On Thursday, 8 July, the agency "Interfax" the press conference the organizers of the exhibition "Forbidden Art 2006" Yuri Samodurov and Andrei Erofeev, who faces three years in prison. "Forbidden Art" is false, said at a press conference one of the accused, ex-head of contemporary art at the Tretyakov Gallery, Andrei Erofeev, reports RIA Novosti.
Currently under consideration in Tagansky Court in Moscow is a criminal case against Erofeev and former director of the Sakharov Museum, Yuri Samodurov, who for the organization of the exhibition "Forbidden Art 2006" is accused of inciting hatred and enmity, as well as the humiliation of human dignity using their official position (point "b" of Part 2 of Article 282). State prosecution has demanded for them the punishment of imprisonment for three years - the sentence will be imposed on July 12. "To say that for those years that are in the process, the picture became clear case in full, I can not. One thing is clear - it is a political frame-up, having nothing to do with democratic justice system, a customer of this case is unclear, but it is obvious performer" - said curator.
According Erofeev, their opponents - the movement of the "People's Cathedral, whose head Oleg Cassini wrote a statement to the prosecutor - consists of people who are close to the ideology of neo-Nazism. "Neo-Nazis in all countries are traditionally the champions of contemporary art. Where do they come to power, they always replace the traditional modern art, and here we are not dealing with the Orthodox cultural policy", - considers Erofeev.
Talking about what emotions he feels for a few days before sentencing, Erofeev admitted that he "is ready for any outcome of the case".
"On Monday we will be a verdict, and I have no assumptions, because anything can happen - and the best and worst. Frankly, the protracted process, we pretty bored, as a distraction from the profession," - he concluded and thanked the audience "In the last hour of sobbing."
For his part, director of the Museum of Contemporary Art PERMM Marat Gelman promised in the event of conviction, the next day, ie July 13, to open his gallery similar exhibition.
Note that for Samodurova is not the first criminal case: he had previously brought to criminal responsibility for committing a similar crime. In 2005 Tagansky district court of Moscow sentenced him to a fine of 100,000 rubles.
The exhibition "Forbidden Art" viewers could see the work that was rejected on ethical grounds, other galleries and museums. A criminal case on hate speech was instituted on the complaint of Representatives Orthodox community, which considered offensive use of religious symbols as objects of art. In June 2010 Erofeev wrote a letter to Patriarch Cyril to the statement at the trial of a clergyman, received in his words, a blessing ROC. According to the accused priest took the view "ultra-right reactionaries", although previously the Moscow Patriarchate has refrained from commenting on the show and the subsequent criminal trial, wrote Lenta.ru.
Erofeev brought on behalf of Patriarch Cyril apologies to those Orthodox who have insulted the exhibits. However, he pointed out that accusing him of extremism, believers do not understand the aesthetics of modern art.
According to GZT.ru, Minister of Culture Alexander Avdeev believes that the prosecution in this case - the bust. "In my opinion, Samodurov and Erofeev not crossed the" red line "of the law. It was a stupid shock, and, in my opinion, the Criminal Code can not be applied. Such attempts always failed, and then for them it was inconvenient ", - said the Minister.
The polar points of view on the process become apparent a long time (conventionally they can be formulated as "an attack on freedom of creativity" and "deserved the punishment for blasphemers"). The reason, I think, that many simply do not capture the meaning and specificity of the conflict. Well, yes, freedom of creativity - it seems to be good, but modern art - a phenomenon generally incomprehensible.
Everyone knows that the townsfolk insist that religious symbols (in Christianity is the crucifix, the image of the Virgin, as well as almost all the Old Testament and the Gospel stories) should be interpreted solely in terms of belief, not disbelief. For their part, some modern artists believe that the remembered characters may be used in that context, which is selected by the author of the work. And if the aforesaid context of someone does not like it, it's him, the viewer, and taste problem.
In fact, here lies the conflict. It is important to understand that art is in fact the Church of the war is not declared. Speech that artists feel their moral right to use the metaphor, which he seemed sharp and relevant. It was on this background and misunderstandings occur. It is not hard to guess that visitors to the exhibitions of contemporary art and frequenters of Orthodox prayers are fundamentally different audiences. At the domestic level, people can perfectly understand the conservatory they go to the circus or at a rock concert. But even hitting what is called "wrong address", do not suffer the consequences, which can be equated to the destruction of personality, as is recorded in the indictment Tagansky court.
Rhetoric about civic society in our country are still very relevant, so the state would do well to take into account differences in the public interest in the preparation of legal norms. So far, those rules seem vague and can be interpreted different ways. What is considered "an insult to religious feelings"? Anything that causes dissatisfaction data carrier feelings - or the necessary objective formulation?
As for contemporary art in our country has been broken for many copies. Comrade Stalin called the music of Shostakovich "Muddle Instead of Music", Khrushchev at an exhibition at the Manege called the sculpture "motherfuckers," etc. etc. I think that history will judge. Word for posterity. And do not think they have that in our time were the barbarians, we should express their views at the most - who - "for", who - against. A Criminal Code be left alone. Him, and without art work enough above the roof.
Denny Degtuarev |
