Bitef

tobože nevidljivih za one koji se nalaze na pozornici! ...« Nije vozno šta Puškinova slika ne visi и foajeu Pozorišta na Taganki. Estetski program poete blizak je пата. Jer, on je naš saveznik. Taj osečaj imali smo uvek, moji pozorišni drugovi i ja, kada smo pristupali rada na nekoj predsíavi, baziranoj na Puškinovim delima. Hteli smo da obuhvatimo ceo njegov svet, sa njegovim prirodnim, harmoničnim i divnim, mada istovremeno i protivrečnim otkrićima, svojstvenih samo njemu. Ali, to je bila samo jedna strana zadatka. Uvek mi se činilo da nijedan glumac, bez obzira na njegov dar i zalepljene zulufe, neće biti u stanju da nam prikaže Puškina sa svom njegov от dubinom i beskrajnom raznolikošću ili, как о кахд naučmci koji proucavaju njegova delà, sa njegovom sveobuhvatnom genijalnošću. Rešili smo da krenemo od savremenog shvatanja Puškina. Trudili smo se da proučimo sve okolnosti koje su pratile život poete, ali smo svesno izbegavali njihovu tačnu reprodukciju. Glumci, kojima je poverena uloga Puškina (imamo ih pet), gledaju na njega, da upotrebim reci Gogolja, » svežim , današnjim ocima« i teže da prikazu Puškina onako, kako on živi u našim mislima i srcu. Hteli bismo da se duh Puš kina, onog Puškina koga svako voll na svoj naćin, intimno i lićno, bar za trenuíak pojavi pred gledaocima. Protivnik sam idolopoklonstva. Reći ću ipak, parafrazirajući reči Tvardovskog: ako Ы morao, među umetnicima, izabrati sebi idola, izabrao bih Puškina. Njegovo ime i dañas važi kao sinonim harmonije najviie sinteze umetnosti. Samo ne treba podvlačiti onu lakoću i neusiljenost njegove harmonije, jer on je ne bi mogao postici, da nije prethodno prošao kroz raźna îskusenja i nevolje. Poezija je vecita. Umetnost režiranja (po danaSnjim shvatanjima) relativno je miada, nema joj ni sto godina. Za taj period doživela je velike promene i obogatila se iskustvom velikih umetnika. Zakoračila je и dubine efikasne analizę, ovladala kontrapunktom i motajom. Harmonija savremenog pozorišta póstala je znatno komplikovanija: od jednostavnih elemenata stvorile su se složenije, skoro algebarskekonstrukcije. Uostalom, sve to neće ništa vredeti, ako гика umetnika, и dodiru sa njom, ne oseti otkucavanje ritma života. (Jurij Ljubimov, glavni režiser moskovskog pozorišta na Taganki) > 1 f Jj . . . I could not the algebra xí" actor, blessed of harmony “4“ took up directing, for acting alone was not enough for me. As an actor, I was often insufferable towards the director, for no sooner had we begun with the work than I had already decided on the final stages of each scene. This hindered and hampered us and deprived us of spontaneity, besides the fact that, as is understandable, it annoyed the director. Conflicts were frequent. However strange it may have seemed, or perhaps even natural, in general we did not squabble about

my role or its inherent dramatic trend, but about the explicit solution to the form some scene should Iаэц. In our country such solutions are still regarded with mistrust. It is customary to star t from the basis of the truth of everyday life. However, art is not only appreciated because it is a truthful portrayal of life, but also because of its artistic form, and to understimate the role of form in the quest for image is a strange but deeply rooted prejudice. The inner intensity of the actor, if not expressed in a clear, dramatic form appears to the audience unconvincing and wishy-washy. The actor cannot interpret the spiritual experience of his hero; on the contrary, everything is fuzzy and the spectator needs some special apparatus like an X-ray machine to be able to perceive this inner life. When I was still following my acting career, the theatre constantly irritated me. I still have this feeling today. In my opinion, this feeling is healthy. One should be irritated by all those tasteless painted decors, different props, goblets, swords, beards, wigs and even scenery that imitates real life, bushes, clouds, hillocks, meadows . . . One should be annoyed by the general belief in the indispensability of make-up the smearing and powdering of the whole face, which is mostly senseless, and where men are concerned, even repulsive. For is it not better for the spectator to see the real face of the actor, the changes in his spiritual state to see how he turns pale, or how he blushes...? What served as an impulse to my taking up directing was my refusal of everything that I had most often come across in the theatre. The emergence of something new in art is always based on the repudiation of the value of an earlier conception of aestetics. It is a complex process, for everything new absorbs everything that has accumulated over the centuries, but is true negation that provides real stimulus. Most important for me was refusing to accept the monopoly of the theatre based on the representation of everyday life, and protesting against the deprival of diversity in theatrical forms ...