this is during the period of mass unemployment.

- Did he also have a negative attitude to Orthodoxy?

The leader hated and destroyed only the Russian Orthodox Church. So, on the day of Nicholas the Wonderworker, when it was impossible to work, Lenin issued an order dated December 25, 1919: e., who missed the clean-up day when loading firewood into the carriages on the day of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker, December 19) ”. At the same time, Lenin was very loyal to Catholicism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, and even to sectarians. In early 1918, he intended to ban Orthodoxy, replacing it with Catholicism.

- How did he fight against Orthodoxy?

For example, in a letter from Lenin to Molotov for members of the Politburo on March 19, 1922, Vladimir Ilyich insisted on the need to use the mass famine in the country to rob Orthodox churches, while shooting as many “reactionary clergy” as possible. Few people know about Lenin's document dated May 1, 1919, No. 13666/2, addressed to Dzerzhinsky. Here is its content: “... it is necessary to put an end to priests and religion as soon as possible. Popov should be arrested as counter-revolutionaries and saboteurs, shot mercilessly and everywhere. And as much as possible. Churches are to be closed. The premises of the temples should be sealed and turned into warehouses ”.

- Anatoly Grigorievich, is it confirmed that Lenin had mental disorders?

His behavior was more than strange. For example, Lenin often fell into depression, which could last for weeks. He could do nothing for a month, and then he was seized by vigorous activity. Krupskaya wrote about this period: “Volodya fell into a rage ...” And he was absolutely devoid of a sense of humor.

- Was Lenin's slogan coarse enough?

Berdyaev called him a genius of swear words. Here are a few lines from Lenin's letter to Stalin and Kamenev dated February 4, 1922: "We will always have time to take shit as an expert." You can not "pull up the trash and the bastard who do not want to submit reports ...". "Train these assholes to answer seriously ...". On the margins of Rosa Luxemburg's articles, the leader made notes “idiot”, “fool”.

- They say that Stalin arranged grandiose drinking in the Kremlin during Lenin's lifetime?

And repeatedly. In this connection, Lenin often summoned and chastised him. But most often Ilyich scolded Ordzhonikidze. He wrote him notes: “Who did you drink and walk with today? Where did you get women from? I don't like your behavior. All the more so Trotsky complains about you all the time. " Ordzhonikidze was still that gulena! Stalin was more indifferent to women. Lenin reprimanded Joseph Vissarionovich for drinking a lot, to which Stalin replied: "I'm a Georgian and I can't live without wine."

- By the way, did Ilyich like banquets?

Feature films often show the leader drinking sugar-free carrot tea with a slice of black bread. But recently, documents have been discovered that testify to the plentiful and luxurious feasts of the leader, about the huge amount of black and red caviar, delicious fish and other gourmet foods that were regularly supplied to the Kremlin nomenclature throughout the years of Lenin's rule. In the village of Zubalovo, by order of Ilyich, luxurious personal dachas were built under the conditions of the most severe famine in the country!

- Did Lenin himself like to drink?

Before the revolution, Ilyich drank a lot. In the years of emigration, I did not sit at the table without beer. Since 1921 - dropped out due to illness. Since then, I have not touched alcohol.

- Is it true that Vladimir Ilyich loved animals?

Hardly. Krupskaya wrote in her notes: “... a hysterical howl of a dog was heard. It was Volodya, returning home, always teasing the neighbor's dog ... "

- Do you think Lenin loved Krupskaya?

Lenin did not like Krupskaya, he valued her as an irreplaceable ally. When Vladimir Ilyich fell ill, he forbade Nadezhda Konstantinovna to come to him. She rolled on the floor and sobbed hysterically. These facts were described in the memoirs of the Lenin sisters. Many Leninists claim that Krupskaya was a virgin before Lenin. It is not true. Before her marriage to Vladimir Ilyich, she was already married.

- Today, probably, there is nothing unknown about Lenin?

There is still a lot that is not classified, since Russian archivists are still hiding some data. So, in 2000 the collection “V.I.Lenin. Unknown documents ”. Some of these documents produced bills. Before the publication of this collection, our archives were selling falsified documents abroad. One American Sovietologist said that, having bought Lenin's works for his book from the management of Russian archives, he then paid the publishers a fine of four thousand dollars because Russian archivists had removed some lines from Lenin's documents.

The Brest Peace is one of the most humiliating episodes in the history of Russia. It became a high-profile diplomatic failure of the Bolsheviks and was accompanied by an acute political crisis within the country. 1 Decree on Peace The Decree on Peace was adopted on October 26 - the day after the armed coup - and spoke of the need to conclude a just democratic peace without annexations and indemnities between all the belligerent peoples. It served as the legal basis for the conclusion of a separate agreement with Germany and other Central Powers. Lenin spoke publicly about the transformation of the imperialist war into a civil war, he considered the revolution in Russia only the initial stage world socialist revolution. In fact, there were other reasons, which are discussed below. The warring peoples did not act according to Ilyich's plans - they did not want to turn bayonets against the governments, and the allied governments ignored the Bolsheviks' peace proposal. Only the countries of the enemy bloc that were losing the war went to rapprochement.

2 Conditions Germany has declared that it is ready to accept the condition of peace without annexations and indemnities, but only if this peace is signed by all the belligerent countries. But none of the Entente countries joined the peace negotiations, so Germany abandoned the Bolshevik formula, and their hopes for a just peace were finally buried. Speech in the second round of negotiations was exclusively about a separate peace, the terms of which were dictated by Germany.

3 Betrayal and Necessity Not all Bolsheviks agreed to sign a separate peace. The left was categorically against any agreement with imperialism. They defended the idea of ​​exporting revolution, believing that without socialism in Europe, Russian socialism is doomed to death (and the subsequent transformations of the Bolshevik regime proved their correctness). The leaders of the left Bolsheviks were Bukharin, Uritsky, Radek, Dzerzhinsky and others. They called for a guerrilla war against German imperialism, and in the future they hoped to conduct regular fighting mi forces created by the Red Army. For the immediate conclusion of a separate peace was, above all, Lenin. He was afraid of a German offensive and the complete loss of his own power, which, even after the coup, relied heavily on German money. It is unlikely that the Brest Peace was bought directly by Berlin. The main factor was precisely the fear of losing power. Considering that a year after the conclusion of peace with Germany, Lenin was even ready for the partition of Russia in exchange for international recognition, then the conditions of the Brest Peace will not seem so humiliating. Trotsky occupied an intermediate position in the internal party struggle. He defended the thesis "No peace, no war." That is, he offered to stop hostilities, but not to sign any agreements with Germany. As a result of the struggle within the party, it was decided to drag out the negotiations in every possible way, expecting a revolution in Germany, but if the Germans present an ultimatum, then agree to all the conditions. However, Trotsky, who led the Soviet delegation in the second round of negotiations, refused to accept the German ultimatum. Negotiations were thwarted and Germany continued to advance. When the peace was signed, the Germans stood 170 km from Petrograd.

4 Annexations and indemnities Peace conditions were very difficult for Russia. She lost Ukraine and Polish lands, renounced claims to Finland, gave up the Batumi and Kars regions, had to demobilize all her troops, abandon Black Sea Fleet and pay a huge contribution. The country was losing almost 800 thousand square meters. km and 56 million people. In Russia, the Germans received the exclusive right to freely engage in business. In addition, the Bolsheviks pledged to pay the tsarist debts to Germany and its allies. At the same time, the Germans did not comply with their own obligations. After signing the treaty, they continued the occupation of Ukraine, overthrew Soviet power on the Don and helped the White movement in every possible way. The Entente countries categorically did not recognize the Brest-Litovsk Peace, calling it a political crime against the Russian people.

5 The uprising of the leftists in the Brest-Litovsk Treaty almost caused a split in the Bolshevik Party and the loss of power by the Bolsheviks. Lenin barely pushed the final peace decision through a vote in the Central Committee, threatening to resign. The split in the party did not happen only thanks to Trotsky, who agreed to abstain from voting, ensuring Lenin's victory. But this did not help to avoid a political crisis. The Brest Peace was categorically rejected by the party of the Left SRs. They left the government, killed the German ambassador Mirbach and raised an armed uprising in Moscow. Due to the lack of a clear plan and goals, it was suppressed, but it was a very real threat to the power of the Bolsheviks. At the same time, the commander of the Eastern Front of the Red Army, the Socialist-Revolutionary Muravyov, raised an uprising in Simbirsk. It also failed.

6 Cancellation Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was signed on March 3, 1918. In November, a revolution broke out in Germany, and the Bolsheviks annulled the peace agreement. After the victory of the Entente, Germany withdrew its troops from the former Russian territories. However, Russia was no longer among the victors. In the coming years, the Bolsheviks were unable to regain power over most of the territories torn away by the Brest Peace. Beneficiary Lenin received the greatest benefit from the Brest Peace. After the cancellation of the contract, his authority grew. He gained fame as a shrewd politician, whose actions helped the Bolsheviks buy time and hold on to power. After that, the Bolshevik party was consolidated, and the party of the Left SRs was defeated. A one-party system was established in the country.

14 QUOTES FROM LENIN, WHICH WILL COOL BLOOD

On January 21, 1924, Vladimir Ulyanov (Lenin), the ideological inspirer of the October Revolution of 1917 and the first leader of the Soviet state, passed away. In the years that have passed since the death of the leader, a real cult of Lenin has been created. His body still lies in the center of the capital as a symbol of an entire era.

We have collected excerpts from Lenin's multivolume works and Ilyich's declassified telegrams:

1. “… Great plan! Finish it together with Dzerzhinsky. Under the guise of "green" (we will blame them later) we will walk 10-20 miles and outweigh the kulaks, priests, landowners. Bonus: 100,000 RUB for the hanged man ... "
   Litvin A. L. "The Red and White Terror in Russia in 1917-1922"
2. “War is not a life but a death war for the rich and hangers-on, bourgeois intellectuals ... they must be dealt with, at the slightest violation ... In one place they will go to jail ... In another, they will be put to clean toilets. In the third, they will be provided, upon leaving the punishment cell, with yellow tickets ... In the fourth, they will be shot on the spot ... The more varied, the better, the richer the overall experience will be ... "
   December 24 - 27, 1917 (V.I.
3. "... Can you still tell Teru to prepare everything for the burning of Baku completely, in the event of an invasion, and to announce it in print in Baku."
   June 3, 1918 (Volkogonov D.A. Lenin. Political portrait. Lenin handwritten order to the chairman of the Baku Cheka S. Ter-Gabrielyan)
4. “Penza, Gubispolkom. ... to carry out a merciless mass terror against the kulaks, priests and White Guards; dubious to be locked up in a concentration camp outside the city.
   August 9, 1918 (Lenin V.I.
5. “Comrades Kuraev, Bosch, Minkin and other Penza communists.
   Comrades! The uprising of the five kulak volosts should lead to ruthless suppression. This is required by the interest of the entire revolution, for now the "last decisive battle" with the kulaks has been taken. A sample must be given.
   Hang (certainly hang so that people can see) at least 100 notorious kulaks, rich men, bloodsuckers.
   Post their names.
   Take all the bread from them.
   Appoint hostages - according to yesterday's telegram.
   Make it so that people can see, tremble, know, shout for hundreds of miles around the people: they will strangle and strangle the bloodsuckers of the kulaks.
   Wire receipt and execution.
   Your Lenin. "
   (Latyshev A.G. Declassified Lenin. M., 1996. S. 57.).
6. “Saratov, (to the representative of the People's Commissariat for Food) Paykes. ... I advise you to appoint your superiors and shoot the conspirators and hesitants, without asking anyone and not allowing idiotic red tape. "
   August 22, 1918 (Lenin V.I.
7. “Sviyazhsk, Trotsky.
   I am surprised and alarmed by the slowdown in the operation against Kazan, especially if it is correctly reported to me that you have the full opportunity to destroy the enemy with artillery. In my opinion, one cannot spare the city and postpone it longer, for merciless extermination is necessary ... "
   September 10, 1918 (Lenin V.I. Complete collection of works. Vol. 50, p. 178).
8. “As for foreigners, I advise you not to rush to deportation. Isn't it better to go to a concentration camp ... "
   June 3, 1919 (Lenin V.I. Complete collection of works. T. 50, p. 335).
9. "All those living on the territory of the RSFSR, foreign submitted from the ranks of the bourgeoisie of those states that are conducting hostile and military actions against us, at the age of 17 to 55, should be imprisoned in concentration camps ..."
   (Latyshev A.G. Declassified Lenin. M., 1996, S. 56).
10. “… Far from all peasants understand that free trade in grain is a crime against the state. “I have produced bread, this is my product, and I have the right to trade in it” - this is how the peasant thinks, out of habit, out of old times. And we say that this is a crime against the state. "
    November 19, 1919 (Lenin V.I.
11. "T. Lunacharsky
    ... I advise you to put all theaters in a coffin.
    Drug education should be engaged not in theater, but in literacy ”.
    Lenin, August 26, 1921 (Lenin V.I.
12. “… I come to the unconditional conclusion that it is now that we must give the most decisive and merciless battle to the Black Hundred clergy and suppress their resistance with such cruelty that they will not forget this for several decades ...
    The more representatives of the reactionary clergy and reactionary bourgeoisie we manage to shoot on this occasion, the better. "
    March 19, 1922 (Bulletin of the Central Committee of the CPSU. 1990. No. 4. P. 190-193).
13. “... Take military measures, ie try to punish Latvia and Estonia in a military manner (for example, "on the shoulders" of Balakhovich to cross the border for 1 mile somewhere and hang 100-1000 of their officials and the rich there) ”.
    Lenin, August 1920 (Latyshev A.G. Declassified Lenin. M., 1996).
14. “... The court must not eliminate terror; to promise this would be self-deception or deception, but to substantiate and legitimize it in principle, clearly, without falsehood and without embellishment. "
    May 17, 1922 (Lenin V.I.

7 secrets of the funeral of Vladimir Lenin Lenin's funeral took place on January 27, 1924. Was Ilyich's last wish fulfilled? Why was the date of the funeral repeatedly postponed? Who was the initiator of the idea of ​​embalming? Last way Ilyich is still surrounded by an aura of mystery. 1 Last Will At the end of the 80s of the last century, a version appeared that Lenin left a written will, in which he asked to be buried at the St. Petersburg Volkovskoye cemetery, next to his mother. The author of the version is considered to be the historian Akim Arutyunov, who, according to the owner of the Petrograd secret apartment, Lenin, stated that the leader asked Krupskaya “to try to do everything so that he would be buried next to his mother”. However, no documentary evidence of such a will of Lenin was found. In 1997, the Russian Center for the Preservation and Study of Documents of Contemporary History, when asked whether a will exists, gave an exhaustive answer: “We do not have a single document of Lenin or his relatives and friends regarding Lenin’s“ last will ”to be buried in a certain Russian ( Moscow or St. Petersburg) cemetery ". 2 Postponed date Vladimir Lenin died on January 21, 1924. The funeral was organized by a specially created commission under the leadership of Dzerzhinsky. Initially, the ceremony was scheduled for January 24 - the funeral was probably supposed to be held according to a "modest scenario": the removal of the body from the House of Unions, a rally on Red Square and the burial procedure at the Kremlin wall, in front of Sverdlov's grave. But this option was rejected, most likely due to the fact that delegates from distant regions and most of the republics did not have time to “catch up” by this date. At the same time, a new proposal appeared: to schedule a funeral for Saturday, January 26th. On the evening of January 21, telegrams were sent out with the message of Lenin's death and the date of the funeral set at 26. But on January 24, it became clear that the burial site would not be prepared for this date: the work was hampered not only by the frozen ground, but also by communications, including the allegedly discovered underground rooms and passages, which had to be repaired. A new date was set for the arrangement of the crypt - no later than 6 pm on January 26, and the new date of the funeral was postponed to 27. 3 Trotsky's absence There could well have been other reasons for the postponement. For example, the so-called "Trotsky factor" is widely known - allegedly Stalin, fearing a strong rival, deliberately "tricked" with the date and forbade (!) Trotsky to return from Tiflis, where he was being treated. However, Trotsky was one of the first to receive the telegram about Lenin's death. First, he expressed his readiness to return to Moscow, and then, for some reason, changed his mind. The change in his decision, however, can only be judged by the return telegram from Stalin, in which he regrets "the technical impossibility of arriving at the funeral" and gives Trotsky the right to decide for himself whether to come or not. In the memoirs of Trotsky, a telephone conversation with Stalin is recorded, when he allegedly said: "The funeral is on Saturday, you still will not be in time, we advise you to continue the treatment." As you can see, there is no prohibition, only advice. Trotsky could easily make it to the funeral if, for example, he took a military plane, and also if he really wanted to. And Trotsky had reasons not to return. He could well believe that Lenin was poisoned by conspirators led by Stalin, and he, Trotsky, is next. 4 Causes of death Throughout 1923, newspapers reported on the state of Lenin's health, creating a new myth about a leader who staunchly fights against an illness: he reads newspapers, is interested in politics, and hunts. It is known that Lenin suffered a series of strokes: the first turned 52-year-old Ilyich into an invalid, the third killed him. In the last months of his life, Lenin hardly spoke, could not read, and his "hunt" looked like walking in a wheelchair. Almost immediately after his death, Lenin's body was opened to determine the cause of death. After a thorough examination of the brain, it was established - hemorrhage. The workers were told: "the dear leader died because he did not spare his strength and did not know the rest at work." During the days of mourning, the press in every possible way emphasized the sacrifice of Lenin, the "great sufferer." This was another component of the myth: Lenin really worked a lot, but he was also attentive enough to himself and his health, did not smoke, and, as they say, did not abuse. Almost immediately after Lenin's death, a version appeared that the leader was poisoned by order of Stalin, especially since no analyzes were made that would allow to detect traces of poison in the body. It was assumed that syphilis could become another cause of death - drugs at that time were primitive, and sometimes even dangerous, and venereal diseases in some cases, indeed, can provoke a stroke, but the symptoms of the leader, as well as a posthumous autopsy, refuted these speculations. 5 Detailed report The first public bulletin, which was released immediately after the autopsy, contained only summary causes of death. But already on January 25th appeared “ official results autopsy ”with numerous details. In addition to a detailed description of the brain, the results of the study of the skin were given, right down to the indication of each scar and damage, the heart was described and its exact size, the state of the stomach, kidneys and other organs were indicated. British journalist, head of the Moscow branch of the New York Times Walter Duranty was surprised that such detailing did not make a depressing impression on the Russians, on the contrary, "the deceased leader was the object of such keen interest that the public wanted to know everything about him." However, there is information that the report caused "shocked bewilderment" among the non-partisan Moscow intelligentsia, and they saw in it a purely materialistic approach to human nature, characteristic of the Bolsheviks. Such a detailed anatomy and emphasis shifted to the inevitability of death could have another reason - the doctors, who “failed” to save the patient, were simply trying to protect themselves. 6 Comrades from the province The embalming was first performed on January 22nd, almost immediately after the autopsy performed by a group of doctors led by Dr. Abrikosov. At first, the body was supposed to be saved until the funeral, then "replayed", carrying out a new procedure, the effect of which was calculated for forty days. The idea of ​​embalming was first expressed back in 1923, but no documents were found that would clarify how the decision was made. To turn Lenin's burial place into the main shrine is a quite understandable aspiration: the country needed a "new religion" and "the incorruptible relics of a new saint." It is interesting that Gorky compared Lenin with Christ, who "took upon himself the heavy burden of saving Russia." Similar parallels were seen in newspaper articles and statements by many influential people of the time. Perhaps when Stalin expressed his desire to bury Lenin "in Russian", he meant just the Orthodox church custom of exposing the relics of the saint to the public, which can be explained - Stalin studied at a theological seminary and, perhaps, this idea was not for him random. Trotsky objected irritably: the party of revolutionary Marxism should not follow such a path, "to replace the relics of Sergei Radonezh and Seraphim of Sarov with the relics of Vladimir Ilyich." Stalin, on the other hand, referred to the mysterious comrades from the provinces who opposed cremation, which contradicted the Russian understanding: "Some comrades believe that modern science has the ability to preserve the body of the deceased for a long time with the help of embalming." Who these "comrades from the provinces" were - remained a mystery. On January 25, Rabochaya Moskva published three letters from "representatives of the people" under the heading "Lenin's body must be preserved!" In the summer of 1924, despite the protests of Krupskaya and Lenin's closest relatives, a message was published in the press about the decision "not to bury the body of Vladimir Ilyich, but to place it in the Mausoleum and extend access to those who wish." 7 Livelier than all the living! Even after the attempt on Lenin's life in 1918, a dualism of his image arose: a mortal man and an immortal leader. Grief for the deceased Ilyich was to be replaced by an enthusiastic struggle, at the head of which is still the immortal Lenin. The newspapers wrote: “Lenin is dead. But Lenin is alive in millions of hearts ... And even by his very physical death, Lenin gives his last order: "Workers of all countries, unite!" Funeral processions, howling sirens and five-minute work stoppages - all these actions during Lenin's funeral became important links in the creation of his cult. Millions of working people from all over Russia came to say goodbye to Lenin. In the 35-degree frost, people warmed themselves by the fires, waiting for their turn, and then in complete silence, occasionally broken by unrestrained sobs, they passed the coffin. They were united by one thing: sorrow and fervent faith in the promised bright future. The country has been in a state of this protracted farewell for 90 years already. Whether it will end and whose "victory" is still the main secret of Ilyich's funeral.

Secrets of Lenin's biography

How did the children of serfs become hereditary nobles, why did the Soviet government classify information about the ancestors of the leader on the maternal side, and how in the early 1900s did Vladimir Ulyanov become Nikolai Lenin?

The Ulyanov family. From left to right: standing - Olga, Alexander, Anna; sitting - Maria Alexandrovna with her youngest daughter Maria, Dmitry, Ilya Nikolaevich, Vladimir. Simbirsk. 1879 year. Courtesy of M. Zolotarev

Biographical chronicle of V.I. Lenin "begins with the entry:" April 10 (22). Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin) was born. Father of Vladimir Ilyich - Ilya Nikolaevich Ulyanov was at that time an inspector, and then - director of public schools in the Simbirsk province. He came from the poor townspeople of the city of Astrakhan. His father was previously a serf peasant. Lenin's mother Maria Alexandrovna was the daughter of a doctor A.D. Blank ".

It is curious that Lenin himself did not know many of the details of his genealogy. In their family, as in the families of other commoners, it was somehow not customary to delve into their "genealogical roots." It was only later, after the death of Vladimir Ilyich, when interest in such problems began to grow, his sisters took up these investigations. Therefore, when in 1922 Lenin received a detailed questionnaire of the party census, when asked about the occupation of his paternal grandfather, he sincerely replied: "I do not know."

GRANDSON OF THE FORTRESS

Meanwhile, Lenin's paternal grandfather, great-grandfather and great-great-grandfather were indeed serfs. Great-great-grandfather - Nikita G. Ulyanin- was born in 1711. According to the revision tale of 1782, he and the family of his youngest son Theophanes were recorded as a courtyard of the landowner of the village of Androsov, Sergach district of the Nizhny Novgorod governorship, Martha Semyonovna Myakinina.

According to the same revision, his eldest son Vasily Nikitich Ulyanin, Born in 1733, with his wife Anna Semionovna and children Samoila, Porfiry and Nikolai lived there, but were listed as servants of the cornet Stepan Mikhailovich Brekhov... According to the revision of 1795, Lenin's grandfather Nikolai Vasilyevich, 25 years old, single, lived with his mother and brothers in the same village, but they were already listed as servants of ensign Mikhail Stepanovich Brekhov.

He was listed, of course, but he was no longer in the village ...

The Astrakhan archive contains the document “Lists of nominal landowners peasants who are expected to be reckoned fugitives from different provinces”, where at number 223 it is written: “Nikolai Vasilyev, son of Ulyanin ... Nizhny Novgorod province, Sergach district, village Androsov, landowner Stepan Mikhailovich Brekhov is a peasant. Absent in 1791 ”. It is not known for sure whether he was a runaway or released on a quitrent and ransomed, but in 1799 Nikolai Vasilyevich was transferred to the category of state peasants in Astrakhan, and in 1808 he was admitted to the bourgeois estate, to the workshop of artisans-tailors.

Having got rid of serfdom and becoming a free man, Nikolai Vasilyevich changed his surname Ulyanin to Ulyaninov, and then Ulyanov. Soon he married the daughter of the Astrakhan tradesman Alexei Lukyanovich Smirnov - Anna, who was born in 1788 and was 18 years younger than her husband.

Based on some archival documents, the writer Marietta Shahinyan put forward a version according to which Anna Alekseevna is not Smirnov's own daughter, but a baptized Kalmyk woman who was freed by him from slavery and adopted allegedly only in March 1825.

There is no indisputable evidence of this version, especially since already in 1812 he and Nikolai Ulyanov had a son, Alexander, who died four months old, in 1819, a son, Vasily, was born, in 1821, a daughter, Maria, in 1823 - Feodosia and, finally, in July 1831, when the head of the family was already over 60, the son of Ilya was the father of the future leader of the world proletariat.

FATHER'S TEACHING CAREER

After the death of Nikolai Vasilyevich, care for the family and raising children fell on the shoulders of his eldest son Vasily Nikolaevich. Working at that time as a salesman for the well-known Astrakhan firm "The Brothers Sapozhnikovs" and not having his own family, he managed to ensure prosperity in the house and even gave his younger brother Ilya an education.

ILYA NIKOLAEVICH ULYANOV GRADUATED THE FACULTY OF PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS OF THE KAZAN UNIVERSITY.
He was asked to stay at the department for "improvement in scientific work" - the famous mathematician Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky insisted on this.

In 1850, Ilya Nikolayevich graduated from the Astrakhan gymnasium with a silver medal and entered the physics and mathematics faculty of Kazan University, where he completed his studies in 1854, receiving the title of candidate of physical and mathematical sciences and the right to teach in secondary educational institutions. And although he was asked to stay at the department for "improvement in scientific work" (this, by the way, was insisted on by the famous mathematician Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky), Ilya Nikolayevich preferred the career of a teacher.

Monument to Lobachevsky in Kazan. The beginning of the XX century. Courtesy of M. Zolotarev

His first place of work - from May 7, 1855 - was the Noble Institute in Penza. In July 1860, Ivan Dmitrievich Veretennikov came here as an inspector of the institute. Ilya Nikolaevich made friends with him and his wife, and in the same year Anna Aleksandrovna Veretennikova (née Blank) introduced him to her sister Maria Aleksandrovna Blank, who came to visit her for the winter. Ilya Nikolaevich began to help Maria in preparing for the exam for the title of teacher, and she helped him in spoken English. The young people fell in love with each other, and in the spring of 1863 the engagement took place.

On July 15 of the same year, after successfully passing the external examinations at the Samara Men's Gymnasium, "the daughter of the court counselor girl Maria Blank" received the title of primary school teacher "with the right to teach the Law of God, Russian, arithmetic, German and French." And in August they had already played a wedding, and "the maiden Maria Blank" became the wife of the court councilor Ilya Nikolaevich Ulyanov - this rank was also granted to him in July 1863.

"ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF JEWISH ORIGIN"

Lenin's sisters Anna and Maria began to study the genealogy of the Blank family. Anna Ilyinichna told: “The elders could not figure it out for us. The surname seemed to us of a French root, but there was no evidence of such an origin. For a long time, I personally began to think about the possibility of Jewish origin, which was prompted mainly by the message from my mother that my grandfather was born in Zhitomir, a well-known Jewish center. The grandmother - the mother of the mother - was born in St. Petersburg and was by birth German from Riga. But while my mother and her sisters kept in touch with their maternal relatives for a long time, about the relatives of her father, A.D. Blank, nobody heard. He was, as it were, a cut-off piece, which also made me think of his Jewish origin. No grandfather's stories about his childhood or youth have been preserved by his daughters in their memory. "

Anna Ilyinichna Ulyanova informed Joseph Stalin about the results of the search, which confirmed her assumption, in 1932 and 1934. “The fact of our origin, which I had assumed earlier,” she wrote, “was not known during his [Lenin's] life ... I don’t know what motives we Communists might have for keeping this fact quiet.”

"To be absolutely silent about him" was Stalin's categorical answer. And Lenin's second sister, Maria Ilyinichna, also believed that this fact "let it be known sometime in a hundred years."

Lenin's great-grandfather - Moshe Itskovich Blank- was born, apparently in 1763. The first mention of him is contained in the revision of 1795, where Moyshka Blank is recorded among the townspeople of the city of Starokonstantinov in the Volyn province at number 394. Where he came from in these places is unclear. However…

Panorama of Simbirsk from the side of the Moscow highway. 1866-1867 years. Courtesy of M. Zolotarev

Some time ago, a well-known bibliographer Maya Dvorkina introduced a curious fact into scientific circulation. Sometime in the mid-1920s, an archivist Julian G. Oksman, who was studying the genealogy of the leader of the world proletariat on the instructions of the director of the Lenin Library Vladimir Ivanovich Nevsky, discovered a petition from one of the Jewish communities of the Minsk province, allegedly dating back to the beginning of the 19th century, to exempt a certain boy from taxes, for he is “the illegitimate son of a major Minsk official”, and therefore, they say, the community should not pay for it. The boy's last name was Blank.

According to Oksman, Nevsky took him to Lev Kamenev, and then the three of them came to Nikolay Bukharin... Showing the document, Kamenev muttered: "I always thought so." To which Bukharin replied: "What do you think is not important, but what are we going to do?" They took the word from Oksman that he would not tell anyone about the find. And since then, no one has seen this document.

One way or another, Moshe Blank appeared in Starokonstantinov as an adult, and in 1793 he married a local 29-year-old girl Maryam (Marem) Froimovich. From subsequent revisions it follows that he read both Hebrew and Russian, had his own house, was engaged in trade, and, in addition, he rented 5 morgues (about 3 hectares) of land from the town of Rogachevo, which were sown with chicory.

In 1794, his son Aba (Abel) was born, and in 1799, his son Srul (Israel). Probably, from the very beginning, Moshe Itskovich did not have a good relationship with the local Jewish community. He was "a man who did not want or, perhaps, did not know how to find a common language with his fellow tribesmen." In other words, the community simply hated him. And after in 1808 from a fire, and possibly arson, Blank's house burned down, the family moved to Zhitomir.

LETTER TO THE EMPEROR

Many years later, in September 1846, Moshe Blank wrote a letter to Emperor Nicholas I, from which it can be seen that already “40 years ago” he “renounced the Jews,” but because of the “overly devout wife” who died in 1834 , adopted Christianity and received the name Dmitry only on January 1, 1835.

But the reason for the letter was something else: while maintaining dislike for his fellow tribesmen, Dmitry (Moshe) Blank proposed - in order to assimilate the Jews - to prohibit them from wearing national clothes, and most importantly, to oblige them to pray in synagogues for the Russian emperor and the imperial family.

It is curious that in October of that year the letter was reported to Nicholas I and he fully agreed with the proposals of the "baptized Jew Blank", as a result of which in 1850 Jews were banned from wearing national clothes, and in 1854 the corresponding text of the prayer was introduced. Researcher Mikhail Shtein, who collected and carefully analyzed the most complete data on Blank's pedigree, rightly noted that, due to his dislike of his people, Moshe Itskovich “can be compared, perhaps, only with another baptized Jew - one of the founders and leaders of the Moscow Union of the Russian People, V.A. ... Greenmouth "...

Alexander Dmitrievich Blank (1799-1870). Courtesy of M. Zolotarev

The fact that Blank decided to break with the Jewish community long before his baptism was also evidenced by something else. Both his sons, Abel and Israel, like his father, also knew how to read in Russian, and when the district (povet) school opened in Zhitomir in 1816, they were enrolled there and successfully graduated from it. From the point of view of Jewish believers, it was sacrilege. And yet, belonging to the Jewish religion doomed them to vegetation within the boundaries of the Pale of Settlement. And only an event that happened in the spring of 1820 abruptly changed the fate of young people ...

In April, a "high rank" arrived in Zhitomir on a business trip - the ruler of the affairs of the so-called Jewish Committee, senator and poet Dmitry Osipovich Baranov. Somehow, Blank managed to meet with him, and he asked the senator to assist his sons in entering the Medical-Surgical Academy in St. Petersburg. Baranov did not at all sympathize with the Jews, but the rather rare conversion of two "lost souls" to Christianity at that time, in his opinion, was a good deed, and he agreed.

The brothers immediately went to the capital and filed a petition addressed to Metropolitan Mikhail of Novgorod, St. Petersburg, Estland and Finland. "Having settled now to live in St. Petersburg," they wrote, "and having the usual treatment of Christians who profess the Greek-Russian religion, we wish now to accept it."

The petition was granted, and already on May 25, 1820, the priest of the Church of St. Sampson the Stranger in St. Petersburg Fyodor Barsov "enlightened both brothers with baptism." Abel became Dmitry Dmitrievich, and Israel became Alexander Dmitrievich. The youngest son Moshe Blank received a new name in honor of his successor (godfather) Count Alexander Ivanovich Apraksin, and his patronymic in honor of Abel's successor, Senator Dmitry Osipovich Baranov. And on July 31 of the same year, at the direction of the Minister of Education, Prince Alexander Nikolayevich Golitsyn, the brothers were identified as "pupils of the Medico-Surgical Academy" tools.

MARRIAGE OF THE HEAD-DOCTOR

Dmitry Blank remained in the capital as a police doctor, and Alexander in August 1824 began serving in the city of Porechye in the Smolensk province as a district doctor. True, in October 1825 he returned to St. Petersburg and was enrolled, like his brother, as a doctor in the city police staff. In 1828 he was promoted to the headquarters physician. It was time to think about getting married ...

His godfather, Count Alexander Apraksin, was at that time an official for special assignments at the Ministry of Finance. So Alexander Dmitrievich, despite his origin, could well count on a decent game. Apparently, at his other benefactor - Senator Dmitry Baranov, who was fond of poetry and chess, who was visited by Alexander Pushkin and gathered almost all of "enlightened Petersburg", the younger Blank and met the Groschopf brothers and was received in their house.

Ilya Nikolaevich Ulyanov (1831-1886) and Maria Alexandrovna Ulyanova (1835-1916)

The head of this very respectable family Ivan Fedorovich (Johann Gottlieb) Groshopf was from the Baltic Germans, was a consultant of the State Justice College of Livonian, Estonian and Finnish affairs and rose to the rank of provincial secretary. His wife Anna Karlovna, nee Estedt, was Swedish and Lutheran. There were eight children in the family: three sons - Johann, who served in the Russian army, Karl, vice director in the foreign trade department of the Ministry of Finance, and Gustav, who was in charge of the Riga customs, and five daughters - Alexandra, Anna, Ekaterina (married von Essen) , Caroline (married Biuberg) and the younger Amalia. Having met this family, the head physician made an offer to Anna Ivanovna.

MASHENKA BLANK

Alexander Dmitrievich was doing well at first. As a police doctor, he received 1,000 rubles a year. For his "quickness and diligence" he was repeatedly honored with gratitude.

But in June 1831, during the cholera riots in the capital, his brother Dmitry, who was on duty at the central cholera hospital, was brutally killed by a riot by a mob. This death shocked Alexander Blank so much that he resigned from the police and did not work for more than a year. Only in April 1833, he again entered the service - as an intern at the City Hospital of St. Mary Magdalene for the poor from the districts of St. Petersburg across the river. By the way, it was here that Taras Shevchenko was treated with him in 1838. At the same time (from May 1833 to April 1837) Blank worked at the Naval Department. In 1837, after passing the exams, he was recognized as an inspector of the medical board, and in 1838 - as a medical surgeon.

IN 1874, ILYA NIKOLAEVICH ULYANOV RECEIVED THE POSITION OF DIRECTOR OF FOLK SCHOOLS IN THE SIMBIR PROVINCE.
And in 1877 he was awarded the rank of actual state councilor, equal in the table of ranks to the general's rank and giving the right to hereditary nobility

The private practice of Alexander Dmitrievich also expanded. Among his patients were representatives of the highest nobility. This allowed him to move to a decent apartment in the outbuilding of one of the luxurious mansions on the English Embankment, which belonged to the emperor's physician and president of the Medical-Surgical Academy, Baronet Yakov Vasilyevich Willie. It was here in 1835 that Maria Blank was born. Mashenka's godfather was their neighbor - in the past adjutant of the Grand Duke Mikhail Pavlovich, and since 1833 - the equestrian of the Imperial court Ivan Dmitrievich Chertkov.

In 1840, Anna Ivanovna fell seriously ill, died and was buried in St. Petersburg at the Smolensk Evangelical cemetery. Then her sister Catherine von Essen, who was widowed in the same year, took care of the children entirely. Alexander Dmitrievich, apparently, sympathized with her before. It is no accident that he named his daughter, who was born in 1833, Catherine. After the death of Anna Ivanovna, they become even closer, and in April 1841, Blank decides to enter into a legal marriage with Ekaterina Ivanovna. However, such marriages - with the godmother of the daughters and the sister of the deceased wife - were not permitted by the law. And Catherine von Essen becomes his common-law wife.

In the same April, they all leave the capital and move to Perm, where Alexander Dmitrievich received the post of inspector of the Perm Medical Council and doctor of the Perm gymnasium. Thanks to the latter circumstance, Blank met the Latin teacher Ivan Dmitrievich Veretennikov, who in 1850 became the husband of his eldest daughter Anna, and the mathematics teacher Andrei Aleksandrovich Zalezhsky, who married another daughter, Catherine.

Alexander Blank entered the history of Russian medicine as one of the pioneers of balneology - treatment with mineral waters. Having retired at the end of 1847 from the post of doctor of the Zlatoust arms factory, he left for the Kazan province, where in 1848 the Kokushkino estate with 462 dessiatines (503.6 hectares) of land, a water mill and 39 serfs was bought in Laishevsky district. On August 4, 1859, the Senate approved Alexander Dmitrievich Blank and his children in the hereditary nobility, and they were entered in the book of the Kazan noble deputy assembly.

THE ULYANOV FAMILY

This is how Maria Alexandrovna Blank ended up in Kazan, and then in Penza, where she met Ilya Nikolaevich Ulyanov ...

Their wedding on August 25, 1863, like the weddings of the other Blank sisters, was played in Kokushkin. On September 22, the newlyweds left for Nizhny Novgorod, where Ilya Nikolaevich was appointed to the post of senior teacher of mathematics and physics at the men's gymnasium. On August 14, 1864, daughter Anna was born. A year and a half later - on March 31, 1866 - son Alexander ... But soon there was a grievous loss: daughter Olga, who was born in 1868, fell ill and died on July 18 in the same Kokushkin ...

On September 6, 1869, Ilya Nikolaevich was appointed inspector of public schools in the Simbirsk province. The family moved to Simbirsk (now Ulyanovsk), which at that time was a quiet provincial town with a little more than 40 thousand inhabitants, of which 57.5% were burghers, 17% were military, 11% were peasants, 8.8% were nobles, 3.2% - merchants and honorary citizens, and 1.8% - people of clergy, persons of other classes and foreigners. Accordingly, the city was divided into three parts: noble, commercial and bourgeois. In the nobleman's there were kerosene lanterns and plank sidewalks, and in the bourgeoisie they kept all kinds of cattle in the yards, and this living creature, contrary to prohibitions, walked the streets.
Here the Ulyanovs' son Vladimir was born on April 10 (22), 1870. On April 16, priest Vasily Umov and deacon Vladimir Znamensky baptized the newborn. The head of the specific office in Simbirsk, the actual state councilor Arseny Fedorovich Belokrysenko, became the godfather, and the mother of a colleague of Ilya Nikolaevich, the collegiate assessor Natalia Ivanovna Aunovskaya, became the godmother.

Ilya Nikolayevich Ulyanov (sitting third from the right) among the teachers of the Simbirsk men's classical gymnasium. 1874 year. Courtesy of M. Zolotarev

The family continued to grow. On November 4, 1871, the fourth child was born - daughter Olga. Son Nicholas died without living a month, and on August 4, 1874, a son, Dmitry, was born, on February 6, 1878, a daughter, Maria. Six children.
On July 11, 1874, Ilya Nikolaevich was appointed director of public schools in the Simbirsk province. And in December 1877 he was awarded the rank of actual state councilor, equal in the table of ranks to the general's rank and giving him the right to hereditary nobility.

The salary increase made it possible to realize an old dream. Having replaced six rented apartments since 1870 and saved up the necessary funds, the Ulyanovs on August 2, 1878, for 4 thousand silver, finally bought their own house on Moskovskaya Street - from the widow of the titular adviser Ekaterina Petrovna Molchanova. It was made of wood, on one floor from the facade and with mezzanines under the roof from the courtyard side. And behind the courtyard, overgrown with grass and chamomile, is a beautiful garden with silver poplars, thick elms, yellow acacia and lilacs along the fence ...
Ilya Nikolayevich died in Simbirsk in January 1886, Maria Alexandrovna - in Petrograd in July 1916, having outlived her husband for 30 years.

WHERE DOES "LENIN" COME FROM?

The question of how and where from in the spring of 1901 Vladimir Ulyanov got the pseudonym Nikolai Lenin, has always aroused the interest of researchers, there were many versions. Among them are toponymic ones: both the Lena River (analogy: Plekhanov - Volgin) and the village of Lenin near Berlin appear. During the formation of "Leninism" as a profession, they were looking for "amorous" sources. So the assertion was born that the Kazan beauty Elena Lenina was allegedly to blame for everything, in another version - the chorus of the Mariinsky Theater Elena Zaretskaya, etc. But none of these versions could withstand more or less serious testing.

However, back in the 1950s – 1960s, the Central Party Archives received letters from the relatives of a certain Nikolai Yegorovich Lenin, which set out a fairly convincing everyday story. The deputy head of the archive, Rostislav Aleksandrovich Lavrov, forwarded these letters to the Central Committee of the CPSU, and, naturally, they did not become the property of a wide range of researchers.

Meanwhile, the Lenin family originates from the Cossack Posnik, who in the 17th century, for the merits associated with the conquest of Siberia and the creation of winter quarters on the Lena River, were granted the nobility, the surname Lenin and an estate in the Vologda province. Numerous descendants of him more than once distinguished themselves both in the military and in the bureaucratic service. One of them, Nikolai Yegorovich Lenin, became ill and retired, having risen to the rank of state councilor, in the 1880s and settled in the Yaroslavl province.

Volodya Ulyanov with his sister Olga. Simbirsk. 1874 year. Courtesy of M. Zolotarev

His daughter Olga Nikolaevna, having graduated from the history and philology faculty of the Bestuzhev courses in 1883, went to work at the Smolensk evening workers' school in St. Petersburg, where she met with Nadezhda Krupskaya. And when there was a fear that the authorities might refuse to issue a foreign passport to Vladimir Ulyanov, and friends began to look for contraband options for crossing the border, Krupskaya turned to Lenina for help. Olga Nikolaevna then conveyed this request to her brother - a prominent official of the Ministry of Agriculture, agronomist Sergei Nikolaevich Lenin. In addition, a similar request to him came, apparently, from his friend, the statistician Alexander Dmitrievich Tsyurupa, who in 1900 met the future leader of the proletariat.

Sergei Nikolaevich himself knew Vladimir Ilyich - from his meetings in the Free Economic Society in 1895, as well as from his works. In turn, Ulyanov knew Lenin: for example, he refers three times to his articles in the monograph "The Development of Capitalism in Russia." After consulting, the brother and sister decided to give Ulyanov the passport of his father, Nikolai Yegorovich, who by that time was already very bad (he died on April 6, 1902).

Is it true that the Mausoleum was built according to the drawings of the Babylonian ziggurats? Did scientists work on the embalming of Lenin's body using occult sciences? Endless secrets, riddles and conjectures surround this symbol of the Soviet era throughout its existence.

Many are surprised that the militant atheists from the CPSU (b) decided not to bury Vladimir Lenin, but to put it on public display. But on the whole, their actions are understandable. Taking away the faith in Christ from the people, they wanted to give them a new God. Nikolai Bukharin wrote in a private letter: "We ... instead of icons hung the leaders, and we will try to open the relics of Ilyich under the communist sauce for Pakhom and the" lower classes ".

And the idea of ​​a mausoleum and mummification may have come from the hype from the main archaeological sensation of the time. In 1923, the world press excitedly described the found tomb of Tutankhamun and the untold treasures recovered from it. Everyone, young and old, discussed the mystery of the pharaoh's mummy, which had not decayed for 3 millennia. So the analogies between the embalming of the pharaohs and Lenin suggest themselves.

The pyramid project really existed. It was proposed by the outstanding architect Fyodor Shekhtel. But in the end, instead of the Egyptian pyramid, a Mausoleum was erected, similar to the Babylonian ziggurat or the step pyramid of South America.

Ur city ziggurat

Sacred body

His comrades-in-arms began to discuss Lenin's funeral even before the death of their leader. People's headman Kalinin told them: “This terrible event should not take us by surprise. If we bury Vladimir Ilyich, the funeral should be as magnificent as the world has never seen before. " Stalin agreed with him and said: "Some comrades believe that modern science has the ability to preserve the body of the deceased with the help of embalming, in order to allow our minds to get used to the idea that Lenin is not among us after all."

And after the death of Vladimir Ilyich, letters and telegrams from working people from all over the country showered in the Central Committee with an appeal to save the body of dear Ilyich and place it in a sarcophagus. The decision had already been made by a narrow circle by that time. And although the leader's wife Nadezhda Krupskaya, his sisters Anna and Maria, as well as brother Dmitry did not agree with this idea, the "opinion of the people" turned out to be more important. Ilyich's body became the property of the party, and a real embalming experiment was performed on it.

Six days after the death of the leader, already on the day of Lenin's funeral - January 27, 1924 - the first wooden mausoleum was erected on Red Square, designed by Alexei Shchusev. It was built in the form of a cube topped with a three-stage pyramid. A few months later, the mausoleum was rebuilt, and stands were erected on the sides of it. This was also a temporary wooden version of the structure.

In 1930, the familiar and now familiar Mausoleum finally appeared, decorated with marble, labradorite and crimson quartzite. Inside the building there is a lobby and a funeral hall. There are also a number of office premises. The administration of the Mausoleum works in them. One of the secret rooms is called "government" - from it members of the Politburo rose to the podium of the Mausoleum during public holidays.

Ilyich's spirit

Joseph Stalin was one of the main initiators of the construction of a magnificent tomb for Lenin. And when in 1953 he himself left the mortal world, the "communist god" was already two-sided, it was not by chance that the party was called by the names of Lenin and Stalin. It is natural that together they found rest in the Mausoleum.

It became known as the "Mausoleum of V.I. Lenin and I.V. Stalin ". Moreover, Stalin continued to lie there even after his cult was debunked at the XX Congress of the CPSU. A paradoxical situation has developed. At the ideological level, Stalin was taken out of the host of "gods", equated with mere mortals and declared almost a heretic. And crowds of people continued to worship his tomb every day.

In 1961, at the 22nd Congress of the CPSU, the people were first promised that soon the Soviet people would live under communism. And then they decided that the first step for this was to get rid of the "vestige of the past." On the last day of the congress, the old Bolshevik woman Dora Lazurkina spoke. And she spoke in a completely mystical vein: "Yesterday I consulted with Ilyich, as if he stood in front of me as if he were alive and said: it is unpleasant for me to be near Stalin, who brought so many troubles to the party."

This was followed by stormy, prolonged applause, and the floor was given to the first secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, Nikolai Podgorny, who made a proposal to decide on the removal of Stalin's body from the Mausoleum. As usual, no one dared raise a hand "against".

Under cover of the night

The execution of the decision of the congress was not postponed indefinitely, and the very next day, as it got dark, Red Square was blocked for the rehearsal of the parade. Two companies of machine gunners were deployed near the Mausoleum and got down to business.

For the burial of Stalin by the decision of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the CPSU, a special commission of five people was created, headed by the chairman of the Party Control Committee under the Central Committee of the CPSU, Nikolai Shvernik. The work was supervised by General Nikolai Zakharov, who headed the 9th KGB Directorate, and the commandant of the Kremlin, Andrei Vedenin. Only 30 people took part in the operation, but by morning everything was ready.

Pyramid layout

Eight officers carried out the coffin with Stalin's body from the Mausoleum through the back door, brought it to the grave near the Kremlin wall, at the bottom of which a kind of sarcophagus was made of eight slabs, and placed it on wooden stands. There were no military salutes or funeral speeches. The next day, a slab was installed over the grave with the date of birth and death of Stalin. Only in 1970 was it replaced with a bust by the sculptor Nikolai Tomsky.

On the morning of November 1, 1961, a traditional queue lined up in front of the Mausoleum. At first, people were surprised to find that only one surname flaunts on the slab above the Mausoleum - Lenin. And then they noted with amazement that instead of two bodies, only one rests in the Mausoleum.

The most striking thing is that there was no protest reaction in society. The people took the secret reburial of the former leader, with whose name he went on the attack at the front, surprisingly calmly. The party said "it is necessary" - so so be it.

Mystic or Science?

Supporters of mysticism believe that the Mausoleum is a ziggurat not only in form, but also in essence. In their opinion, in every Babylonian ziggurat, a teraphim was kept - a mummified human head with magical properties. The functions of a teraphim in the case of the Mausoleum are performed by the body of Vladimir Lenin.

And everything was started in order to irradiate people with some invisible rays that inspire respect for the socialist system. The antenna transmitting this radiation is supposedly a niche to the right of the entrance. Parades are held by her during public holidays, here in Soviet time there was a long line of people wishing to get to the Soviet shrine.

To the disappointment of the apologists of the mysterious versions, the radiation of the Mausoleum is not detected by any ultra-precise physical devices. As for the "teraphim", the term is not Babylonian, but ancient Hebrew. Even before believing in one God, the Jews kept ancestral idols in their homes - rude figurines similar to a person. In fact, it is the same as the antique lares and penates. This concept has nothing to do with the Babylonian ziggurats. As with the Moscow Mausoleum.

The mummified body of the leader of the world revolution is no less surprising. More precisely, not mummified, but embalmed. The unique operation began only in March 1924, that is, two months after Lenin's death. The body by that time was no longer in the best condition. The outstanding chemist Boris Zbarsky and his colleague Vladimir Vorobyov were entrusted with the responsible work.

Scientists had to not only embalm the body, but to begin with to develop the technique itself, since before that there was nothing like it in the world. It is clear that the cost of the error was extremely high. As a result, the success of the embalming team was declared "a scientific achievement of world significance." However, many are sure that science alone was not enough. Allegedly, Zbarsky in his work used the works of the Austrian zoologist Paul Kammerer, who, in addition to biology, was no stranger to the occult.

Kammerer is even credited with knowing the secrets of the magicians of Ancient Egypt. This mystical knowledge of the Austrian allegedly helped Soviet scientists to preserve Lenin's body. Alas, Kammerer is not drawn to a figure endowed with power and involvement in secrets. His scientific biography enough

inglorious and tragic - in 1926 he committed suicide after being convicted of gross falsification of experiments. Trying to prove that salamanders change colors depending on the color of the soil on which they live, he injected ink under the skin of the poor amphibians. In the USSR, however, he was really welcomed, as he adhered to atheism and anti-racism, for which he was even persecuted in conservative Europe.

Lenin's embalmed body did not always rest peacefully in the sarcophagus. At the beginning of the war, he was evacuated to Tyumen in a special sealed coffin soaked in paraffin. But the details of how the leader's body was kept from July 1941 to April 1945 are still carefully hidden. Meanwhile, according to unverified information, they did not follow him properly. Up to the point that they even dropped it into boiling water when trying to wash it.

The strict regime established by academician Zbarsky demanded that the embalmed body be immersed in a bath with a special solution every 18 months. Whether this was done in Tyumen is unknown. Therefore, many are sure that now in the Mausoleum lies not Lenin at all, but a wax doll. Others argue that no more than 10-15% of the body of the real Ilyich survived.

War with the past

Over the years of the existence of the Mausoleum, more than a dozen different incidents have occurred in and around it. Dissatisfied with the Soviet system sought to take out their emotions on the most sacred - on the embalmed body of the leader. The first mausoleum terrorist in March 1934 was Mitrofan Nikitin, an employee of one of the state farms, who decided to take revenge on the dead Lenin for all the horrors of dispossession and collectivization.

Nikitin fired twice at Ilyich with a revolver, but missed. He fired the third shot into his heart. A note was found in his pocket criticizing the current situation in the country.

After this incident, it became impossible to carry weapons to the Mausoleum. But this did not stop those who wanted to vent their anger. In 1957, a certain Romanov threw a bottle of ink into the sarcophagi of the two leaders. In 1959, the glass of one of the sarcophagi was smashed with a hammer. And in 1960, one of the visitors jumped on the barrier and smashed the glass with his feet. Shards of glass damaged the skin of Lenin's body, and the Mausoleum was then closed for a month. In 1961 and 1962, stones were thrown at Lenin.

The first event leading to loss of life took place in September 1967. A resident of Kaunas named Krysanov came to Red Square in a belt filled with explosives. Unable to get inside, he blew himself up in front of the Mausoleum. The terrorist himself and several people died. In 1973, another criminal followed in his footsteps, who managed to enter the funeral hall with an improvised explosive device under his coat.

The explosion killed the attacker himself, as well as a married couple who came from Astrakhan. Several children were injured. But the sarcophagus, covered with bulletproof glass after the previous incident, was not damaged, although it was in it, according to the expert opinion, that the main force of the explosion was directed. The identity of the terrorist remained unidentified. Only fragments of documents were found, from which it followed that he had previously been sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Oleg LOGINOV, Kirill IVANOV

Latyshev Anatoly Georgievich - candidate of historical sciences. The material was partially published in the journal "Soviet Screen". 1988. No. 22; 1989. No. 1.

"I would like to name everyone by name ..."

During the period of mass repressions of the 30s, 40s and early 50s, more than a hundred filmmakers became victims of lawlessness and terror (the figure, of course, is approximate, there are no official statistics, so today, until more accurate estimates, we can accept it in as a hypothesis). Behind each of them - those arrested, shot, died of hunger, beatings and torture - is the tragedy of human and creative fate: undelivered films, unwritten scripts, unplayed roles ... Their names, slandered and erased from the memory of several generations, return to us today.

On January 11, 1935, on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of Soviet cinema, the central newspapers published Stalin's greeting addressed to B. Shumyatsky to the Main Directorate of Cinematography. The greeting defined one of the tasks of cinema - "to raise the political fighting efficiency of the masses."

In the editorial of Pravda, this greeting was defined as “a program document that confronts the cinema art front exclusively with important tasks, the solution of which raises our cinema to an unattainable height. " to our teacher, leader, friend, great, brilliant Stalin, I call my comrades in cinematographic work to new battles, new victories at the front of the most important and most popular of the arts! "

"Fronts", "armies", "fighting efficiency", "battles" - this vocabulary in those years approached cinema like no other art. “To the greatest extent, Stalin was inclined to program precisely cinema,” K. Simonov emphasized in his memoirs. - And as a form of art, more state-owned than others, that is, it demanded from the very beginning of the work state permission for it and state expenses, and also because in his ideas about art he treated directors not as independent artists, but as interpreters, implementers of the written. "

Stalin consistently and systematically programmed future films, connecting them with contemporary political tasks, although the films he programmed were almost all historical. Stalin, as a rule, took a ready-made figure in history, which could be utilitarianly useful from the point of view of the modern political situation and ideological struggle (Ivan the Terrible, Alexander Nevsky, Suvorov, Kutuzov, Ushakov, Nakhimov, Pirogov, Popov, Michurin, Pavlov).

In the language of the regulations of the garrison and guard service, in his inherent bureaucratic style - highlighting individual points and paragraphs - Stalin wrote notes to those who headed Soviet cinema in different years: what specific changes to make to the ordered script, what should be the image of this or that movie hero. The normative aesthetics of our cinema was born. For example, when Stalin considered it necessary to bind the entire population of the country with iron discipline, in 1940 his order appeared regarding the script for the film "Suvorov": “The script does not reveal the features of Suvorov's military policy and tactics .... Ability to maintain a harsh, truly iron discipline in the army.

Reading the script, one might think that Suvorov turned a blind eye to discipline in the army (he did not value discipline highly) and that he gained the upper hand not because of these features of his military policy and tactics, but mainly because of his kindness towards soldiers and bold cunning towards the enemy. turning into some kind of adventurism. This is, of course, a misunderstanding, to say the least. " (One can only guess what mortal horror seized the filmmakers, to whom such Stalinist remarks belonged: "... a misunderstanding, to say the least."

“... The cult of personality in itself contradicts the Marxist understanding of both society and the functions of art in society. Especially sharply, I would say, as in no other art, the cult of personality has affected the cinematic world, - testified Mikhail Romm. - In cinema, the situation was such that not a single picture (I mean full-length) or a group of short films that the program, with the exception of the chronicle, say, “News of the Day” (and the “News of the Day” was also viewed), did not appear on the screen without watching Stalin and his direct permission and amendments that he introduced. Thus, every picture, no matter what we did, was certainly waiting, sometimes for six months or more, to be seen by the Politburo, and in fact by Stalin. "

And filmmakers are accustomed to the fact that a single directive taste defines unambiguously everything that is required and desired in art. Taking into account the monstrous system of reinsurance thinking at all stages of production and "passage" of the film, the latter was viewed as a report or article in the newspaper, and the creative worker lost his own face.

He was dominated by the fear of the possibility of making a mistake (a creative failure could even cost his life) and absolute helplessness in defending his positions, his views, the complete deprivation of the inalienable right of every civilized person - the right to object. As a result, lacquering of reality, lack of conflict, an arrogant attitude towards "cogs", the people, on the one hand, and irrepressible servility towards the leader, on the other, disregard for the historical truth and the real facts of the biography of prominent figures of Russia in particular, triumphed in the cinema of the Stalinist period.

In his memoirs "Through the Eyes of a Man of My Generation" Konstantin Simonov argued that in Soviet cinema "in the most cruel years - thirty-seventh and thirty-eighth - much less people were affected by repression than in any other sphere of art." But if the number of writers is counted - a thousand died, and many more went through prisons, camps and exile, then no one has counted the repressed filmmakers yet ...

It is difficult to draw a clear distinction here - among the writers who died there were also scriptwriters. According to the testimony of the same Simonov, Stalin, scourging individual films, often blamed the sins only on the scriptwriters. For example, speaking in 1940 about the film "The Law of Life" directed by A. Stolper and B. Ivanov, mercilessly criticizing the scriptwriter A. Avdeenko, Stalin did not support the remark that it was necessary, they say, to punish the directors. Carelessly twisting his finger in the air, showing how the tape was spinning in the apparatus, he said: “What are they? They only played what he wrote. "

The number of victims of Stalinism among the organizers of film production was great. Along with Boris Shumyatsky, his deputies Yakov Chuzhin and Konstantin Yukov were repressed, the major organizers of film production Alexander Gruz and Grigory Irsky, as well as many other employees of the Main Directorate of Cinematography (GUKF). wife, actress Lyubov Babitskaya. They killed the deputy director of the Mosfilm film studio, a Bolshevik woman with pre-revolutionary experience, Elena Kirillovna Sokolovskaya, who had repeatedly been in the White Guard dungeons during the Civil War, and many other employees of this studio. A remarkable critic and theorist of cinema, screenwriter, playwright Adrian Piotrovsky, artistic director of the Lenfilm film studio was arrested and shot. And also almost the entire management team of this leading film studio. Margarita Barskaya, scriptwriter and director of the popular children's film Torn Shoes, was killed. And the performer of roles in the films "The Fifth Ocean" and "The Elusive Jan" actress Evgenia Gorkusha-Shirshova. A remarkable cameraman who used new methods of shooting, including combined, Vladimir Nielsen, was repressed.

The destroyed Veniamin Zuskin worked in the theater, but his role as Pini in the movie "The Seekers of Happiness" was a classic one. Repressed wonderful theater directors Vsevolod Meyerhold, Les Kurbas and Solomon Mikhoels made their own contribution to the art of cinema.

Filmmakers Alexei Kapler, Nikolai Erdman and Mikhail Volpin, Julius Dunsky and Valery Frid, Sergei Ermolinsky, sound engineer Yakov Kharon passed through the camps and exile. Actors Valentina Karavaeva, Tatiana Okunevskaya, Leonid Obolensky, the leading actor in the films "Forty-first" and "Pilots" Ivan Koval-Samborsky and won recognition already in the 70s, Vaclav Dvorzhetsky. Until recently, few people knew about the tragic fate of the popular film actor Georgy Zhzhenov, whose stunning memories of the “Kolyma period” of his life we ​​now read in his “Omchag Valley”.

And how much has our cinematography lost by unknown sound engineers and sound technicians, assistants, assistant filmmakers and cameramen, editors and film engineers. All of them must be named. Bloody Stalinist repressions fell upon foreign filmmakers fleeing fascism in our country. For example, the famous German film actress Karola Neer-Genschke, a brilliant performer of the leading role in the film "Threepenny Opera" by the progressive director Georg Pabst (based on the play by Bertolt Brecht), died in the camp. And the famous actor Erwin Geschonnek in the GDR recently published his memoirs about how he, a communist since 1929, was expelled in 1938 from Soviet Union to Czechoslovakia, where he ended up in the Gestapo.

A blow to Soviet cinema was the campaign of struggle against the "rootless cosmopolitans" inspired by Stalin in the post-war years. One of the founders of documentary cinema Dziga Vertov, directors L. Trauberg and S. Yutkevich, film critics and screenwriters M. Bleiman and N. Kovarsky, V. Sutyrin and N. Otten, historian and theorist of cinema N. Lebedev were accused of cosmopolitanism. When you read the article "Defeating Bourgeois Cosmopolitanism in Cinematography" published in Pravda on March 3, 1949, you do not believe that this could have happened. In the course of this campaign, the most base feelings were cultivated, mutual suspicion and hostility were kindled.

In October 1988, the Soviet public accepted the decision of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU to cancel the resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of August 14, 1946 "On the magazines" Zvezda "and" Leningrad ". It is worth recalling that on August 9, 1946, at a meeting of the Organizing Bureau of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, along with the fate of Leningrad magazines and individual writers and poets, the fate of the second series of films "Big Life" by L. Lukov and "Ivan the Terrible" by S. Eisenstein was predetermined. " Stalin gave the order ... "

This refrain from the "March of the Artillerymen" can be applied to Soviet filmmakers of the 1930s and 1940s without much exaggeration. As the participants in the events of that period testify, starting from the mid-30s, Stalin personally (not to be confused with the loyal falsification of the stagnant years - really personally!) Not only determined the strategy for the development of Soviet cinema, but also gave clear "orders" for the creation of individual films. The publication of these "orders" written by Stalin regarding the first versions of the scripts for the films "Great Citizen", "Suvorov", "Georgy Saakadze" will help, in our opinion, to approach the key problems of the history of Soviet cinema in a new way.

When you turn today to Stalin's instructions for the development of cinema, you again and again remember the warning that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. But Stalin's hypocrisy truly knew no bounds! Stalin's plans, expressed by him in December 1927 in the Political Report of the Central Committee at the 15th Party Congress, seem to be truly humanistic: “I think that it would be possible to begin a gradual curtailment of vodka, introducing, instead of vodka, such sources of income as radio and cinema ... Indeed, why not take these most important means into your hands and put on this matter shock people from the real Bolsheviks who could successfully blow up the business and give, finally, the opportunity to curtail the business of producing vodka. "But," blowing up " the subsequent years of repression in the country, Stalin clearly imagined that they would be impossible without the psychosis of suspicion among the people, without a massive clouding of public reason. And therefore, he assigned a special role to the "most important" of the arts - cinema - in "inflating" spy mania.

Films of any genre, if they were not of a historical nature, should have been interspersed with stories about the struggle against the Trotskyists and Bukharinites, enemies of the people and pests, saboteurs and saboteurs. For example, film critics are unanimous in the opinion that the first episode of the film "Big Life" was more successful than the second, literally destroyed by Stalin personally. But let's not forget about those moments that unite both series. In the first, the vile pests first tried to seduce the "positive" Boulder, and then by a landslide disrupt the establishment of a record by him. In the second episode, the bureaucrat Usynin - a comic character in the first - becomes a policeman, and the Nazis leave for sabotage work in the Soviet rear those saboteurs who, it would seem, so easily and finally were already exposed in the first episode.

Still from the movie "The Great Citizen"

The film "Great Citizen", which is so often written about nowadays, clearly stands out against the background of others, similar in theme, that is, exposing "enemies of the people." For example, this particular film, and no other, was massively shown in the People's Republic of China at the beginning of every political campaign like the "cultural revolution". For in the most vivid form he expressed the Stalinist idea of ​​sharpening the class struggle under socialism, which coincided with the task set by the then Chinese leadership - to strengthen the vigilance of the masses in relation to "hidden enemies." Sharp criticism in recent months has been directed primarily at the creators of the film "The Great Citizen". For example, the magazine Rinashita, the theoretical organ of the Italian Communist Party, published an extensive article on Soviet cinema a few months ago. In it, the author proves that the Soviet system of filmmaking “even in the worst periods did not completely suppress the creative prerogatives of the creators of the pictures. Here is just one but a compelling example. In 1939, Friedrich Ermler, with his film The Great Citizen, actually justified the monstrous Stalinist repressions that followed the mysterious assassination of Kirov. This film of his, deeply personal, and not courtly opportunistic (emphasized by us. - Auth.), Was imbued with the spirit crusade against “right and left oppositions”. But at about the same time, in 1938, Mark Donskoy presented us with the film Gorky's Childhood, a work breathing poetry and sympathy for a suffering person. Two films-antipodes, but grew up at the same time, on the same soil. " How easy it would be if today we could objectively divide the filmmakers of the Stalinist period into pairs of "clean" and "unclean". Put tapes by Mark Donskoy on the first shelf, and films by Friedrich Ermler on the second. After all, the list of films, as well as their directors who fanned spy mania, is long: "Aerograd" (1935, directed by A. Dovzhenko) and "Komsomolsk" (1938, directed by S. Gerasimov), "The Border Is Locked" ( 1937, directed by V. Zhuravlev) and "Motherland" (1940, directed by N. Shengelaya), "Party ticket" (1936, directed by I. Pyriev) and " High reward"(1939, dir. E. Schneider)," Honor "(1938, dir. E. Chervyakov) and" Courage "(1939, dir. M. Kalatozov)," Night in September "(1939 dir. B. Barnet) and "Miners" (1937, dir. S. Yutkevich). They were preceded by the film by the same F. Ermler, The Peasants, which was filmed in 1934.

The capture of a saboteur or pest became an obligatory attribute of even lyrical comedy films. Let us recall "A Girl with Character" (1939, directed by K. Yudin), "Arinka" (1940, directed by N. Kosheverova and Y. Musician), "The Bright Path" (1940, directed by G. Alexandrov). How can one today assess the fact that the script of the low-quality film "The Mistake of an Engineer Kochin" was written by such a persistent and noble writer as Yuri Olesha, based on the play by the brothers Tur and L. Sheinin "Face to Face"? No, “The Great Citizen” was not only a “deeply personal” film by F. Ermler, it was also “courtly opportunistic”. This is clearly evidenced by Stalin's never-published letter to the head of the cinematographic department of those years B. Z. Shumyatsky (a year later he was shot as an “enemy of the people”): “B. Shumyatsky. I read the script by Comrade Ermler (“The Great Citizen”). It was compiled undeniably politically competently. Literary merit is also undeniable.

There are errors, however.

1. Representatives of the “opposition” appear to be more senior physically and in terms of party experience than representatives of the Central Committee. This is atypical and not true. Reality gives the opposite picture.

2. The portrait of Zhelyabov must be removed: there is no analogy between the terrorists - pygmies from the camp of the Zinovievites and Trotskyists and the revolutionary Zhelyabov.

3. The mention of Stalin must be excluded. Instead of Stalin, the Central Committee of the party should have been installed.

4. The murder of Shakhov should not serve as the center and the highest point of the scenario: this or that terrorist act pales before the facts that were revealed by the Pyatakov-Radek trial.

The center and the highest point of the scenario should be the struggle of two programs, two directives: one program - for the victory of socialism in the USSR, for the elimination of all remnants of capitalism, for the independence and territorial integrity of the USSR, for anti-fascism and rapprochement with non-fascist states against fascist states, against war , for the politics of peace; another program - for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR and the curtailment of socialist gains, against the independence of the USSR and for the state dismemberment of the USSR to please the fascist states, for rapprochement with the most powerful fascist states against the interests of the working class and to the detriment of the interests of non-fascist states, for the aggravation of the military danger and against the politics of peace. The matter must be arranged so that the struggle between the Trotskyists and the Soviet government looks not like a struggle between two coteries for power, one of which was “lucky” in this struggle, and the other “unlucky”, which would be a gross distortion of reality, but as a struggle between two programs , of which the first program corresponds to the interests of the revolution and is supported by the people, and the second is contrary to the interests of the revolution and is rejected by the people.

But it follows from this that the script will have to be redone, making it more modern in all its content, reflecting all the main things that were revealed by the Pyatakov-Radek process. With com. greetings I. Stalin. January 27, 1937 ". This Stalinist concept, so clearly expressed in the letter, should be viewed against the backdrop of the hysterical orgy of "witch hunts" that unfolded in the country - on the pages of newspapers, at meetings, on movie screens. Exactly one week after Stalin's letter regarding the Great Citizen, the editorial of Pravda proclaimed: “Not a single malfunction, not a single accident should go unnoticed for us. We know that units do not break down by themselves, boilers do not explode by themselves. Someone's hand is hidden behind every such act. Is it not the hand of the enemy - this is the first question that should arise in each of us in those cases. "

And woe to those who, in the opinion of Stalin and his inner circle, exposed the "hidden enemies" and agents, their wives and children not energetically enough. So, in the summer of 1937, in an article about the re-elections in the Komsomol, indicating that they had already passed in more than one and a half thousand primary organizations Pravda stated threateningly: "Meanwhile, one can count on one hand the meetings where issues of Komsomol work were sharply, militantly discussed, where during the discussion of candidates the offspring of fascist agents who had made their way into the Komsomol were exposed."

Only taking into account the conditions of those years when the monstrous terror against its own people was growing, when the population of the country was daily poisoned with the poison of suspicion, when blatant lawlessness and torture flourished, when in a stream of mutual denunciations it was already impossible to separate the inhabitants mad with fear from unscrupulous careerists, should the film be analyzed "Great Citizen" and Stalin's letter regarding the first version of his script. Certain points of the Stalinist letter, that is, certain specific instructions, were taken into account by the authors of the film. Regarding the first - about the atypical juxtaposition of the age of the representatives of the Central Committee and the "opposition" - can be read in the memoirs of one of the authors of the script, Mikhail Bleiman (incidentally, subjected to cruel accusations of cosmopolitanism in the late 1940s). He might not have known that the installation came personally from Stalin. Instructions to scriptwriters could come indirectly, through some official of the film industry. In the 70s, Blayman told in a book with the symbolic title "About cinema - testimony": "We worked hard, we were hindered by the arbitrary concept of the plot found at the beginning - convenient and incorrect. There was an attempt to squeeze the content of "Great Citizen" into the traditional scheme of family drama. There was a struggle between father and son, and the son was right and the father was not. Voluntarily or involuntarily, the struggle in the picture became the struggle of generations. This was historically incorrect. Although convenient. We followed the truth and abandoned this scheme. " As for the removal of the portrait of Zhelyabov - Stalin's instructions not to allow the terror of the Trotskyists and Zinovievites to be compared with the Narodnaya Volya, - even at the trial of Zinoviev, Kamenev and others in the summer of 1936, State Prosecutor Vyshinsky refuted the apparently gaining popularity idea of ​​the comparability of the actions of the opposition and the Narodnaya Volya: comparisons with the period of terror of the Narodnaya Volya are truly shameless. Filled with respect for the memory of those who, during the times of the People's Will, honestly and sincerely fought against the tsarist autocracy, for freedom, although with my own special, not always impeccable methods, I categorically reject this blasphemous parallel. " This fact once again proves how scrupulously Stalin combined his consultations on screenplays and directing the trials of Lenin's comrades-in-arms.

And it is natural that the press wrote about the first episode of "The Great Citizen": "The painting" The Great Citizen "was released on screens in the days when the whole country, the entire Soviet people, seized by a formidable and crushing hatred, judged despicable villains and provocateurs from the" right- Trotskyist bloc ". The picture was seen by millions of Soviet patriots at the same time as, in the October Hall of the House of Unions, the prosecutor of the USSR, on behalf of the free peoples of the great country, summed up the judicial results of the unprecedented crimes of dirty traitors. While the court, by its verdict, drew a line under the monstrous activity of spies and murderers, “The Great Citizen” from the screen reminded the audience of how this activity began. ”

The third Stalinist instruction seems to testify to the leader's modesty. Indeed, the hypocrite Stalin could afford this, and he should have restrained the overly zealous authors of the script - they say, not with Stalin, after all, but with the Central Committee, the factionalists fought. But this is the rarest case when Stalin's specific installation could have been circumvented. And vice versa, to be punished if you follow it literally. The film contains a lot of remarks dedicated to Stalin, a portrait of the leader - both in Shakhov's bedroom and on the factory walls. One of the scenes (in the script published in 1942) - at night in Shakhov's office (the prototype of which, as indicated in the credits, was S.M. Kirov), two visitors. Authorized by the Communist Party of China and at the same time a talented inventor Katz and second secretary of the regional committee Zemtsov (who later turned out to be a provocateur sent to the party by the tsarist secret police, and now contacted foreign agents).

The absent-minded, pensive owner of the cabinet is suddenly transformed - he insistently begins to ask: is Soviet power strong? Is the Communist Party Strong? “But if we are three ... if we were enemies ... How would we fight with such a government and such a party? - And, rounding Katz and Zemtsov with a heavy and evil look, he asks: - I ask you, if there are stupid enemies who are shooting at the secretaries of the regional committees, then there may be smart ones who act differently. I'm asking you, can they or can't?! "And although no one objected to him, he ends up shouting, as if a heated argument is taking place here:" But Stalin claims that they can and do! He talks about this from year to year, at every congress, warns all the time ...! "The end of the conversation - in a calmer tone:" - What do you suggest? - asks Zemtsov. - Nothing special. Learn to think and work in the Stalinist way. " Indeed, Shakhov's vigilance is truly Stalinist. For example, in one of the discussions, the hidden enemy Kartashov objected to Shakhov: "I did not say that." Shakhov pauses for a second: "But it turns out that way: you obviously thought so." Or the final shots of the film - to the sound of the funeral march, Katz utters the words of farewell at the coffin of Shakhov, who was killed by the enemies of the people. He recalls how vigilant Shakhov was ten years ago, when the question of "who - whom" was being decided - "in the years when the party began a new great offensive, when the human rabble of all stripes and shades hissed, croaked, slandered, trying to stop us, confuse, intimidate.

Like devils with incense, they were twisted and twisted even from one name - Stalin. Millions followed this name, and popular rumor called the leading cohort of fighters a simple and honorable title - the Stalinists. And our dear… such dear Pyotr Mikhailovich Shakhov was a faithful Stalinist - a courageous and honest fighter for the people's cause ”. Further, Katz recalls the words of Shakhov, said back in 1925: “The Bolshevik Party is building a new life, realizing the age-old dream of mankind! And everyone who gets in her way, everyone who tries to stop our work, the people will destroy! "He continues to speak quietly and slowly:" And the people - the victorious people - destroyed them, destroy them and will destroy them. The sacred ruthlessness to the few in the name of the happiness of millions (emphasized by me. - Author) - this is the thought that he endured, which he lived and for which he was treacherously killed.

Pyotr Mikhailovich Shakhov died. He was just like us - only a little higher ... He had the same eyes as ours - only a little sharper ... He thought about the same thing that we think - only much deeper ... He had great love , great faith and great hatred. And he bequeathed this to us - great hatred for enemies, great faith in our victory and great love for the people, for the party, for Stalin. " year ". The wounded Lenin addresses Professor Mints: “Doctor, you are a communist and must speak directly. If this is the end, I must issue an order. Summon Stalin. "

On the set, doubts arose about the text of the final scene: Lenin, who had not yet recovered from his injury, fussy seated the young and healthy Stalin in an easy chair, while he sat down on the chair. And then the head of cinematography S.S. Without a word, Dukelsky took a copy of the script out of the safe, on the last page of which was inscribed a resolution: “Very good. I. Stalin ". Against the background of the events of that period, such a fact will seem like a petty quibble. In a letter dated January 27, 1937, Stalin writes that the crimes shown in the script pale before the facts revealed by the Pyatakov-Radek trial, and that the script should be redone to reflect “all that is basic” that was revealed by this trial. But the verdict on the accused was passed only on January 30th. As for the image of Pyatakov, his surname is absent in all the published versions of the script. And in the film, he is still there! And the most vile figure: he talks about his connections with foreign centers, will convey orders to Trotsky, plans to carry out monstrous sabotage under the guise of "natural disasters".

And yet the “highest point of the scenario”, in spite of Stalin, turned out to be the murder of Shakhov! The doorknob slowly turns - Shakhov is heading towards death. And on the screen, the horror-distorted face of the new director of the plant, Nadia Kolesnikova (played by Zoya Fedorova, who was subsequently repressed).

How do you rate a movie these days? I don't think so many articles and memoirs, notes and responses have been written about any other film, about the process of filming it, except, perhaps, "Chapaev". And today we must admit that the film is talented, made at a high professional level, an ensemble of wonderful actors has been selected.

And nevertheless, the praises of the “Great Citizen” scattered throughout the pages of the 1986 Encyclopedic Dictionary of Cinema, which were published in 1986, are fundamentally wrong. That this film is of fundamental importance for the development of the art of socialist realism in cinema (p. 234). That, in spite of the fact that "the film was not free from some mistakes in portraying the class struggle of the early 1930s, the innovation of the direction and the excellent ensemble cast put this work among the greatest achievements of cinematography." And finally, that “performed by N.I. Bogolyubova Shakhov became one of the memorable heroes, embodying on the screen the type of a politician of the Leninist formation ”(p. 361).

F. Ermler began his speech to the crew of the second series of the film “The Great Citizen” with the passage: “I do not intend (and, unfortunately, I can’t) discover America. I have only one thought, and the thought is not new. We, cinematographers, and in particular our film crew, who have taken on a difficult and difficult obligation to make a film like The Great Citizen, we need the truth. "

And the film turned out to be a "big lie." This is vividly shown in the work of the untimely deceased Max Bremener “Test by Truth. Reflections on the film by F. Ermler "The Great Citizen" (Cinema Art. 1988. No. 9). Different views are expressed about the personality of the director F. Ermler. Of course, a disservice, in my opinion, was rendered to the memory of the director in the recent statement of the famous actress E. Bystritskaya that “Ermler was an honest artist, an inflexible person and, of course, in the Stalin years he was in disgrace,” that is, he worked not for fear, but for conscience.

But we must not forget the main motto of those terrible years: "He who is not with us is against us," and even a small step to the side was considered as an attempt to escape - the shot followed without warning. And on the "loyal subjects" of Stalin's tyranny, a rain of encouragements and awards rained down. Having received the Stalin Prize for the "Great Citizen", F. Ermler was then awarded three more Stalin Prizes, the Order of Lenin, and received the title of People's Artist of the USSR. Judging by his articles of those years, he carried out the "Stalinist mandate" with zeal, professionally, he was helped by the fact that he came to the cinema from the organs of the Cheka. Although, there is no doubt that the threat of repression hung over him, like over every Soviet person.

Indeed, in the process of making the film "Great Citizen" four members of the creative team were arrested, two of them died in Stalin's dungeons.

The testimonies of F. Ermler and other scriptwriters about how they could not find a performer for the role of “one of the leaders of the Trotskyite-Zinoviev gang” - Kartashov are impressive: “The actors refused to play the enemy. They were afraid of this role, they were afraid of the viewer's hatred. " And then I had to persuade for a long time the selected for this role I.N. Bersenev, because he flatly refused: “And if you play well, you will not be able to appear on the tram. The boys will certainly break the skull with a cobblestone. ”“ It was said quite seriously, ”the authors of the script complained about the difficulties.

In 1938, F. Ermler wrote that the actor began to enter the image of the enemy by studying the closed materials of the trials of the 30s, the works of Stalin. (In the 60s, he already claimed that Dostoevsky's "Demons" played a big role, which were transferred to the actor.) "We tried not to illustrate our reality," wrote the writers of the script for "The Great Citizen," studying the works of Stalin. We tried to trace the course of his thoughts, the birth of his conclusions and predictions. "

The scriptwriters of The Great Citizen were forced to play an unseemly role in the tragedy that befell the entire Lenfilm leadership, headed by Adrian Piotrovsky, who was shot in 1938. In the same year, F. Ermler and other scriptwriters on the pages of the Cinema Art magazine stated: “We received an object lesson in the class struggle from the experience of staging our own thing. The harmful, now exposed management of the Lenfilm studio invented a variety of ways to disrupt this production. The script was not allowed to be filmed because it allegedly needed revision; the script was not allowed to be filmed, suddenly calling into question its political relevance. The calculation was that we ... will surrender ... because the enemies of the people were afraid to directly prohibit the staging, they could not ”.

And yet, it is hardly worth portraying F. Ermler as such a "devil of hell" among his colleagues. After all, our other leading cinematographers, whose portraits now adorn the foyer of the Central House of Cinema of the Union of Cinematographers, had to say, write and do much of the same in those terrible years.

“Cinema is the greatest medium of mass agitation. The task is to take matters into our own hands. " These are the words from the final part of the Organizational Report of the Central Committee to the XIII Congress of the RCP (B), with which I.V. Stalin. Stalin fulfilled this task “literally” and with interest: as eyewitnesses testify, starting from the late 1930s, he personally exercised control over the production and release of almost every Soviet film.

As you know, 13 volumes of Stalin's Collected Works were published during his lifetime. To understand all the horrors of Stalinism, social scientists need to turn to Stalin's works again and again. After his death, the final 14th and 15th volumes were prepared for publication. Signal copies appeared, but the circulation was not published. The reason is not difficult to guess - there was a struggle in the party leadership on the eve of the XX Congress, the publication of the final volumes of the Collected Works of Stalin, commented in an apologetic spirit, would contradict the line on debunking the personality cult. In our days, the surviving separate signal copies of the last volumes are of great value. A special role in understanding the events of the period from the summer of 1934 to the spring of 1953 is played by those Stalinist works that were never published, they were planned to be included in the 14th and 15th volumes with the note: "Published for the first time."

A striking fact: the compilers of the 14th volume, placing the Stalinist works in chronological order, could not find a single Stalinist line under the heading "1940", except for three works on cinema, more precisely - on separate film scripts. Judging by the Collected Works, Stalin during this year only reads the screenplays and gives them ratings. He even holds a special meeting on one of the films. Of the most interesting, in our opinion, of several Stalinist films on film is a short recording dated September 9, 1940, "From a speech at a meeting about the film" The Law of Life ". Of course, the very fact of Stalin's merciless criticism of the script for the film "The Law of Life" is now widely known - it is enough to refer, for example, to the memoirs of Konstantin Simonov, published in 1988 in the magazine "Znamya", "Through the Eyes of a Man of My Generation." Let us read carefully the text of this document.

“From a speech at a meeting about the film“ The Law of Life ”: There are various questions here, these questions are of great importance for the development of literature. First, I would like to say on a question that has no direct bearing on Avdeenko's scenario - the approach to literature. There is an approach to literature from the point of view of its truthfulness and objectivity. Does this truthfulness and objectivity mean that a writer can and should be impartial, just sketch, photograph? Is it possible to equate a living person, a writer who wants to be truthful and objective, can he be equated with a photographic apparatus? No way. This means that truthfulness, objectivity should not be dispassionate, but alive. A writer is a living person, he sympathizes with some of his characters, dislikes someone. This means that truthfulness and objectivity are truthfulness and objectivity that serves some class. Plekhanov said that literature cannot be tendentious, and when he deciphered this, it turned out that literature should serve some class, some society. Therefore, literature cannot be some kind of photographic apparatus. This is not how truthfulness should be understood. There can be no literature without passion, it always sympathizes with someone, hates someone. I believe that it is from this point of view that we should approach the evaluation of literature - from the point of view of truthfulness and objectivity.

Is it required that works show us the enemy only in its most important, negative form? Is this right or wrong? Not properly. There are different ways of writing, for example, the manner of Gogol or Shakespeare. They have outstanding heroes - negative and positive. When you read Gogol or Griboyedov, you find a hero with only negative traits. All negative traits are concentrated in one person. I would prefer another style of writing - the style of Chekhov, who does not have outstanding heroes, but there are “gray” people, but reflecting the main stream of life. This is a different way of writing.

I would prefer that our literature portrays enemies not as monsters, but as people hostile to our society, but not devoid of some human traits. The very last scoundrel has some human traits, he loves someone, respects someone, for the sake of someone wants to sacrifice. I would prefer our writers to portray enemies like this, enemies of the mighty. What a plus would be for us if we were making noise, if there was a class struggle, a struggle between capitalism and socialism, and suddenly it turned out that we had smashed the little one. And the enemies made a lot of noise, they were not so weak. Weren't there strong people among them? Why shouldn't Bukharin, no matter how monster he be, be portrayed in such a way that he also had some human features? Trotsky is an enemy, but he was a capable person, no doubt - it is necessary to portray him as an enemy, but having not only negative features.

We need truthful literature that depicts the enemy in full - not only negative, but also positive traits that he had, for example, perseverance, consistency, courage to go against society. And the point is not that Comrade. Avdeenko gives enemies in a decent light, but in the fact that the winners, who defeated the enemies, led the country behind them, he leaves aside, he does not have enough colors for them. That's the problem. This is his main bias and untruthfulness.

There has been a lot of talk here about not indulging young, budding writers, not pushing them forward early, because this makes people dizzy and deteriorate. This, of course, is true, but one cannot preach any kind of guild-like behavior in professional literature.

Previously, they looked like this: a student may be capable, but he has a deadline. An apprentice may be three heads taller than a master, but once the deadline is set, he must work it out. Then he will be slapped in the face and initiated into the master. What are you, dear comrades, preaching such a philosophy? And if among the young there were people who, in talent, in talent, are not worse than some old writers, why would you marinate them? This will cripple capable people who are “gifted by God” who want to grow. You have to grow them, you have to look after them, look after them like a gardener looks after plants. We need to help them, we need to break the guild. We must put an end to these guild traditions, otherwise it will never be possible to nominate people.

Take the best commander of our country - Suvorov. He was a monarchist, a feudal lord, a nobleman, a count, but practice prompted him that it was necessary to break some foundations, and he promoted people who had distinguished themselves in battles. And only as a result of this, Suvorov created a group around himself that broke these foundations. He was disliked because he violated the traditions of the guild. They said - this one, not a very capable commander, but excuse me, because he has such a surname, such connections at court, he is so sweet, how can you not love him? And Suvorov moved little-known people, broke the foundations of the guild. They did not like him for this, but he created around him a group of capable people, good generals.

The same is true if you take Lenin. How did Lenin forge cadres? If he saw only those who spent 10-15 years in the party environment in leadership work and so on, and did not notice those young but capable people who are growing like mushrooms, if Lenin did not notice this and did not break the traditions of experience, he would be gone.

Party, literature, army - all these are organisms in which some cells need to be renewed without waiting for the old ones to die off. If we wait until the old ones die, and only then will we update, we will be lost, I assure you. With these amendments, I agree with the statements regarding the nomination of youth. You can't limit people, keep them in a corral. After all, there are few old cadres. Of course, it is good to have old writers, this is a find, a treasure, but there are few of them. And in our party too - old people who never grow old in soul, who are able to perceive everything young - there are few such old people. If you build a literary front only on them, only on old people who never grow old - there are old people who do not grow old, then your army will be very small, and it will not live long, because the old cadres are still die out. Hence the question of aspiring writers.

Here they talked about "roach", about thousands. We also have middle peasants in the party who are not known to anyone. They are more or less known to the Central Committee, they are people who have not stood out in anything yet, but capable. There are such people, you have to deal with them, work with them, and they usually make good workers. We were all middle peasants, we were corrected one, another time, where necessary, and good workers grew out of the “roach”. We have a lot of "roach", so we should not forget it, we must work with this "roach", and not say that it is only for counting. You can't do that, it hurts people very much. There must be patient work to educate these people, to select them. If one writer comes out of twenty people, that's good. Then you will have a whole army of writers. Our country is large, and you need to have quite a lot of writers. If a person is talented, capable, he must be raised, helped to go up, maybe even in violation of the charter. Sometimes nothing comes out without violations.

About Wanda Vasilevskaya. Why do you like her writing style? She has in her works “gray”, simple people, inconspicuous figures, but they are well displayed in everyday life, they are cleverly and well chosen. I don’t think she’s the most outstanding writer, but I think she’s quite talented and very good at writing. However, for some reason it is hushed up. She herself does not climb anywhere. You read her works - you will see that this is a talented person. We have many talented people who are famous. Take Panferov, for example. He has good places, but in general a person can write when he is working on himself. Panferov is famous, and I assure you that Wanda Vasilevskaya could have become taller than Panferov, but no one is doing her.

Now about Comrade Avdeenko. You see, I already said that the point is not that he gives types of enemies or friends of our enemies in a decent form, not as monsters, but as people who have some good features, since without them there is not a single person. The very last scoundrel, if you look closely at him, has good features, for example, he can lay his head for his friend. This means that the point is not that Avdeenko portrays our enemies well, but that the people who exposed these enemies are shown by him not by Soviet people. It is not so easy to do it. In our country, for example, 25-30 million people starved in the past, there was not enough bread, but now they began to live well. Enemies within the party figured out this: we will give this to the Germans, this to the Japanese, there will be enough land for our century. But in our country it has turned the other way around - we are not giving anything to anyone, on the contrary, we are expanding the front of socialism. Is it bad? Is it bad from the point of view of the balance of the struggle of forces in the world? We are expanding the front of socialist construction, this is beneficial for humanity. After all, Lithuanians, Western Belarusians, Moldovans and others consider themselves happy, whom we have delivered from the oppression of landowners, capitalists, policemen and any other bastards. This is from the point of view of the peoples. And from the point of view of the struggle of forces on a world scale, between socialism and capitalism, this is a big plus, because we are expanding the front of socialism and reducing the front of capitalism. And Avdeenko's people who have to fight are shown as some kind of creepy, grayish people. How could such people defeat their enemies? The whole sin of Avdeenko is that he leaves our Bolshevik brother in the shadows and for him Avdeenko lacks color. He looked at the enemies so well, got to know them so well that he can portray them from both a negative and a positive point of view. He did not look closely at our reality. It’s hard to believe, but he didn’t understand, didn’t notice her.

Here is about the same picture - "The Law of Life". Why “Zakon” - Avdeenko did not explain. What did you want to say? “Here, you, gentlemen, Bolsheviks, no matter how you interpret, but such love, as I understand it, exists, and it will take its toll, because it is the law of life.” He didn’t have enough spirit to say this to the end, but anyone who knows how to think understands what it is. Avdeenko's ognerubov is a fine fellow, an eagle, he fell victim to stupidity, the crowd. It happens, they say, right? The heroes fall. Brilliant people find themselves in a limited environment. Directly some kind of Chatsky who was strangled by Wednesday. I would like to know which of his heroes Avdeenko sympathizes with. In any case, not to the Bolsheviks. Why, otherwise, did he not have enough colors to show real people? Where did the Chkalovs come from? Where did they come from, because they do not fall from the sky? After all, there is an environment that gives such heroes. Why does Avdeenko lack color to show good people, to show how a new life is being built? Why doesn't it have colors to paint our life? Because he doesn't sympathize with it. You will say that I am exaggerating. I would like to be wrong, but, in my opinion, he hardly sympathizes with the Bolsheviks. After all, he was repeatedly corrected, pointed out. Everything is the same. He does his own thing anyway. Someone else's camp lives with him, and our camp is somewhere in the shadows.

Now the painting "The Law of Life". The same. Where is it from? Is this a mistake? No, not a mistake. A self-confident person, he writes the laws of life for people, he almost claims to have a monopoly on the education of young people. If he had not been warned, not corrected, that would have been a different matter, but there were warnings from the Central Committee and a review in Pravda, and he continues his work. "

Necessary comment: The "culprit" of the special meeting in the Central Committee of the Party should be presented to the reader. Alexander Ostapovich was born in Donbass into a mining family, and was homeless as a child. He worked in mines and factories in Donbass, as a locomotive driver on the "hot tracks" of Magnitogorsk. Already in 1933, the first book of an autobiographical novel by a 25-year-old writer "I Love" was published, which was highly appreciated by M. Gorky in his speech at the First Congress of Writers. In 1936, the novel Fate was published, the protagonist of which, a former peasant, participates in the construction of Magnitogorsk. We add that A. Avdeenko also wrote the screenplay "I Love" (that is, in 1940 he was not a novice screenwriter), according to which the film was shot in 1936 by director Leonid Lukov. Thus, Lukov, who was subjected to devastating criticism in a special decree in the post-war period for the second episode of the film "Big Life".

In the post-war period Avdeenko publishes the play "Peers", the novel "Labor", which shows the life of Donetsk miners in the mid-30s, the military adventure stories "Over the Tissa" and "Mountain Spring", collections of stories. July 1988.

We are sitting on the veranda of the dacha in Peredelkino. Alexander Ostapovich Avdeenko, who turns 80 in a month, recalls such a dramatic meeting in the Kremlin on September 9, 1940. Yes, the criticism of Stalin was truly merciless, he testifies. Stalin spoke in a raised tone (this happened to him extremely rarely) that the author of the script for the film "The Law of Life" was "a man in a mask", "a friend of the enemies of the people", an "anti-Soviet writer", that it was necessary to check who recommended him to the party.

I ask Alexander Ostapovich to tell in more detail about the course of the meeting, about its background. This meeting can be considered unique - more than forty people gathered in the Kremlin hall, where the meetings of the Organizing Bureau of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks were held. The Presidium of the Writers' Union was invited - Fadeev, Pogodin, Trenev, Kataev, Aseeva. The bulk of the party was made up of employees of the Central Committee of the party, responsible for ideology, propaganda, culture. It began at about 19 o'clock, ended at midnight, in the form resembled a meeting of a military tribunal. The main message on the film was made by A.A. Zhdanov.

... The film "The Law of Life" was given wide advertising, huge queues accumulated at the ticket offices of Moscow cinemas. The film was highly appreciated by the newspaper "Kino" - the organ of the Committee for Cinematography. At the end of July, the Izvestia newspaper published a positive review of the film The Law of Life. Noting that the film is the first sign in the development of a modern everyday theme, listing a number of shortcomings, the newspaper noted that “after all, the film is really good. Sincerely, with great inner truth, he poses a number of problems and solves them. The authors are not fake, they are not trying to elude acute questions, they are not hovering in an imaginary world, but they show real Soviet people, real life, real joys and sorrows. "

And exactly three weeks later, Pravda published an editorial, The Fake Film. A.O. Avdeenko, on the basis of conversations with witnesses of the events, considers it an undoubted fact that this article was edited by Stalin personally, who included in it the most acute accusations, biting epithets.

The article began with the assertion that “the moral of the film is false and the film itself is fake through and through. To put it more precisely, the film "The Law of Life" is a slander against our student youth. "

The filmmakers were accused of relishing the "reckless drunken binge" of graduates medical institute, in "the revival of Artsybashevism, which in their time they tried to poison the youth, to turn them away from politics, from the revolutionary movement by preaching sexual licentiousness." As in Stalin's speech, Avdeenko was accused in the article that his sympathies were on the side of the decomposed hero of the film, "no matter how hard he tried to hide it with obscure maxims."

Although the final monologue of the positive character of the film, Sergei Paromov, does not allow any misinterpretation - he says that the law of life should be decency and honesty, that such a sacred feeling as love should be protected.

Alexander Ostapovich says that on August 16, 1940, on the day the newspaper article appeared in Pravda, he worked from the early morning at the Continental Hotel in Kiev on the movie script People Who Stepped Over the Border, which had already been put into production.

In the morning I went to Khreshchatyk and was amazed: the poster was gluing a giant billboard with the image of the "lyrical couple" from the film "The Law of Life" - Sergei Paromov and Natasha Babanova. And people crowded at the stand with Pravda. Alexander Ostapovich's heart skipped a beat - he immediately realized that his film was in the spotlight. However, as Alexander Ostapovich emphasizes, at that moment he did not feel “knocked down” yet. His social position was strong, one might say that he was a successful writer, a correspondent for Pravda. Sincerely and sacredly believed in the all-encompassing genius of Stalin. Alexander Ostapovich himself reminded the author of this article of the fact that Pravda published on February 1, 1935 his speech at the VII All-Union Congress of Soviets "For which I applauded Stalin." In the spirit of that time, the speech ended with the words: “Our love, devotion, strength, heart, heroism, life - everything is for you, take, take the great Stalin, everything is yours, the leader of the great Motherland. Dispose of your sons, who are capable of deeds in the air, and underground, and in the water, and in the stratosphere. "

Only in the evening of August 16, 1940, in a conversation with a fellow Pravdist in a hotel restaurant, to the reply: "Some fool destroyed my film" - Alexander Ostapovich heard the most terrible thing: "Not a fool, but Stalin." On the same evening, a government telegram came, signed by Kuznetsov, Zhdanov's assistant, that the secretary of the Central Committee of the party Zhdanov proposed to immediately appear in the Central Committee. For several days, nevertheless, Avdeenko could not get an appointment, and when he was summoned on September 9 to the building of the Central Committee, he did not expect that he would immediately go to the meeting. Well, when the meeting ended, recalls Avdeenko, a state of complete insanity set in. Resentment burned - after all, Zhdanov so fraudulently quoted his articles taken out of context in Pravda! He shouted: "I did not expect that they would talk to me like that in the Central Committee!" But the main thing, of course, was gripped by fear - I was sure that he would be arrested immediately ...

The postman slipped a fresh issue of Pravda under the door, on the last page in the right corner there is information that, due to the anti-Soviet nature of the publications, A. Avdeenko was suspended from work as a special correspondent. An urgent meeting of Moscow writers was called - Avdeenko was expelled from the Writers' Union in absentia. Avdeenko was expelled from the party just a few days later, when Alexander Ostapovich returned to Donbass, and immediately to the district committee bureau, "for bourgeois decomposition."

... Only after looking at this "tightly" forgotten tape, you begin to understand the reason why Stalin fell on her so furiously. By the way, this film is practically not mentioned in modern studies about Soviet cinema in the 1930s and 1940s. In the annotated catalog "Soviet Feature Films" it is reported: it appeared on the screen on August 7, 1940, filmed on August 17, 1940, that is, it was at the box office for only 10 days. Of course, the aesthetics of the film is outdated, there is much that is naive in it, but for its time it stood out for the unusualness of the problems raised. There are no "enemies of the people", saboteurs, spies in the film.

In his office, under a large portrait of Stalin, as well as in the circle of students, the secretary of the regional committee of the Komsomol Ognerubov speaks the correct, beautiful words about communism, about the role of Soviet youth. They listen to him with bated breath. But in fact, he seduces naive girls, punches a career for himself by any means. Surrounded by lackeys, flatterers and sycophants, he delivers a speech against hypocrites who say one thing and think and do another. He does not hide the fact that he wants to take all the benefits from life. And then it is exposed not by the higher party bodies, but by ordinary students. Sergei Paromov directly proclaims from the rostrum: “Aren't there people among us even a little like Ognerubov ?!” And Stalin got furious. He saw a tunnel under the impregnable bureaucratic fortress he had created. It turns out that an attempt to control the “higher ranks” appears from below! can develop, people will begin to think about the decay, corruption of the apparatus - the main support of Stalinism. Ponder over the facts of discrepancies between word and deed. And Stalin struck a crushing blow, firmly chopped off a timid attempt to criticize the apparatus. This was a large-scale action. Immediately after the meeting in The Kremlin has delayed the release of the next issues of a number of thick magazines in order to ruthlessly condemn the film "The Law of Life" in editorial and copyright articles.

Of course, Stalin's speech on September 9, 1940 is even more significant for its first part, which speaks of the "approach to literature." Apparently, this is the only Stalinist work in which he theorizes on the problems of truthfulness and objectivity of fiction. In the spirit of the famous: "The Girl and Death" by Gorky, stronger than Goethe's "Faust", he gives instructions that one should write in the "manner" of Chekhov, and not Gogol and Griboyedov.

The main feature of the Stalinist speech is its invariably inherent hypocrisy and double-mindedness. What is even worth such a passage: “Why not portray Bukharin, no matter how monster he was, so that he had some human features.” And the Stalinist directive sounds truly ominous: “The party, literature, the army - all organisms in which some cells need to be renewed without waiting for the old ones to die off. "

But Aleksandr Avdeenko was lucky to a certain extent - he turned out to be not the “cage” that was destined to “wither away”. When a state of siege was declared in Moscow four months after the start of the war, A. Avdeenko refused to leave for the rear and came to Krasnaya Zvezda with a request to send him to the front as a correspondent. This was out of the question, and then Alexander Ostapovich went into the active army, fought bravely as the commander of a mortar platoon. In the future, Alexander Ostapovich writes front-line essays from the very heat of battles, participates in the liberation of Kiev and Prague, the capture of Berlin.

In our opinion, if we want to tell the whole truth about the difficult past of our cinema, as well as of our entire society, we should not so much "push" the publicity of certain filmmakers into the bright light, sometimes biasedly "whitewashing" some and making others "scapegoats" how much to search and publish new materials and documents of Stalinism, which still lie intact in the archives.

And then the whole abyss of the past will begin to open. And a lot will fall into place.

On the Internet, you can find various publications and discussions in which the opinion is expressed that the historian Anatoly Latyshev is a fictitious person or that there are no traces of his scientific activity before 1991. One of the most recent publications on this topic is Ildar Ilyasov's post "Twenty Years of Lies" ("http://ledokol-ledokol.livejournal.com/149961.html"). Unfortunately, the authors of all these publications do not have information about the biographical information and scientific activities of Anatoly Latyshev, therefore, in order to avoid incorrect statements on this matter in the future, I will cite data regarding his personality and his works.

Anatoly Georgievich Latyshev was born in 1934. Graduated in 1956 from the Dnepropetrovsk Metallurgical Institute. Was in the Komsomol work. He studied at the Higher Party School (HPS) under the Central Committee of the CPSU. For twenty-five years he worked at the Department of International Relations of the Higher School of Art at the Central Committee of the CPSU, and then at the Moscow and Central Higher Party School. For fifteen years he was a member of the Academic Council of the Museum of V.I. Lenin.

He defended his thesis for the degree of Candidate of Historical Sciences - The Swiss Workers' Movement after the Second World War. (1945-1965) / Academy of Social Sciences under the Central Committee of the CPSU. Department of the History of the International Communist and Labor Movement. Moscow, 1968

During the Soviet period, the following books and articles about V.I.Lenin and the people and events associated with him were published (perhaps the list is not complete, it also does not include articles written by A.G. Latyshev about other historical events and political figures):
Books:

Desyaterik V.I., Latyshev A.G. Hand in hand, like like-minded people. M.: Molodaya gvardiya, 1970.208 p. Circulation 50,000 copies.

Desyaterik, V.I., Latyshev, A.G. Struggle teaches. Lenin and young foreign revolutionaries. Moscow: Molodaya gvardiya, 1974, 191 p., Circulation 45,000 copies.

Latyshev A. Lenin, the youth of the world and the revolution. M .: Knowledge, 1977. 64 s. Circulation 79 360 copies

Latyshev A. G. V. I. Lenin and the Swiss workers' movement in 1914-1917. // Questions of history, 1969, no. 6, p. 3-19.

Latyshev A. G. V. I. Lenin and the workers' movement in Switzerland before the First World War // Uchenye zapiski. / Higher Party School under the Central Committee of the CPSU. 1974. Issue 1.S. 215-249

Latyshev A. Swiss friend of Lenin. // Communist, 1984, No 6, p. 103-113

Latyshev A. Flaws in the legacy. To really know Lenin and Stalin, it is necessary to open primary sources and documents // Union, 1990. No. 11. P. 3.

In the first half, A. G. Latyshev, 1991, left the CPSU. Became a member of the Democratic Party of Russia. From September 1991 he worked as a political columnist for the Democratic Newspaper, the newspapers Rossiyskoe Vremya and Utro Rossii.

At the end of September 1991, A.G. Latyshev, as a member of the temporary commission for the parliamentary investigation of the causes and circumstances of the coup d'etat in the USSR, gets the opportunity to work for a month and a half in the Central Party Archives of the Institute of Marxism-Leninism under the CPSU Central Committee (CPA IML) with documents from Fund of V.I. Lenin. On this occasion, Ildar Ilyasov writes the following in his post: “Let's turn to the documents. appendix - "Composition of the deputy commission to investigate the causes and circumstances of the coup d'etat in the USSR." There is no Latyshev there. And why should he be there? With the exception of two people, all the members of the commission were directly related to the Supreme Soviet. So Latyshev is here lying. "

But it is worth noting that A. G. Latyshev was a member of the temporary commission as part of a group of experts headed by B. M. Pugachev, Doctor of Philosophy.

There is evidence that B.M.Pugachev, just as A.G. Latyshev worked in the archive with the V.I.Lenin fund:
“Here is the opinion of BM Pugachev, Doctor of Philosophy, head of a group of experts of the Russian parliamentary commission. He is the first of ordinary mortals who got acquainted with the unknown documents of Lenin. Pugachev, in particular, remarked:“ Yes, we found a number of his letters, documents that have never been published before. You know, even for me, a person who has been associated with social science for many years, reading these papers was ... well, surprising, or something. Ilyich's letters characterize him as an extremely cruel man, moreover, as a hater of man. "

Evgenia Albats in her book "Mine of Delayed Action". 1992 to Chapter III. The torturers and victims cites references 27 and 48, which also confirm the participation of A. G. Latyshev in the commission - A. Latyshev. "Genesis of the totalitarian system in the USSR". Documents of the Russian Armed Forces Commission to investigate the causes and circumstances of the coup.

It is possible that full list with a list of all the experts of the commission is stored in the archives Documents on the organization and activities of the Deputy Commission (copies of the resolution of the Presidium of the RSFSR Armed Forces, reports on the work of the commission, report on the work of the commission of the USSR Armed Forces, draft resolutions, statements of the commission). GARF. F. 10026. Op. 4.D. 3471

After working in the archive with the V.I.Lenin fund, A.G. Latyshev over the course of several years began to publish numerous articles in various newspapers and magazines, which, unlike his Soviet publications, already had a clear anti-Leninist orientation (it is worth noting that only concerning Lenin's participation in the execution of Nicholas II and his family, A.G. Latyshev defended the point of view that he was not involved in this execution). A. G. Latysheva was especially active in publishing the publication of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation "Rossiyskaya Gazeta", which, thanks to its circulation of 1,000,000 copies. contributed to the widespread popularization of his articles. As an example, I will give the names of some of them:

The trouble of tomorrow. On the "secret" and open funds of Lenin // Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 1992. May 19. No. 113 (449);
- Late epiphany // Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 1992. July 3. No. 151 (487).
- The place of the killer is vacant. New documents about the execution of the royal family. // Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 1992. August 29. No. 193 (529).
- German money for Lenin // Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 1992. September 29. No. 214 (550)
- Without a cross // Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 1992.24 October. No. 233 (569).
- “We did not stop to shoot thousands of people ...” Lenin's unknown speech // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. 1993.5 February. No. 24 (640).
- Lenin and the Jews // Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 1993.27 February. No. 40 (656).
- Two lucid falcons were talking. On Lenin's “secret” and “open” funds // Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 1993. March 27. No. 59 (675)
- Lenin and Romanian gold // Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 1993.24 April. No. 79 (695)
- Even the Cheka was more humane than the first chairman of the Council of People's Commissars // Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 1993. June 19. No. 116 (732)
- The saga of the fate of the sarcophagus. What to do with the Lenin Mausoleum? // Russian newspaper, 1993. November 5, No. 207 (823).

In 1996, on the basis of his numerous newspaper and magazine publications, A. G. Latyshev publishes the book "Declassified Lenin", which is published in 15,000 copies, followed by another 11,000 copies. In addition, the book A. G. Lenin Latyshev: Primary Sources is being published in a huge print run of 51,000 copies. M., 1996. 48 p., Which is an abridged version of the "Declassified Lenin" edition, published by the "Mart" publishing house in 1996.

Thus, it can be stated that the numerous articles of Anatoly Georgievich Latyshev, Candidate of Historical Sciences, published in the 90s by various media outlets, were used as a kind of propaganda mouthpiece serving to denigrate and discredit V.I.Lenin. It is also worth noting that today the works of A. G. Latyshev are in demand among various historians and publicists. journalists who adhere to an anti-Leninist orientation in their publications.

Http://yroslav1985.livejournal.com/156196.html