Since December 2007 Leonid Parfyonov has been involved strictly in the making of documentary films. His filmography over the past two years includes the films Sovremennitsta dedicated to the 75th anniversary of Halyna Volchek, Ptitsa-Gogol dedicated to the 200th anniversary of Nikolai Gogol, Khrebet Rossiyi (Backbone of Russia), the history of the Perm region and work on the Zvorykin-Muromets project about a Russian electronics engineer, who is considered the inventor of the television. Over the past 10 years, Parfyonov shot 20 full-length, made-for-TV documentary films, including Zhyvoi Pushkin in honor of the 200th anniversary of Aleksandr Pushkin, Voina v Krymu. Vsyo v dymu about the Crimean War of 1853-1856), Zooletiye dedicated to the 300th anniversary of St. Petersburg, an introductory film to Gambit. Play-by-Play titled Turetskiy Gambit and other films.  Many of his documentaries were filmed on orders of major Russian TV channels and earned national awards. In addition, Parfyonov was conferred several TEFI Awards, a top recognition in the Russian television community. Conflicts between journalists and the senior management of TV channels are quite commonplace in Ukraine. Moreover, it is not customary in these parts to simply “walk out of a studio” for principal reasons. But than again, no Ukrainian TV journalist can boast such a job list as Parfonyov. Perhaps there’s the rub

Leonid, putting commercial consideration aside, why did you decide to publish a print version of Namedni?
L. P. There were no financial reasons at all. The fact is that when the TV version was launched it seemed that the era and the reality of those times were slipping away. But clearly we were shaped by those factors, which is why we are entering a new era, not Soviet but something different. It was an inventory of the past that shaped us, but at the same time deformed us, and which will be dying away. It seemed we have said goodbye buy it became clear by Vladmir Putin’s second term that the Soviet Union is alive and kicking.  That [Russian Federation] is some kind of a third country, no longer the Soviet Union, albeit nor is it Russia yet. Moreover, it is never near the Russia that it was before the October Revolution of 1917. It is some kind of a post-Soviet Russia – a renaissance of Soviet antiquity. As it turned out, the majority of the people and practically all leaders could not realize themselves in any other way but the Soviet way. This is what the state, its leadership, grandeur and statehood should look like. This is the way the relations in the society should be. The perceptions of good and evil are to a very large extent Soviet as well. I tried to formulate that although Russia is a very diversified country, Russians lie in hospital beds, do their time in the army, get an education, sell carbohydrates, cheer for their national sports teams, sing the national anthem, choose the authorities and watch television very much the Soviet way. When I realized that Namedni is not history, rather meaningless and bare contemporaneity, I felt the desire to return to it. And I believe a photo-album is a more suitable format than a documentary TV series.

You once described your “renaissance of Soviet antiquity” as follows: “Ours is a post-Soviet country that is proud of its victory in the war, Gagarin’s flight into space and that Americans used to fear us.” In your opinion, is such a renaissance possible in Ukraine today? 
L. P. I don’t know the situation in Ukraine. My book was written by a Russian person for Russians, first and foremost. Since Ukraine shares some common past with Russia, this could be of interest to Ukrainians. I will not even attempt to describe modern-day Ukraine as one must live here, know the language and have Ukrainian heritage in order to understand what inside you is from Soviet Ukraine and what from independent Ukraine, how this things clash or harmonize with one another. I have no clue about this.

You say you don’t know what’s going on in Ukraine, but you most likely follow Ukrainian television as it is one of your markets. What is your take on Ukrainian TV journalism?
L. P. No, I do not follow it. I do not consider Ukrainian TV to be a market for me. I visit this place once a year and a half. The last time I flew here to shoot the film Ptitsa-Gogol. We lived in Myrhorod. I did not once turn on the TV and don’t even remember whether there was a TV set in my room. I don’t care for foreign television. I first need to figure out what Russian TV is all about.

We Ukrainians follow Russian TV very meticulously. We noticed that practically every single Russian news program airs a piece of negative news about Ukraine. One need not be an expert to understand that Russia is conducting a premeditated smear campaign against its neighboring country. What do you think about this?
L. P. I do not watch Russian news either.

But that’s the way it is and what will this lead to? Leaders come and go, while people last forever. The politics of slander sows discord between the people of neighboring countries. As a result, you come to Moscow, get a taxi and hear from the driver: “Are you from Kyiv? So, how is it that we supply you gas and who did you elect for president?” Propaganda is highly effective on the average citizen level.
Yesterday, at a meeting with readers you compared our country to India and Pakistan. You also did not forget to point out that you found a Gogol’s note in Ukrainian in Krakow archives and that there weren’t any Ukrainian Gogol scholars there. You won’t be able to brush aside the propaganda. As they say here “she works”.
L. P. I simply said that when I arrived in Krakow, I did not see any Ukrainian TV channels that tried snatching this note away from me or stop me from snapping a photo of it. And as far as I know, Ukraine has never shot a film on the occasion of the 200th anniversary of Gogol.
Let me explain everything step by step. Russia imagined that after the collapse of the Soviet Union some kind of expanse known as the CIS connected to the Russian language would remain. Furthermore, there was the belief that Moscow would be what London is today for the British Commonwealth. But this never happened.
Russia was unable to set a civilized example that former Soviet republics would want to follow. On the other hand, there were national elites that aspired to selfidentity simply to not be like the rest. In general, this was a kind of mutual rejection – hypocrisy on the one hand and the desire to split on the other. Nothing worked out and the sands of time have run out. This means there will be further distancing. As the saying goes, you can’t stuff toothpaste back in the tube.
Yushchenko once said to me in an interview: “What’s the point of grieving over the fact that we parted ways. This simply means we shall meet again on a new branch somewhere in Europe.” I believe this is a wise thought. After all, if we are destined to meet anywhere, it will clearly be in Europe, albeit coming in from different directions. More and more members of the younger generation will want to live the European way in one country or another. It is only on this common denominator that we will be able to find common grounds. For the time being, it’s all “you a former empire” and “you are a former subcolony”, and endless mutual claims that Ukraine is ungrateful and Russia is arrogant.

Russian journalists often visit our media holding. They tell us that in truth Russia does not see statehood in Ukraine. They view it as a misunderstanding of a kind. Is that true?
L. P. First of all, let’s define this more precisely. There is no United Russia aside from the one written in quotations, and for good reasons. I have this formula that I devised years ago and use repeatedly, so I am not going to speak on behalf of the nation. As for my native Russia, I more often notice a lack of knowledge about Ukraine and an indifference towards it in my milieu. Among my acquaintances, I am the only one who travels to Ukraine. But I come here on business. Naturally, I see that this is a different country. Even the atmosphere is different. Just look around (the hall of the Intercontinental Hotel – Weekly.ua). For me, it looks too oriental.

But there is nothing unique about this. The Hyatt Hotel in the center of Moscow is done in the same style…
L. P. But the Hyatt in Moscow is owned by Armenians. Meanwhile, all of Kyiv resembles an Armenian hotel. Moscow offers a diversity of restaurants, from Uzbeki to Italian. In Kyiv, it’s all a part of self-identity. It is the Ukrainian capital and it is the Ukrainian Intercontinental. And it is very plush. For me as for a person from the north, this is evident. Even the president’s residence, the design of which was reportedly overseen by ex-president Leonid Kuchma, is done in the style of the United Arab Emirates.

In one of your interviews you said: “A critical mass of people is forming that aspires to self-realization and wants to live in system where state institutions function as public services. But there are few such people. Our country is elderly.” Do you believe old age of the population is the reason for Russian imperialism, arrogance and snobbishness?
L. P. The same is visible in Ukraine. The fact is that people with the typical Soviet mentality constitute a majority, including the electoral majority. I tried to point this out in my book. The billboards of Viktor Yanukovych are a classic example of how the people see their leader. He is cool and collected on a dark blue background. Such is a serious man and classical Soviet leader. It is an appeal towards traditional ideas of what the relationship between the authorities and people should be. That’s it. He is a typical Homo Sovieticus raised in a Soviet manner. It’s written all over him. But the image fits not just because that’s the way he is, but also because that’s the way the people want to see him. He is the leader of this left-bank political movement, because what the voter is there – traditional and Russia-oriented. In general, to a great extent this is the string that Putin strums as a strict, calm and solid man. Viktor Chernomyrdin and Yevgeniy Primakov, who embodied the true Soviet boss, are the same. This is quite obvious and remains the stereotype to this day… We simply understand that this is not the case where the government is a service organization that is elected, is accountable and is truly a civil service for the people. For the time being, they are the bosses.

On a personal note, what happened with Newsweek? Lack of creative freedom?
L. P. Nothing to do with that. For me the most important thing is what I do with my own hands. At Newsweek I had to be present in the office five days a week. I had to publish a magazine that was not my brainchild, though I could put in my two cents worth. That sounds funny as there is no such thing as an author’s magazine and an author’s weekly is absolute nonsense. The most interesting projects for me are those that I create myself. I do not want to be a manager or an administrator. I enjoy being an author of on-screen and off-screen commentaries.

We noticed that you remember every spread of both of your major volumes.
L. P. I remember because I wrote them. It is solely my work. I had no hack writers. There are experts that know the tools, but all the ideas belong to me.

How do you define happiness?
L. P. My job. There is a false perception that when a person is successful at work he or she will eventually become a boss. Journalism is a field that cannot be made into a career. It is like intelligence: you are on your own and that’s it. You have a piece of white paper on which you must prove everything with your own words. You prove this every day. I typically write even while flying.

Do you envision your films in your mind before they are shot and cut?
L. P.  Of course. How else can you think up the style? You do things as you understand them: something fits and something doesn’t. Something goes here and something else goes there. That’s overdoing it and that’s not enough. For example, today we arrived in Brovary and I had thought I could create two episodes from the film [ZvorykinMuromets]. But I watched them and understood that I could only take one. It is tough to pull something from them. All I have is a station. Here there is simply topography where you have to designate a distinctive place. In the end, Brovary does not exist for somebody to shoot a film about Zvorykin. It lives own life!

Tell us, if you had the necessary funds and the will of God would you shoot a classic documentary about the Great Famine on an order from Ukraine?
L. P. I don’t know, probably not. I can only shoot Russian films. An Russian citizen, I am of Russian blood. To shoot a Ukrainian film you have to be Ukrainian, understand the Ukrainian audience, distinguish it from the Russian audience, have a feel for the situation and what is appropriate and what is going overboard. For example, I was told that some of my remarks were too harsh for the Ukrainian audience and that some people were a bit shocked. I cannot inject into my veins a dose of Ukrainian spirit and understand how things should and should not be.

Printable version comments powered by Disqus