Yelena Yampolskaya, editor-in-chief of the newspaper Kultura. From sex columns to "spiritual space". What is Elena Yampolskaya known for - the possible head of the State Duma Committee on Culture. She headed the newspaper "Culture", dispersed the team and transformed the publication into a "spiritual publication".

Journalist, writer and theater critic Elena Yampolskaya was born on June 20, 1971 in Moscow. After graduation, she went to get higher education at the theater department of GITIS. Even in her student years, she began to earn extra money in the newspaper "Soviet Culture". After that, her career began already in a larger publishing house: the Izvestia newspaper. After that, her career began to develop rapidly and a talented journalist has already occupied leadership positions. The husband of Elena Yampolskaya is currently not known to the general public. The woman does not distribute not only his name, but also the type of activity.

In December 2011, Elena Yampolskaya was appointed editor-in-chief of the Kultura newspaper, which had ceased publication two months earlier due to financial difficulties. According to Yuri Belyavsky, the former editor-in-chief of the publication, before his dismissal, the newspaper's shares were bought up by organizations affiliated with N. S. Mikhalkov. The media also wrote that Mikhalkov could become a new investor in the publication. Yampolskaya denied that Mikhalkov owned the newspaper; later admitted that "Culture" is financed from several funds, some of which are related to Mikhalkov.

Having headed the publication, Yampolskaya called Kultura, published under the leadership of Belyavsky, “monstrous”, and the name of the newspaper itself was inert and boring: “a normal person, having seen an unknown newspaper called Kultura in a kiosk, most likely will not buy it.” Yampolskaya said that under her leadership, the newspaper will expand the range of topics, which will include social issues, religion and entertainment. In January 2012, the updated newspaper "Culture" began to appear with a new subtitle "The Spiritual Space of Russian Eurasia". Elena Yampolskaya believes that the updated "Culture" is "the most beautiful newspaper in the country."

After the appointment of Yampolskaya, Irina Kulik, Dmitry Morozov, Daria Borisova, Georgy Osipov and a number of other journalists left the newspaper as a sign of disagreement with her policy; Yampolskaya claims that she herself fired the newspaper's employees for incompetence. Journalists from other publications, mainly from Izvestia, were hired to replace the departed employees. According to Yampolskaya, the newspaper's circulation has grown, which she attributes to Kultura's support for the ban on gay propaganda: “Now they call us a homophobic newspaper. But we continue to bend our line, and these materials are among the most read. As editor-in-chief, Yampolskaya sees the task of making Kultura the legislator of public mores in the country.

The personal life of Elena Yampolskaya remains a secret with seven seals. The woman prefers not to expand on this topic and in every possible way avoids comments. It is not known for certain whether she is married or not. According to some reports, Elena is still officially married, but she herself does not discuss this fact in an interview. It remains only to guess about her marital status, since she communicates much more willingly on the topic of work and gives all sorts of explanations.

Elena Yampolskaya, editor-in-chief of the Kultura newspaper, member of the Presidium of the Council for Culture and Art under the President of the Russian Federation, tells about the mission of culture in modern society, patriotism, moral education, Russian-Armenian cultural ties.

- Elena Alexandrovna, you headed the newspaper "Culture" in 2011, with your arrival, the revival of the publication began. What are the main results of the formation of the new "Culture" you could note?

- The main result, probably, is that "Culture" is back on the agenda. If at first they asked me with surprise: “Does such a newspaper still exist?”, Now some want to become the heroes of our publications, others, on the contrary, are afraid of this, readers call, write, thank, argue, in general, there are fewer and fewer indifferent. Compared to the previous "Culture", which died in Bose a couple of months before the arrival of our team, we increased the circulation by 12 times. And this is just the bare minimum. We simply can’t afford to run circulations, a paper edition, especially a beautiful one, is an expensive business. But I know, for example, that in Sapsany, where the issue is distributed along with the monthly supplement - Nikita Mikhalkov's magazine "Own", passengers are extremely unhappy if they do not have enough of our printed materials. And the cleaners who pass through the cars at the end of the journey report that people do not leave Kultura - they take it with them. It is by such "trifles" that one can judge the demand. There is, of course, another way: he caught up with a million copies, filled the pages with all kinds of chewing gum, a person read, chewed, spat out, threw away, forgot. We strive to make a newspaper of great style, prolonged action, a newspaper that would provide quality food for the mind and soul.

– The topics that you raise on the pages of the newspaper go beyond culture and art, they are religion, politics, social problems, and much more. Questions of culture are extrapolated to these areas?

– In my opinion, absolutely everything that surrounds us is part of the culture. Or it indicates its absence. Culture does not begin with an evening trip to the theater, but with how friendly you greet your neighbor in the elevator in the early morning. Culture is not only a concert at the Philharmonic, but also a series on TV. The series is even more important, because philharmonics are not available everywhere, but they watch TV and willy-nilly tune the thoughts and feelings of most of our fellow citizens according to what they see. It is impossible to implement the state cultural policy without changing the information policy. I come to different regions, and simple, naturally intelligent people ask me: “Why do participants shout at different talk shows, interrupt each other? Our parents taught us that it was indecent…” It seems to them that as the editor-in-chief of the Kultura newspaper, I know the answer. And I can only refuse invitations to such shows myself, because I consider the manner of communication implanted there disgusting, humiliating, plebeian. Thanks to Vladimir Solovyov, who in his "Sunday Evening ...", although also not free from this format, however, brings together brawlers in one story, calm and thoughtful people in another, so that everyone leaves the filming generally satisfied.

Since culture is all-encompassing, I really hope that the year of ecology declared in 2017 will become a true year of culture for us. It's time to get rid of garbage - both material and mental. And the whole world needs to take it on. I am convinced that by cleaning out yards, parks, forests, banks of water bodies, we are cleaning out the nooks and crannies of our own souls. Real love for the native land, loving care for it - that's what can really unite us.

– In the preface to your recently published book “On Culture and Beyond”, you say that the cultural baggage of each of us – a precious collection of everything we love – allows us to keep in touch with our native land. Do you think the mission of culture is so high?

I don't think it can be overestimated. Culture is the education of the senses. The lower the level of culture, the more mentally undeveloped, spiritually blind and deaf people. Hence - the shameless violation of all moral norms, disregard for the land and people, past and future.

– How do you assess the Russian-Armenian relations in the field of culture? What joint cultural projects would you like to highlight?

– In my opinion, given the excellent interstate relations that bind Russia and Armenia today, the cooperation between our cultures should be richer and more diverse. I judge this at least by the fact that I very rarely receive invitations to cultural events from the Embassy of the Republic of Armenia in Moscow. Many of our CIS partners are much more active in this regard. I understand that there are objective financial difficulties, but saving on culture is more expensive for yourself. Culture gives people a sense of belonging to each other. It creates a common language of communication. In the end, music, theater, literature, fine arts, cinema are the most obvious and effective way to win mutual sympathy. I think that the possibilities of Armenian business in Russia have not yet been used in this field. Entrepreneurs from Armenia should invest in strengthening the friendly and charming image of their people in the minds of Russians.

– Have you been to Armenia? If yes, what are your impressions?

- Yes, I have been to Armenia twice - with the Theater under the direction of Armen Dzhigarkhanyan. Armen Borisovich and I have been friends for terribly many years. While still a student of GITIS, I came to him for the first interviews - by the way, it was for the Kultura newspaper. The genre of the interview is, in principle, very close to me as a journalist, I return to many of my heroes again and again, but Dzhigarkhanyan is probably the record holder in terms of the number of conversations we recorded. There are people who, like good cognac, are brewed from year to year, becoming deeper and more interesting with age. Communicating with them is a real pleasure ... So, Armen Borisovich made sure that, accompanying his team on tour, I saw not only Yerevan. I was taken to Sevan, to Etchmiadzin, Garni Geghart. They even arranged such exotic entertainment as swimming in sulfur springs. True, all this was quite a long time ago. So I am waiting for the opportunity to return to Armenia again. Now with a special feeling, since a year and a half ago I married a wonderful man - an Armenian by nationality. I was very touched that people like me - "foreign" wives - are called by Armenians "our daughter-in-law." That is, the daughter-in-law of the whole people. Acquiring so many relatives at once is troublesome, of course, but on the whole it is pleasant.

- So what's the problem?

- So far - in the banal lack of leisure. The pre-election race was added to the worries about the newspaper - the primaries of United Russia, the preliminary voting for future candidates for deputies of the State Duma of the seventh convocation, have just ended. I participated in this procedure in the Chelyabinsk region.

– We have been exploiting, as you put it, the Soviet cultural heritage for almost a quarter of a century. Are new shoots emerging?

- There are always sprouts - such is the property of life. However, they are often ruined by an illiterate and irresponsible attitude. Somewhere there is a lack of selection: alas, in all spheres of our life, not only in culture, the role of apprenticeship, the long and painstaking increase in skill is almost completely leveled. In most cases, a barely hatched sprout is not allowed to rise - they require immediate fruit. Producers need another "star" for a month or a year. They are not interested in the longer term. The fate of such precocious, as a rule, is ruined - having become accustomed to "shine" on the screen, they lose interest in self-improvement, and the producers, meanwhile, are already looking for a new victim. If the "star" is artificial, it gets boring very quickly. That is why, with tenacity, worthy, perhaps, of better use, I insist that we need a system of all-Russian creative competitions aimed at finding and supporting young talents, and not at personal PR for members of various television juries.

As for the Soviet cultural heritage, it is priceless. In fact, this is the cement that still holds the peoples of the former Soviet republics together - sometimes against the wishes of politicians. But we must understand that generations change. Young people do not want to live our nostalgia. They need a new artistic language, the image of a modern hero, close and exciting problems. Here, the creators of now independent states face a difficult task - not to allow us to completely disperse, to close the doors to each other.

- Recently, the topic of patriotism is often exaggerated in the press. The President of Russia pays great attention to this topic. Is patriotism our new ideology or is it the mission of culture through which love for the motherland needs to be cultivated?

- "Patriotism" is a very good one, but it's just a word. It is necessary not to work as an echo of the president, repeating the same thing in every way, but - to each in his place - to fill this concept with content. Love for the motherland is acquired from early childhood, gradually, it consists of little things. To raise a patriot, you need good children's books, films, songs, computer games - your own, domestic. How does an average Russian family spend their weekends in a more or less large city today? He goes to a mega mall, stares at the windows, watches this or that American movie, buys toys for children, made God knows where and depicting other people's heroes, and then eats at this or that fast food - again under an American sign. And what kind of homeland, tell me, will a child brought up in this way love? Will he even have a home?

- Is the development of culture a state task?

“Moreover, it is a factor of national security. It is necessary to systematically deal with cultural issues if we want Russia - strong and independent - to continue to exist on the world map. In addition, it is cheaper to maintain music schools and libraries than prisons and colonies.

– At the same time, the residual principle of financing culture continues to operate?

– It is very fashionable for years and even decades to complain about this principle. However, two things must be clearly understood. Firstly, today we are in a difficult economic situation, this will not last a year or two, there will be no extra money in the foreseeable future. There are top-priority tasks that cannot be avoided: we need to support children, the elderly, the poor, develop production, ensure import substitution, and strengthen the country's defense. It is unlikely that culture in such a situation makes sense to expect special preferences. But - and this is the second important thing - it is in the sphere of culture that efficiency is ensured not so much by the volume of investments, but by the taste and love of those who distribute and invest funds. You can get a stunning result for a ruble, or you can get a complete bullshit for a hundred. The main capital of culture is not money, but talents. Guess the talent, attract him, give him the opportunity to realize his calling - and the efficiency of the funds spent will exceed one hundred percent. It happens in culture, really.

- Why has interest and love for books been falling over the past 20 years, queues at the box office disappear, there is no total interest in museums and exhibitions? Is culture in crisis?

- Partly - because of an overabundance of information. We suddenly found ourselves in a world not of cultures, but of subcultures - niche, limited, "party". In a world where the spiritual hierarchy seems to have been lost, everything does not develop vertically, but spreads horizontally. Tolstoy wrote a novel, and I wrote it - posted it on the net, got a hundred likes. Why am I worse than Tolstoy? Such an amount of slag is produced - screen, book, music, that people look for pleasure in other areas. Mainly in consumption. This is also one of the reasons for indifference to culture. A person with a consumer psychology does not stop, does not think - he buys, uses one way or another and runs further: what else to grab?

At the same time, mind you, as soon as a really talented work of art appears, those queues immediately return. And what about the hype around the Valentin Serov exhibition at the Tretyakov Gallery on Krymsky Val? This is not purely aesthetic, but a deep human interest. People, it seems to me, went to see amazing faces. Real, significant, behind each of which is character and destiny, and not three pounds of falsehood and a couple of plastic surgeries. Art that deals with authentic, not feigned, is doomed to success at any time. Including cash register.

– Is religion able to “compensate” for the lack of culture?

- In a multinational and multi-confessional society - even in the presence of a state-forming people and a main religion - religious issues must be approached very delicately. Faith and culture are not meant to “compensate”, but to complement each other. Genuine culture, in my opinion, is always related to conscience. And this concept is divine. And equally accessible to a person of any nationality, any religion. No wonder we find so many truly Christian motifs in the art of the Soviet period - that is, in what is generated by a formally atheistic state.

- There is an opinion that many TV programs have a negative impact on young people, corrupt them, such as the notorious Dom-2 program. As a member of the Council for Culture and Art under the President of the Russian Federation, are you struggling with this?

- We have already discussed the fact that cultural and information policy in our country, unfortunately, is still practically divorced. I agree that it is extremely dangerous to encourage vulgarity. If a young person sees that it is possible not to study, not to work, to lie on the couch all day long, languidly quarreling with their own kind, and at the same time be in the center of attention of their peers, the damage from such “educational work” is difficult to calculate. Maybe you have heard: a baboon now lives in the Gelendzhik zoo, which was kept in one of the Moscow casinos for several years. There he was taught to smoke and drink. Then the gambling establishment was closed, the baboon was taken away, now he leads a healthy lifestyle. The only weakness that he has kept from the old days is the Dom-2 program. Apparently, because he recognizes himself in the participants. I am very fond of animals, but a man willingly taking on the role of a monkey sitting in a cage for the amusement of an idle public is a deplorable sight.

However, I am not a supporter of purely repressive measures. Everything harmful should not be banned, but ousted - benign, talented, interesting. The main task in relation to the new generation, in my opinion, is to give them a scale. Different than on youth channels and social networks. To dream of getting not the same hundred likes, but the State Prize, the star of the Hero of Labor, a place in the history textbook ... Shrinking the scale, the insignificance of desires and tasks is ruining us every day. Distinguishing the great from the small, the important from the unnecessary, is what culture should teach.

Interviewed by Grigory Anisonyan

Elena Yampolskaya: Sermon from the pious bosom

The editor-in-chief of the Kultura newspaper believes that Hitler's invasion saved Russia

"The way to the heart through the penis"

In the story of the remarkable Russian writer, priest Yaroslav Shipov, "Dinner at the Bishop's", the author's interlocutor (judging by the mentioned episodes of his life path - the late Archbishop of Vologda and Veliky Ustyug Mikhail (Mudyugin)) “complained about attendants - in church terminology, not all old women are called in general, but only those who are engaged in cleaning and various ancillary activities in churches:

How much I serve, so much I suffer from them! I’ll go out in the cathedral with a sermon - some fool in a black robe immediately crawls up to wipe the candlesticks in front of my very nose ... And how the parishioners suffer because of them, especially from new converts, and especially women! .. If they are young and beautiful, they will attack, like a crow: either they don’t like the way you pass the candle, then you don’t cross yourself like that, then something else ... "

It has been repeatedly noted that the most vicious church grandmothers are obtained from ladies who were distinguished in their youth by depraved behavior. Now, under the guise of fighting for morality, they are angry at those who experience sinful joys that are no longer available to them, and with their hiss only discourage people from the faith they supposedly defend.

Elena Yampolskaya, a former employee of Izvestia and now the editor-in-chief of the Kultura newspaper, seems to be not yet quite an old woman, but her spiritual evolution involuntarily makes us recall the church grandmothers from the story of Father Yaroslav. It is hard to imagine that just a few years ago, such pearls popped out from under the playful pen of the author of the book “Anthem to a Real Bitch, or I Am Alone in My Home”.

“A sexy bitch is a mature, independent woman who knows for sure that she is not a gold piece to please everyone, but much better than a gold piece, and her value is unique ... Well, I love it! Myself! ... And if in the end I managed to become selfish, then this is my personal merit. By the way, it would be nice to give yourself something for this. Making the way to the heart through the penis is not difficult. But then comes the moment of truth, when you realize that most likely he loves not you, but your clitoris.

Murder of the Silver Galosh

It soon became clear that discussions about intimacy bring neither fame nor money, and Elena Alexandrovna decided to become an Orthodox journalist. A playful little feather recently began to throw thunder and lightning, and especially furiously - in defense of the church authorities.

Do you remember the story of Patriarch Kirill's watch, which, after a heated discussion on the Internet of their cost, disappeared in the photo from his hand, but remained on the reflection on the surface of the table? So, if Yampolskaya is to be believed, after that the presenting of the comic Silver Galosh award to the patriarch “for the immaculate disappearance of the watch” should be equated to the murder of a child. Verbatim: “insulting the patriarch at the Silver Rain and the murder of a five-year-old boy in the Vladimir region are events from the same chain”.

Even the most malicious church grandmother could hardly have thought of comparing an innocent joke on an adult man with reprisal against a child. Because at least some of them know that the head of the Russian Orthodox Church is Jesus Christ. While Vladimir Alexandrovich Gundyaev is only its primate and a person who can be made fun of if there is a reason (and the story of the "disappearance" of the clock is really funny and does not offend faith in any way). However, too sharp a transition from sexual problems to spiritual topics often contributes to clouding the brain. This unfortunate phenomenon manifested itself especially brightly on the eve of the last presidential elections.

Six million depraved bums

The election of the head of state, as well as big politics in general, is regularly accompanied by scandals and skirmishes, in which all competitors suffer. However, Yampolskaya went the other way. She began to indiscriminately throw mud at voters who were going to vote not for the diligently licked Vladimir Putin, but for the unloved Mikhail Prokhorov.

“For Prokhorov, unfortunately, - wounded, envious, depraved - not even idleness, but half-hacky destructive chatting in the hole ... For Prokhorov - those who will never speak out directly, will not turn proudly, will not leave the principle just like that, to nowhere. They bite the hand that feeds, because they seized it with their teeth, you won’t tear it off ... There is no other electorate for liberals in Russia.”(“Culture”, June 29, 2012).

Personally, I didn't vote at all in the presidential election, and I certainly would never have supported a retired nickel tycoon. The thieves son of the head of the International Relations Department of the USSR State Committee for Sports, closely connected with the KGB, who, at the direction of his senior comrades, first joined the CPSU, and then was essentially appointed - first an oligarch, and now the leader of the liberal party - does not cause the slightest sympathy.

However, no matter how doubtful this politician may seem, among the almost six million who voted for him, as well as for all other candidates for the presidency of Russia, there are many worthy people. I know two people personally: both have worked in the defense industry all their lives, after its collapse they went into business, and not a criminal one (one is engaged in the repair of office equipment, the other in computer engraving), both have good, already adult children.

I suspect that in their lives they, like many other voters of Prokhorov, have brought much more benefit to the country than other bed journalists, even if they are complete bitches. In fact, Yampolskaya is no different from her former Izvestia colleague Evgenia Kuritsyna (Bozhena Rynsky), who is the death of all Moscow pensioners who voted for the mayor Sergei Sobyanin who won the election. Only Kuritsyna is more frank, does not hide behind sanctimonious arguments about Orthodoxy and does not compost readers' brains with false stories about the blessing of the future Marshal Zhukov by an unknown Optina elder back in the 1920s. At the same time, in order not to look like a completely impudent liar, Madame prudently does not name the elder.

To spirituality through Hitler

Having written off millions of compatriots who voted improperly, the editor of Kultura does not stop there. Following them, she fearlessly sends more than 20 million dead in the Great Patriotic War there. From the point of view of the Yampol "Orthodoxy", their death greatly contributed to the growth of spirituality among the population, which means that Hitler's invasion on June 22, 1941 is justified.

“Destroying the soul is much more terrible than dying physically. But it was precisely this - the death of the soul - that threatened pre-war Russia. The last temple would fly into the air, the last priest would go into exile, the words "Rus", "Russian" would disappear forever from Soviet use; and generations would grow up in a presumptuous conviction that the Politburo proposes, but the leader disposes, and there is no higher power, and everything that they breathed before is in the furnace ... The war took millions of lives and saved Russia.(“Culture”, June 29, 2012).

I am not surprised that Yampolskaya did not read either the Decree of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR of January 26, 1936, or other pre-war documents, with the publication of which began the purge of historical science from those who throw out "everything that they breathed before - in furnace" of the theories of the head of the "Marxist historical school in the USSR" Mikhail Pokrovsky, whom she also did not read.

Another thing is surprising: she has not yet seen the film “Alexander Nevsky”, familiar to all of us from childhood and first released on the screen in 1938, where the prince and Orthodox saint, brilliantly played by Nikolai Cherkasov, says: “Rus' would not forgive either you or us for lack of courage, so remember that, punish your children and grandchildren. And if you forget, you will become the second Judas, Judas of the Russian land. My word is firm: trouble will find, I will raise all Rus'!

A partial return to the old values ​​and symbols is an inevitable stage in all revolutions, be it the French one of 1789 or the Russian one of 1917. This happened in our country under the unbelieving Stalin, in France under Napoleon, who was indifferent to faith, and the normalization of relations with the previously rejected and persecuted church is a natural stage in such a return. Enemy invasion and the death of millions of people are completely unnecessary for this. Napoleon signed an agreement with Pope Pius VIII on July 15, 1801, when France was not at war with anyone. The famous meeting of Stalin and Molotov with the Orthodox hierarchs, after which the restoration of church life began in the country, did not take place at the moment when the Germans were approaching Moscow. The Soviet leaders accepted the hierarchs on September 4, 1943, when the outcome of the war was no longer in doubt.

This alone proves that the tales about Stalin, who turned to the church out of fear of Hitler, are just as ridiculous as the episodes with the mustachioed leader in the last film of Yampolskaya's idol Nikita Mikhalkov, from whose filing she, according to rumors, got her current position. Nevertheless, the lady editor manages to sing at the same time both the Kremlin mountaineer and the picture of the main filmmaker of all Rus', who brought him out as a crazy maniac, sending 15 thousand people with shovels to German machine guns.

You can love Stalin. You can hate and applaud his image in the film. You can finally see the former leader in the coffin, and the shamefully failed at the box office (I remind you: the budget is $ 55 million, fees - 7 million) Mikhalkov's creation. But to admire both at once ... Although for ladies who make a living with a clitoris, such lightness of thought is quite natural.

A lot has been written about the book of Archimandrite Tikhon (Shevkunov) "Unholy Saints" lately. Still: for the first time, a book about the monastery and contemporary ascetics, the author of which is a clergyman of the Russian Orthodox Church, found itself in the center of reader interest, became an absolute bestseller...

The reader, as a rule, never pays attention to the page with the imprint of the book, but I do not skip it due to professional interest. Editor - Elena Yampolskaya ... First thought: "The same one?". Practicing journalists rarely become editors of books, and Yampolskaya is, without exaggeration, a well-known journalist, herself the author of several books (for a conversation with her “If you don’t feel pain, you’re not a professional,” see No. 14 (30) of our magazine). At the moment, Elena Aleksandrovna is the editor-in-chief of the Kultura newspaper, the first issue of which was published at the end of January 2012. She herself believes that the changes in her life are connected precisely with the work on the book. We are talking about the peculiarities of working on Unholy Saints, about the inner experience that is associated with it, and about the newspaper Kultura, a new edition oriented towards a modern person who is in search of...

- How did it happen that you, a journalist, at that time the deputy editor-in-chief of Izvestia, became the editor of Father Tikhon's book? Then, probably, she still did not have a name?

And it all turned out like that. Father Tikhon and I have known each other for a long time, we have been together several times on fairly long trips, I wrote in Izvestia about his film The Byzantine Lesson. And then one day I came to him, probably to confess - for what other reason could I be in the Sretensky Monastery? After confession, he asked me: “Do you know, Lena, any good literary editor? And then I'm going to publish a book. I have a huge number of disparate chapters and materials, it is necessary to assemble a single whole out of this, and it is necessary that someone look at everything with an editorial eye. I answered: "I know, father Tikhon, a good editor - he is sitting in front of you." I have never worked in publishing houses, but among newspaper editors I can recommend myself without false modesty. For some reason, it seemed to me that Father Tikhon asked this question for a reason, but precisely in order to hear: yes, I am ready to do this. At the same time, my employment in Izvestia was so dense that if it were not a book by Father Tikhon, but some other “leftist” work, I would never have taken it up. In general, there was something above all this, which I later realized.

From the very first chapter, it became clear that the book was unusually fascinating. I didn’t rewrite anything globally anywhere: editing consisted in working on separate “burrs”. Father Tikhon, firstly, has a lively style, a wonderful sense of humor, very good dialogues. And secondly, of course, the script education is felt: it perfectly builds a picture - you see visibly what the author is talking about.

Since the book is very interesting (someone told me: “This is the church Conan Doyle!”), And it was difficult to tear myself away from it even in the first printout, I had to re-read the text many times. This is the case when you, being carried away by the plot and in a hurry to find out what will happen next, stop following the correct construction of the phrase. I had to come back all the time. And in the end it so happened that I didn’t just read this book three times - I literally read every word in it three times, and each time it became a new work for the soul. The work, which, perhaps, was not even assigned by Father Tikhon.

Few things have changed my life like this book. Moreover, I do not attribute this solely to the influence of the author, to whom I have great respect and great sympathy. There was something above us. This book was given to him for some reason, and it was given to me - and not by Father Tikhon, but by Someone Who is higher. If we talk about what made the greatest impression on me, this is the chapter about the shegumen Melchizedek, who died and then resurrected. I don't know if it's worth retelling. But, probably, it’s worth it, not everyone has read the book ...

Father Tikhon tells how, while still a very young novice, he risked turning to the schemer with the question: what then happened to him, what did he see when he was there, from where they do not return? That's what he heard.

…Hegumen Mikhail walks across a green field, comes to some kind of cliff, looks down, sees a moat filled with water, dirt — fragments of some chairs, cabinets, broken legs, doors, and something else are lying around. He looks there in amazement and sees that all this is the things he made for the monastery. With horror, he recognizes his work and suddenly feels someone's presence behind him. He turns around, sees the Mother of God, who looks at him with pity and sorrow and sadly says: “You are a monk, we expected prayers from you, and you brought only this” ...

I can't tell you how much this thing shocked me. We are not monks, but each of us has our own obedience in the world. I considered this endless editing of texts, preparing pages, releasing and so on and so forth as my obedience. It was the first time I looked at my work from the outside and realized that although they probably expect not only prayers from me, but this is what will then wallow in the mud, by and large. This routine, daily work of mine will then lie around with torn off legs, broken off doors. She lives for one day. Reflection of the news picture of the day does not lead anyone to anything, because it does not create any new meanings. I sit and clean up some dirty texts all the time, because journalists generally write very badly now, and I sit - and I clean, I clean, I clean ... And I thought: “My God, is this really how my life will go ?!”.

This is the biggest experience that I took out of Father Tikhon's book. And I hope that now in the Kultura newspaper, although the texts still need to be cleaned up, it still seems to me that my life has begun to line up in some other way.

— Did you manage to visit the Pskov-Caves Monastery, to which most of the book is devoted?

- I visited Pechory for the first time only after I read the book. I really wanted to go there: in recent years, Father John (Krestyankin) has been extremely worried about me. This is a special person for me. Unfortunately, I didn't see him alive. But I like to read his letters. In the car, I'll put on a CD with his sermons and listen. He somehow lives next to me. And, having edited the book of Father Tikhon, I decided: "That's it, I'm going to Pechory." Unfortunately, this trip was mostly a disappointment. Maybe, and even for sure, I myself am to blame for this - I was not really ready ... But then a miracle happened there, and I met Father John - absolutely real, absolutely alive.

The story is like this. I arrived as a journalist, I was going to make a report for Izvestia, where I worked at that time. I was assigned to a very important monk who is in charge of press relations. The monk, as far as I understand, does not like people in general, and especially journalists. Apparently, for this he was given such obedience, so that journalists would not return to the monastery anymore. He met me extremely coldly, even arrogantly, showed me what he could, answered questions: “I’m incompetent here”, “I won’t talk about this”, “The viceroy cannot meet with you”, “These are questions of our internal routine " - and so on. He does not look into the eyes, all the time somewhere to the side ... In general, it's terrible. We went briefly into Father John's cell, but our contact with this man, who for some reason immediately showed me such a sharp hostility, everything was poisoned. I was constrained, I could not really perceive, feel anything. They went in and out.

I was so shocked by the materiality of this miracle! As soon as I sat down and thought that I wouldn’t be able to read Fr. John’s books with a light heart, that this sediment was nasty, some unpleasant doubts about the monastery, they would now be projected onto him too ... And Fr. John at that very moment simply took me by the scruff of the neck and said: “Come on, come back. Let's start all over now." It was absolute happiness and absolute reality.

After that, I spent another day there, and nothing could break through me - neither sidelong glances, nor cold treatment. I felt sorry for this monk. He spoke with such arrogance about how he had to suppress his own pride in the monastery that he wanted to punch him in the nose. In addition, I realized that I myself arrived there in a not quite prepared state. God be with him, it doesn't matter. I came to the caves, put my hand on the coffin of Father John, said “thank you” to him, asked him for something and went out into the light of God absolutely happy. If I ever return to Pechory, then, I think, only to Father John. But my trip there, of course, was completely connected with the book of Father Tikhon, I really wanted to see with my own eyes everything that is described there.

- If you recall the book - after all, Father Tikhon was first sent to the barn. Maybe this is some kind of experience that is given ...

— … to such ambitious people. And Father Tikhon, I think, is an ambitious person by his nature. This is good quality in my opinion. That it does not allow you to do your job badly in any area. Then other things, more serious and spiritual, take the place of ambition. But initially, I think it is very good when ambition is inherent in a person by nature.

— You were the first reader of many of the stories that were included in the book. The author was interested in your opinion?

- Certainly. The author constantly asked whether it was interesting or not, especially since he knows me quite well. I cannot call Fr. Tikhon my confessor, that is loudly said, but still I confessed to him more than once and took communion at the Sretensky Monastery. Despite the busyness of Father Tikhon, he never refused me such requests and, in addition to confession, he always found time to talk. Moreover, it is very reasonable, practical and even pragmatic, that is, the way one should talk with an ordinary secular person, with a woman. I never spoke from the height of my spiritual experience.

I think it was initially important for him that the book reach a wide range of readers, not only purely church people, that it slightly turn the mind of an ordinary person - and he tested this effect on me, of course. Very correct and professional approach.

We have a permanent page in the newspaper "Culture" dedicated to religion, it is called "Symbol of Faith". All traditional confessions are represented there, but Orthodoxy prevails, this is understandable and natural, from all points of view. And so, the Orthodox journalists whom I involve in the work on this page sometimes start beating their heads against the wall after my remarks and shouting: “No, Orthodoxy and the newspaper are incompatible! We can't do that." I say: “Is Orthodoxy compatible with a fascinating book? Take "Unholy Saints" - that's how to write. Learn."

- For the last twenty years in our country it was believed that the topic of culture is not in demand, that publications completely devoted to it are unprofitable. The cultural institutions themselves, especially in the provinces, were forced to survive, even to some extent giving up themselves, their task of bringing culture to the masses, not consumer goods… Is this period over? What can be considered its result? How much have we lost during this time?

- "We" - as a country? I believe that during this time we have lost almost everything, and gained only one thing - the return of religion to our natural, everyday life. But this only acquisition of the post-Soviet period is so expensive that it gives us hope: we will still get out of the swamp. In principle, the Soviet Union would have survived if it were not for state atheism, I am absolutely sure of this.

I think that our people now have a need not for culture as such, but for finding meaning. In recent years, any thinking Russian person has really been deprived of them. The cultural product is diverse and intrusive, but basically it does not offer these meanings to it, it does not ask any serious questions. There is such a fear that “oh, if we start shipping now, they switch the button or don’t buy a ticket, word of mouth will spread that it’s too difficult, too gloomy” ...

It seems to me that this is not true. We have normal, thinking, intelligent people. There are still a lot of them in the country, fifty percent for sure. They just don't know where to go to ask a question and start looking for an answer with someone else. They just crave at least some intellectual, not in the sense of a high-browed, but serious conversation ...

— … about some important things.

- Yes. It is quite natural that it is necessary to look for meanings, first of all, in the sphere of faith and the sphere of culture. Moreover, a culture that is nevertheless connected with faith, descended from it, was born, and, in general, true culture never breaks this umbilical cord. This niche interests me.

We need people who are trying to formulate for themselves why they live. It is very difficult to understand this in modern Russia. If you are a deeply religious, truly church-going person, it will probably be easier for you. But if you are an ordinary representative of Russian society and you have actively working brains in your head, and a heart full of doubts in your chest, then it is very difficult for you to understand why you exist every single minute. Unless, of course, you think that you just live to feed your family. But feeding a family is a strange goal of being human. To put it mildly, not too high. It is very strange when it is put at the forefront. To live solely for this, in my opinion, is humiliating for a spiritual being.

- In a conversation about the religious life of a person, "Culture" is still only looking for its own tone, or do you want to achieve something specific?

— For the time being, I urge my Orthodox journalists who deal with this topic “not to frighten people.” Because I remember what I was myself, say, ten or even five years ago. In general, I believe that in life one must believe in two things: in the Lord God and in the ability of a person to change for the better. I know from my own experience that a person is capable of evolving very strongly. Therefore, I can’t stand talking about the so-called “candlesticks”: they say, the head came to the temple with a “flashing light”, stands with a candle, does not understand anything ... No one knows what is happening in the soul of this person, and no one has the right to call him names "candlestick". I do not believe that you can defend the service and at the same time think all the time: what kind of kickback will they bring you tomorrow and have you forgotten the bribe in the left pocket of your sheepskin coat. I am sure that worship “breaks through” anyone, and even a completely unchurched person leaves the church a little changed.

Since our newspaper is called "Culture", we also try to present the topic of religion through cultural events. This is all the more important because once in Russia these spheres were inseparable. All of Pushkin is permeated with biblical motifs, Gogol, Dostoevsky, even Chekhov… Christianity was a natural fabric that was preserved in absolutely everything – in music, painting, literature. And I think that it is very important for us to get all this out of the chests and remind us: guys, but once it was not like that - not “society is separate, but the Church is separate” or “we are Orthodox, and you are all the rest”, but It was a life of faith.

Again, we are asking for interviews, for comments, not only to priests or those people who are famous for their piety. If a person thinks about what he lives for, he has every right to appear on our "Symbol of Faith" page.

— The concepts of culture and art have also always been inextricably linked. Contemporary art, in your opinion, how does it see the pain points of modern man?

- The whole question is what you mean by the term "contemporary art". Modern - that which is being produced now, at a given moment in time, or what is commonly called contemporary art. What are the various manifestations of "art" - installations, a naked artist on all fours ...

“Today's art, which is still art.

— There are no general trends, unfortunately, because neither Russian society nor Russian art has ever been so atomized. Modern artists are completely different people, and although they create at the same time in the same country, they exist in parallel realities and often do not intersect with each other, which means that they do not come around and do not give rise to common meanings.

But I think that for those who follow the path of searching for meaning, everything will be quite stable. Maybe they won’t immediately collect such a box office as some Yolki-2 or Rzhevsky against Napoleon, but I hope nothing threatens their existence in this country. I do not believe that people whose soul wants something more will die out here. She often does not even understand what she wants, but her desires are not limited to the material world. It is characteristic of a Russian person to want more. And by no means in the sense that it was broadcast on Prokhorov's election posters.

We, the Kultura newspaper, want to occupy this niche. Judging by the fact that there is a demand for us, the circulation is growing, the number of subscribers is increasing, apparently, people have noticed that the newspaper they were waiting for has appeared. And I hope that Kultura is already beginning to create new meanings: the person who picks up our newspaper, it changes at least for some drop, turns his mind a little. And this is the most valuable quality in anything: in a film, a play, a book. By the way, this certainly applies to the book of Father Tikhon. A newspaper is not a book, but, in my opinion, it is wrong to humiliate it. The newspaper is the word, and the word is everything. No matter what they say about its devaluation lately. Dudki. The word remains of great value if it is real. You just have to look for it. This is what we are trying to do.

Journalist, writer and theater critic Elena Yampolskaya was born on June 20, 1971 in Moscow. After graduation, she went to get higher education at the theater department of GITIS. Even in her student years, she began to earn extra money in the newspaper "Soviet Culture". After that, her career began already in a larger publishing house: the Izvestia newspaper. After that, her career began to develop rapidly and a talented journalist has already occupied leadership positions. The husband of Elena Yampolskaya is currently not known to the general public. The woman does not distribute not only his name, but also the type of activity.

In December 2011, Elena Yampolskaya was appointed editor-in-chief of the Kultura newspaper, which had ceased publication two months earlier due to financial difficulties. According to Yuri Belyavsky, the former editor-in-chief of the publication, before his dismissal, the newspaper's shares were bought up by organizations affiliated with N. S. Mikhalkov. The media also wrote that Mikhalkov could become a new investor in the publication. Yampolskaya denied that Mikhalkov owned the newspaper; later admitted that "Culture" is financed from several funds, some of which are related to Mikhalkov.

Having headed the publication, Yampolskaya called Kultura, published under the leadership of Belyavsky, “monstrous”, and the name of the newspaper itself was inert and boring: “a normal person, having seen an unknown newspaper called Kultura in a kiosk, most likely will not buy it.” Yampolskaya said that under her leadership, the newspaper will expand the range of topics, which will include social issues, religion and entertainment. In January 2012, the updated newspaper "Culture" began to appear with a new subtitle "The Spiritual Space of Russian Eurasia". Elena Yampolskaya believes that the updated "Culture" is "the most beautiful newspaper in the country."

After the appointment of Yampolskaya, Irina Kulik, Dmitry Morozov, Daria Borisova, Georgy Osipov and a number of other journalists left the newspaper as a sign of disagreement with her policy; Yampolskaya claims that she herself fired the newspaper's employees for incompetence. Journalists from other publications, mainly from Izvestia, were hired to replace the departed employees. According to Yampolskaya, the newspaper's circulation has grown, which she attributes to Kultura's support for the ban on gay propaganda: “Now they call us a homophobic newspaper. But we continue to bend our line, and these materials are among the most read. As editor-in-chief, Yampolskaya sees the task of making Kultura the legislator of public mores in the country.

The personal life of Elena Yampolskaya remains a secret with seven seals. The woman prefers not to expand on this topic and in every possible way avoids comments. It is not known for certain whether she is married or not. According to some reports, Elena is still officially married, but she herself does not discuss this fact in an interview. It remains only to guess about her marital status, since she communicates much more willingly on the topic of work and gives all sorts of explanations.