Part 1. March 1999. St. Petersburg. Editor's office.

Marina Dmitrievskaya: Oleg, you play in "Woe From Wit" where there are such words, "All the Muscovites have a distinguishing mark". What kind of Moscow distinguishing mark is that?
Oleg Menshikov: Why should I know? It's you who can see this Moscow mark; I could see the one of St. Petersburg.

M.D.: OK, what is that?
O.M.: I've just said, "I could", but I realize that I don't know the city very well… Yesterday there was Seryozha Migitsko's benefit performance in the Lensovet Theatre; and it seemed to me that you (at least, in the theatre world) were more sincere, friendly, united. I realized that yesterday people came home. As for us, we still pay visits. Well, I prefer the latter - to pay visits, but yesterday I was a bit envious.

M.D.: When all the people found themselves in the same condition in the face of some new life, they became closer.
O.M.: Sergey Yurjevich [Yursky - he also played Chatsky in another staging of "Woe From Wit"] said the same thing about Moscow, when you interviewed him.

M.D.: When I get parallel statements of the two "Chatsky's", that means something…
O.M.: That's funny! (Laughs)

M.D.: Do you see something different in the Petersburg actors? I am asking you about it because you are a very Moscow actor.
O.M.: What does it mean? (Laughs) No, I really don't know! (Laughs) Please, explain it!

M.D.: Well, we always had Mochalov and Karatygin, Ermolova and Savina; there always was this contrast between the styles…
O.M.: Karatygin. Was he from Petersburg?

M.D.: And Ermolova was from Moscow…
O.M.: What is it about Moscow that can't set your mind at rest? (Stops laughing)

M.D.: As a matter of fact, I think Petersburg should give Moscow no rest.
O.M.: Well, it is not any kind of competition.

M.D.: No, not the competition, but the contrast, the school. Moscow is so "reckless", and Petersburg…
O.M.: I believe you always have this emulation or "anti-emulation" of Moscow; you always compare yourselves with Moscow. We don't have it; al least I don't have it. But you always have this subconscious "What is going on in Moscow?" thing. And we don't. We don't compare ourselves with anyone.

M.D.: I guess, that's a "Moscow distinguishing mark"…
O.M.: Maybe. But try also not to compare yourselves. Do you need it? Well, Moscow is Moscow, who cares!

M.D.: But what about the context?
O.M.: You can find many wonderful objects that have nothing to do with geography.

M.D.: I am just trying to understand actor's nature, that's all. Moscow perception differs greatly from the one of St. Petersburg, because these perceptions are determined by the cities. Moscow is "a big village", as it was built with estates. This is mine, and it belongs to my neighbour; you can sit on a bench discussing what's happening behind the neighbour gate. And Petersburg is different, one doesn't have a feeling of "his own" here, and that's what the perception is based upon. Why is Yursky a Petersburg - not a Moscow - actor?
O.M.: I don't think that matters. It was not about the city; he had Tovstonogov. If it weren't for Tovstonogov, what would have happen to him?

M.D.: In his notes Oleg Ivanovich Borisov wrote that both of you (named Oleg) were born on the same day and that he would like to work with you again. And what did he mean to you?
O.M.: You know, it was some strange situation. Strange for me, as I could not even think of coming up to him, talking to him… We both played in the film "With The Orchestra Along The Main Street" - and then suddenly he displayed such warmth towards me! I came to Odessa; there were many gapers in the shooting area, who watched the process. I also stood there (no one paid attention to me then!) and watched Oleg Ivanovich work. Suddenly he mentioned me in the crowd, rushed to me, gave me a hug… We went… The following night was great: there were three of us, Peter Efimovich [Todorovsky - the director] played the guitar, Oleg Ivanovich sang… It's impossible to forget it. Although we never stayed in touch, I never phoned him. I guess, it was foolish, it was some pseudo-timidity, I was shy. "Why would I bother such an artist, such a person?" But it was wrong. I didn't bother him, and what happened? Who lost by it? Only me. I don't think he would have minded to talk to me once more; but I would have gained a lot.

M.D.: He was reserved too.
O.M.: We were born on the same day… The same silly thing happened to me when I was a student. We wanted to come to Ranevskaya [a legendary Russian actress] and say, "We are not acquainted, but we are here because we want to talk to you". Now I read about her and realize that she would have replied, "OK, sit down!" And she would have talked to us as long as we needed (a great person can't behave the other way). But we didn't go. Fools! In fact, we are brought up by other people; but it's us who choose those who will be around us.

M.D.: But still it is normal not to phone or come. Tom Stoppard said Isaiah Berlin invited him to come many times, but he (Stoppard!) didn't dare…
O.M.: Well, that's stupid, he was invited! And no one invited me!

M.D.: Oleg, I must confess I don't know much about you, I haven't seen all your works. Even "The Barber Of Siberia", I watched it only because of the interview. I haven't seen much in the theatre either.
O.M.: You could not have seen anything in the theatre at all.

M.D.: Yes, I could have, for example, I saw "Idiot" in the Theatre of the Soviet Army many years ago.
O.M.: I played Ganechka very well, I can tell you. (Laughs) No, I mean serious. Do you know why I am saying it? Because I remember this role. Actually, I played more than one role; but Ganechka is one of few roles I remember as well as Caligula and Nizhinsky.

M.D.: You were a student of the Shepkin Drama school. After twenty years of being in the profession, can you name your teachers?
O.M.: I don't know. I don't have just one name, but to name all of them… Sixty per cent of the names are not familiar to you, and it would be wrong to name only famous ones. There are many of them.

M.D.: I'll ask this way. You've just said that a person chooses those who will be around him. You too?
O.M.: Of course, I chose… It's not that I meet a person and think if he'll match my schedule. I mean that people enter your life in concordance with the way you live. What kind of people they will be depends on the way you live.

M.D.: And who was important to you?
O.M.: I am not trying to evade the question, I really am not. But there are many of them! Well, you say - teachers. In Moscow I worked with many directors. Of course, all of them were people of different talent. They may not have been my teachers, but I learned a lot from them. You can learn something even from the worst director. Even to decline something, one should learn to do it as well. I guess, the main teacher is inside of you. At least, it's like that with me. I don't mean I don't need anyone. On the contrary, I need many people! Very many names. But you can't name 22 names and forget about 2 and vice versa.

M.D.: OK, OK, I won't ask this question again! Let's do it this way. What were your first theatre impressions and what are the deepest ones in your life?
O.M.: The first and the deepest one was and still is the way Tsarev played Famusov in "Woe From Wit". If you can consider reading a play as a theatre impression then it has to be the unique moment in my life when I - after reading Camus's play "Caligula" - wanted to play Caligula. It was the one and only time in my life (when they ask me what I want to play, I answer very seriously that I don't know). And that's how people enter your life - two weeks later I received a phone call from Fomenko who offered me a role of Caligula. Bergman's "Hamlet" was a brilliant performance. I don't really like this word, but in this case, I think, it's proper. I can't say the leading actor amazed me, although he was great. But everything was great there! The performance! Then - Vasiljev's "Serso" and all Strehler's performances I saw (I saw just a few). "The Great Magic", "Island of Slaves". I remember, after the first act of "The Great Magic" two famous actresses were getting dressed, and I stood there horrified, I couldn't believe they were leaving. And they were saying something like this, "Well, we see the same things in our theatres every day!" Actually, I went to their theatres then to find out what they saw and what they understood by "Strehler", but I guess, our points of view were different. Concerning our understanding of Strehler. Well, that's all about the theatre, I think. See, how short our interview is! (Laughs)

M.D.: No, no, I have a list of questions, and there are 27 of them! And one of them is - who among the world directors would you like to work with?
O.M.: With Strehler, of course.

M.D.: Yesterday I read in a paper you were rehearsing Romeo in Peter Brooke's performance. As there were two "k" in Brooke's name, I can ask you now. Are you rehearsing Romeo?
O.M.: Only if to write "Menshikov" with two "k"! Good Lord! Of course, not! Well, what do you expect? Once they published my photo in a Moscow magazine and wrote that I was playing the saxophone in the role of Hamlet in Peter Stein's performance; and there was also an interview with me where I told how I learned music… Great, huh? And it happened when Stein's performance was already on.

M.D.: What about suing?
O.M.: (Laughs) To sue everyone is to waste life!

M.D.: You hold the record on the quantity of rumours. Even when they try not to listen to them…
O.M.: …the rumours are still alive!

M.D.: For instance, yesterday a theatre cashier who sells our magazine asked for a ticket for Migitsko's benefit performance (she couldn't afford one as the tickets were very expensive)…
O.M.: How much?

M.D.: 300 rubles. That's unbelievably expensive for St. Petersburg. No one went to see your "Woe From Wit", no one could afford a ticket.
O.M.: And everyone blamed us for some reason! They wrote I gained $18000. What's going on with this tour is sheer nonsense! We had no concern with the organizers, complain about them!

M.D.: I will. The day before the performance I was backstage in the BDT [the theatre where the Petersburg performance "Woe From Wit" took place]. I saw two girls who looked like those "organizers" and asked them very politely, "Could you tell me how critics will be able to attend the performance?" And what did I hear? "Oleg doesn't give a damn about your critique! Unless he gets the damn Grand Prix of your damn "Baltic Home" festival, he will never come here again! Damn it!" I listened to this speech and didn't go to the performance.
O.M.: I found out "Baltic Home" was taking place only after I arrived here. I was going not to "Baltic Home", I was going on tour to the great theatre, to the city I respect very much. I don't think anything about the festival, but I wasn't going to attend it! In fact, it's become boring to explain it all the time.

M.D.: As I've said already, you hold the record on the quantity of rumours. Anyway, we digressed from the topic. The cashier I was talking about said to me yesterday that Pavel Kaplevich, an artist, married you to Ulyana Lopatkina [prima ballerina of the Mariinsky Theatre].
O.M.: According to rumours, Kaplevich has a huge influence on my life, doesn't he? They say he brought me to Fomenko, then he brought me to Lopatkina!

M.D.: Don't laugh! That's what she said - Lopatkina! Actually, you are always surrounded with such things. Yesterday at the benefit I witnessed the hysteria around you. It was a gripping view, similar to Fellini! And it impressed much more than the things happening onstage! (Both laugh) And you have to deal with it somehow. That's irreality. What does your real life consist of?
O.M.: Well, by the way, that is also my real life. Not the most favourite part of it, but it's mine. And it's real.

M.D.: But there is also an image. Now you don't look like it very much. I watched you yesterday. You seem to have some kind of a button, you push it and - bang, you are smiling, your image is switched on. But at some point, you forget about it, and the real life comes to the surface.
O.M.: Yesterday I pushed the button of course. Certainly!

M.D.: But a person eats, drinks, reads some books, listens to some music, works on this and that…
O.M.: (Laughs) I do all these things. I eat. I drink. I work. It's all real.

M.D.: What kind of work are you doing now?
O.M.: We are creating a new play.

M.D.: Are you a writer?
O.M.: Thank God, I am not. I just had an idea and I want to make it a reality. We are creating a play. There are several of us. It all began from the plot I came up with. Literary people write it down. I want to start rehearsing in Autumn.v
M.D.: Is there a group of actors you want to work with?
O.M.: No. Although I am a very affectionate person, it's hard for me to forget people who once were a part of my life (I am talking not as an actor, but as a man occupied with entreprise). Those who come stay in my mind and in my heart. But I don't want to bound them or myself by our collaboration.

M.D.: So while writing you don't consider some concrete actors, right?
O.M.: There are only two or three people who want to do it and can sacrifice (excuse me for this word) something for it. We'll see what will happen with the others.

M.D.: And what helps you in your life?
O.M.: What helps me?

M.D.: Well, it's hard to live, right? Or easy?
O.M.: Not that easy. But not that hard either. It depends on your inner aims.

M.D.: Then there must be some "categorical imperative".
O.M.: That's difficult for me. What's that?

M.D.: That's Kant. Well, something is taken from the Sermon on the Mount (treat others the way you want others to treat you). Or this one - behaviour is moral if you see every person as the end, but not the means [the proverb "The end justifies the means"]. If you feel that someone becomes the means for you, then it has nothing to do with morality. It is hard sometimes. For example, when I go to ask for money for publishing the magazine, it is hard to convince myself that the person I am going to talk to is the end, and not the means. So I try to see him as the end and do my best to explain him that there is nothing similar to the Russian theatre critique in the world…
O.M.: You are right, there is nothing.

M.D.: And I tell him that the critique must be preserved. And at this point he becomes the end for me.
O.M.: (Laughs) Do you think he understands it?

M.D.: I don't really care what he thinks about the end and the means. You know, when I criticize a performance, my aim is to make the theatre understand something…
O.M.: Well, what if they stage a performance to make you understand something?

M.D.: Yes. But if I didn't, I have every right to assert them my lack of understanding.
O.M.: Why?

M.D.: It is a dialogue: they stage - I watch.
O.M.: But you don't carry on a dialogue with just anyone. What if they are not interested in it?

M.D.: If they staged a performance, then they wanted to tell me something. I listened to them and said, "Guys, I don't know this language".
O.M.: (Laughs) That's it. That's the end.

M.D.: If I don't know the language, then that's the end, indeed. Then I won't write about it. But if they just imitate the language, like children who can't read and write? I had experience of the kind while watching Sturua's "Hamlet" not long ago.
O.M.: On the one hand, it is so. On the other, neither you nor me think that Sturua is an unintelligent person, right?

M.D.: He is great!
O.M.: Then there is something that makes him go this way. So maybe we should feel sorry for him instead of running away horrified?

M.D.: If I see someone hurt or ill, I feel sorry for this person.
O.M.: Maybe it's not the point? That's the way he sees himself now. If he is interesting and if he is doing something, that's the most important thing. He cognizes himself by staging performances; I cognize myself by acting and - pardon - staging. That's my way of cognition of myself and the world.

M.D.: I will never forget what Sturua gave me, that's why I don't write about his "Hamlet". I am waiting for him to recover. Timur Chkheidze had a very hard time in Petersburg, but then he recovered. Have you seen his "Godunov"? He staged it like poetry, like the combination of vowels and consonants.
O.M.: When we worked on "Woe From Wit", it was the realization of my dream to stage poetry. Our actors forgot how to recite poetry on the stage, and especially - how to act it.

M.D.: Somehow we've digressed from our main topic - if it is easy to live…
O.M.: No, we haven't. We live to cognize ourselves, to understand what's happening with us.

M.D.: Have you ever been betrayed?
O.M.: Yes, of course. I stopped taking it too painfully.

M.D.: Did it happen itself? Or did you learn to do it?
O.M.: I guess, I became wiser.

M.D.: Or maybe quite the opposite?
O.M.: No. Of course, betrayal is always painful. But you should learn to forgive. Even betrayal.

M.D.: Can you? Honestly.
O.M.: I can. Honestly.

M.D.: I envy you. I can, but I have to try hard to do it.
O.M.: (Laughs) It's not that hard, really! Don't get me wrong, I don't mean, "not to care". I am talking about forgiving and communicating with this person. I am not saying it because I lived a long life and learned a lot. I am saying it because it is really so. Well, after all, what is betrayal? A person abandons you…

M.D.: Not just abandons.
O.M.: Well, yes. All the explanations don't make sense. Betrayal is betrayal. I agree.

M.D.: You can find reasons justifying any betrayal.
O.M.: And everybody does it. And everybody is right in his own way. Even the one who betrayed doesn't consider himself a betrayer, you said it. We will never be able to look within other people's souls, we will never understand what's going on in their minds.

M.D.: What about an actor?
O.M.: What about an actor? An actor looks within his soul. The psychology of another human being is phase-mongering, I don't like it. Forget about another person, try to understand yourself first! No- no-no! Take, for instance, Oleg Ivanovich Borisov. He was a great actor, but for me he was not just an actor, he was an outstanding person. I didn't want to see him lisping something and walking strangely. I was interested in seeing him coming onstage and listening to what he had to say.

M.D.: He was not afraid to look within himself, where not everything was perfect. He was intrepid because he didn't try to make everyone love him. Everyone wants to be a nice guy… "Here I am - love me!"
O.M.: He behaved the way he thought was right. And he didn't have to ask for love, because he was loved.

M.D.: But - "with a strange love" [a quote].
O.M.: Well, of course! We are talking about Borisov, not some pop star. But the audience loved him.

M.D.: He made people feel chilly.
O.M.: But still they felt a need to listen to him.

M.D.: Oleg Evgenyevich, you seem to have a traditional view on the theatre.
O.M.: Yes, theatre is a big stage. I don't really accept all those performances for 60 spectators. I will never go to see such a performance, I'll suspect a director of what he really wanted to say. I played Caligula on the Little stage, but I think it was wrong. Spectators were 2 meters away from me, and I sobbed, writhed in hysterics. That is wrong! After all, this is not a mental institution, this is theatre. In the theatre there must be footlights, a curtain, a stage, there must be many spectators.

M.D.: And they must be good.
O.M.: There are no bad ones. If you haven't captured the audience, it's your fault. However, I must admit, once I had a inconceivable, impervious audience. I don't remember anything like that ever happened to me before. It was the Moscow premiere of "Woe From Wit". If I only gave you some names! The auditorium was packed with theatre people who knew each other. Dogileva told me she couldn't walk through the gangway without greeting and hugging everyone. And we didn't invite anyone, they came by themselves as it should be. (Actually I never invite anyone to my performances, I think it's improper: "Come, watch me play!" There is something abnormal in it, isn't there?) So there was this audience with at least 200 potential Famusovs and at least 300 potential Chatskys!

M.D.: And 300 people more who knew what Famusov and Chatsky should be like…
O.M.: And 300 more - indignant at the fact that during the financial crisis there was an entreprise with 25 people onstage and 25 people backstage, with great costumes; and "what he is trying to say with his production and his Chatsky anyway", and the poetry… But in this situation the house is full for the whole season and in the end of the 20th century people sit quietly listening to Griboedov's poetry, why is that? I think it is great! After all, no one urges them to come! And during the 40th performance they sit even on the stairs and listen! So it is hard only when there are professionals in the audience… And then, you know, what do we all lack? We should take everything a bit easier, everything - first, ourselves and our profession… I guess, it comes after a number of years. Easier! And what will be will be.

M.D.: Yes, I always say to myself - if it happened it was meant to. It is necessary to understand for what.
O.M.: Yup! Exactly. See, how much alike we are. That's what I say to young people: whom are you trying to prove anything? Relax. Everything will be OK. But it is like a disease, one should go through it… They always criticize next generation: they say, the previous one was much better. I agree, the mankind really regresses; every next generation is a little bit worse than the previous one. This can be said about the theatre too. It's in trouble, the great are leaving. What were we raised on? Anatoly Vasiljevich Efros. We went to watch Tovstonogov. And what do young people watch, Marina?

M.D.: Come to watch good Petersburg performances, our theatre situation is not that bad. [She tells Oleg about the latest theatre seasons]
O.M.: I haven't seen anything of what you named. But don't you think that it is some kind of family joy and pride?

M.D.: No, we have many talented people. But their destiny is not, so to speak, a Moscow one. Here is an example. Yesterday during the skit Eugeny Baranov from the Comedy Theatre parodied you…
O.M.: I haven't seen it, but they say it was a good number.

M.D.: It was the best. It was the only intelligent number in the skit. He is a very talented artist. People were saying, "They are very alike. Baranov could have got everything Menshikov has if he was more lucky". No one knows our actors, they are not promoted. There is neither cinema nor TV. But there are people.
O.M.: Young people astonish me. They come and say they liked Volodya Mirzoev's performance. It is horrifying not because I don't like Volodya. No, he's a smart, intelligent man; he has the right to have his own "Mirzoev's Theatre". But I think such a theatre can exist only if there is the main line of the theatre - Efros's Theatre. But when a small path is considered to be the main road of the theatre!..

M.D.: One of the reasons why Moscow has lost this main line is that it was aimed at a quick result. No one was interested in routine. And we were bringing up our new actors at that time… It wasn't very profitable; actually here the financial situation differs a lot from Moscow.
O.M.: I saw "Caligula". And it is not mine. Although the actor who plays Caligula is very good. But you see, you can name 6-7 actors, but in Moscow there is no such thing.

M.D.: What were the crucial moments of your life?
O.M.: Meetings. The graduation from the Institute and three meetings - with Mikhalkov, Balayan and Kozakov. Within two years I acted in their films. I didn't understand anything then and I didn't really care who it was - Balayan, Mikhalkov or Kozakov. It didn't matter! I was 20 years old! They asked me - "How does Mikhalkov treat actors?" But how would I know?! Then of course, it was Fomenko. If I ever think of a theatre as of some holiday then it has to be Fomenko. I think he always stages the same performance but it is always interesting to me. Actually, he is very interesting for me as a personality.

M.D.: Yes, Moscow canonized him. In Petersburg he was called Petya [a small name of Peter], and in Moscow he is Foma [a nickname from his last name], there is something biblical in it. But at some point Moscow will throw him off the throne for exactly the same things it lifted him up there.
O.M.: I don't think now he is a better director than he was 15 years ago, all the fuss about him doesn't do him any good… Thanks to Fomenko I came to the theatre. Before that I was in the street. There was neither cinema, nor theatre.

M.D.: Are you a free person?
O.M.: Are there free people at all? Of course, not. But then I decided that doing absolutely nothing would be better than doing the things I did then. Well, and soon I received a phone call. Actually, not very soon (I spent 1,5 months in a hospital. So it was like this: I quit - a hospital - a phone call). However, unless I quit, Fomenko would have not appeared in my life. Later he told me he wanted to invite me, but he knew I worked in another theatre. Therefore, unless I quit, I would have never played Caligula…

M.D.: There are different ways of life. There is a way of life of the Russian intellectuals; but there is also a bourgeois one, and Moscow is now associated with this way of life. And they put you in the middle of it. How do you cope?
O.M.: I don't understand you. Do they think I don't attend "Kinotavr" [a Russian film festival] parties, but I visit the Kremlin parties?

M.D.: They say you are a member of a high-ranking sphere connected with Mikhalkov…
O.M.: Such rumours - about Mikhalkov, parties - always amaze me. When you meet those who tell such things ask them to think before they say something. This is not true; I don't belong to any high-ranking sphere! He prefers to be alone there. Actually when I communicate with people I don't care about their social status. A person is either interesting or not interesting to me. The same thing is with the parties. It doesn't make difference which one to attend, as I don't like them in general. It scares me when there are more than 20 people around. Maybe it is some kind of psychosis. You understand it yourself, now I can't stay unnoticed and sit quietly in the corner. Yes, I attend state banquets on the occasion of the State Prizes presentations. I can't ignore these events because I get awarded. I attend festivals although I try to do it as rarely as possible. Sometimes I hear things like "he doesn't go anywhere, he doesn't talk to anyone". That's nonsense! Assistant producers always say to me, "Oleg, when we offered you a role, they warned us - 'he will be a torture to be around'!" And then they say what a professional I am and they have no problems with me (I know that I am a disciplined person, I am never late etc.) Well, of course, I am used to some things now and I won't go by subway. But it's life.

M.D.: How do you interpret the word "intellectuals"?
O.M.: I believe there are words that don't need to be explained. I tried to find the definition of this word, but I understood it was a waste of time.

M.D.: But does it make sense to you?
O.M.: Absolutely. But I think intellectuals are intellectuals, and that's it. There are many definitions, all of them are good. But there is no one and only definition.

M.D.: Head of our department gave one.
O.M.: Which one?

M.D.: An intellectual thinks that consciousness determines existence, and a 'non-intellectual' thinks it's vice versa.
O.M.: One can put a comma here and continue…

M.D.: And what do you think about it?
O.M.: (Laughs) I don't know. (Pauses) Consciousness, I guess. I guess so. And about the way I live. Of course, there are things I am used to. I am sorry, but it happened so. I understand very well that many people know no rest because of how much money I earn. But if only those who are angry about it knew what I spend this money on… (Pauses, then laughs)… they would get much more angry!

M.D.: It happens because there was no such thing as stardom in our country…
O.M.: And we don't need it at all!

M.D.: But you are a star. The way you live, what you do, your image… Maybe it happened because our life changed, but they labeled you with this word "a star".
O.M.: You know, frankly speaking, I never thought it was this way. Honestly. I just led my life, rarely went out. But when we toured many towns with "Woe From Wit", it was a revelation for me that people love me. It was a revelation! The way they long to see me, try to talk to me…

M.D.: It is much more than love that surrounded many actors. For example, I have wonderful students in the Institute, who publish their articles in papers, go to theatres, meet actors, celebrate holidays with famous people. And their mental state is normal. But when I told you would come and we would talk in the editor's office, my smart intelligent girls asked if they could come and walk along the street hither and thither - near the office. So I think you are doomed. Unfortunately or luckily.
O.M.: Neither unfortunately nor luckily. It is the way it is.

M.D.: That's why you are getting married to Lopatkina.
O.M.: We walked along the night Petersburg once. Those are such fairy tales…

M.D.: So don't you go by subway, huh?
O.M.: Marina, how can I go by subway? Why would I do it? I treat myself kindly. It is awful when everyone is staring at you! Why would I subject myself to such a torture? It's not because I don't want to go by subway. I used to love to go by subway, especially in the evening. I just loved it! Also I loved to go by tram along the evening Moscow! There are few people in a tram in the evening. It was great! When will I be able to do it again? Never.

M.D.: That's terrible.
O.M.: Yup.

M.D.: On the one hand, when at night you run trying to catch the last train, you curse your life because you don't and will never have a car. But on the other hand, when I think that you go by car only!..
O.M.: Many people go by car only! One more thing. One day you are in a very good mood. It's great when it happens. Not long ago we gathered - there were 10 of us - and went to the Central Amusement park. And we went on all the rides! On the Ferris wheel, on the roller-coaster! It was a wonderful day. And I didn't really care about people staring at me. We had so much fun! If people came up to me, somehow they went away very quickly. So adventures on the tram are also possible, they are possible.

M.D.: None of great actors of the past experienced such stardom, none was surrounded with this madness. I guess something happened in our life and we needed such a thing.
O.M.: We don't know what we transmit through ourselves, do we? So I think it is not my merit; it is my purpose not to lose the things that go through me.

M.D.: Do you have to pay?
O.M.: Certainly. If someone said to me, "Return to the 15-year past and think if you really want to live the way you do now", I would think for a long time, and then (laughs) I would choose a normal human (!) life.

M.D.: What kind of life is that?
O.M.: Not to be an actor.

M.D.: Then whom would you choose to be?
O.M.: Anyone! It doesn't matter. I can foresee the reaction: oh my God, how easy it is for him to say such things! Not your reaction, but in general. But I mean serious. About the payment. On the other hand, you are saying - madness, crowds (now the weather is warm and there are really many people at the back entrance). If they are there, then they need something! I speak so boldly about it because I don't consider it my merit and quality, I don't have anything to do with it.

M.D.: Oleg, only now, after an hour of our conversation, I can talk to you normally. If you only knew how scared I was before the interview! I couldn't explain it even to myself why I could talk normally to Frendlikh or Lavrov - but couldn't talk to you. And then I realized the reason - I am beyond the scope of your activity. There is a bookcase with books in it. The books are big and small. I am small; Yursky or Frendlikh are big and they are situated far from me, but still we all are on the same shelf, on the same territory. And you are a book from another shelf. Neither higher nor lower, your shelf is just different. That's why it is hard to make up questions. Well, I prepared one: I want to know features of a star way of life.
O.M.: What kind of star I am!! You are wrong! If there is a star in our country, that is only one person - Pugachyova [a pop singer], what's going on around her is close to the things happening with stars "there" [in the West]. If I am a star, who is Niro then?

M.D.: But it is different everywhere… What theatre do you like as a spectator? What films do you like?
O.M.: I don't know. I adore Fellini, as well as many other things. I have never thought about it.

M.D.: What books did you read, what songs did you sing while growing up?
O.M.: You know, my relationship with my childhood is very serious. It is serious, because there is no relationship at all. I don't remember myself being a child; I don't remember it at all. I remember myself only from the time I became a student.

M.D.: A student? That's serious.
O.M.: (Laughs) That's a disease. A maniac-depressive psychosis. No, there are some "flashes of memory" and also "information from the others" like Zhvanetsky [a comedian] used to say. Of course, there were special books and films, but I don't remember them.

M.D.: What about any sensations of childhood?
O.M.: There are some. I can remember some smells… But I don't remember MYSELF as a child.

M.D.: How did you decide to become an actor?
O.M.: (Laughs) I don't remember!

M.D.: We'll stop here, and my first question next time we meet will be - "what is the first thing you remember?"
O.M.: I'll try to remember. I promise.


Part 2. November 1999. Moscow. Theatrical Company "814".

M.D.: Oleg, last time we left out very important things. For example, what experience did you gain from the English period of your work together with Vanessa Redgrave in the performance "When She Danced"?
O.M.: Did we leave that out? That couldn't be! It was a gift and a holiday for me - a drama actor leaves for England for a half a year period to work with a star at the West End (and besides Vanessa there were many famous actors in that performance).

M.D.: Did you rehearse in English?
O.M.: No, I rehearsed and played in Russian. I didn't know English at all then, the only word I knew was "table"… Everything was so unusual: the scenery was prepared from the very beginning, playbills were on a month before the performance. A month of rehearsals, two days onstage before the premiere - and that was all. Then there was a premiere, a so called press-night, when all the critics came. And they are so afraid of critics because - in contrast to ours - those critics are really very powerful. If 80% of newspapers write one shouldn't see a performance, no one will go to the theatre. There was the only one rare event with "A Midsummer Night's Dream" staged by a French director, when in spite of all the critique people went to watch it. Well, maybe it was because the performance was untraditional for them, although I saw "Richard" there - that was something! - with Stalin-Hitler uniforms. By that time we had already passed that phase…

M.D.: About 15 years ago, when Sturua's "Richard" was on…
O.M.: Exactly! And the time I was there, it was still a revelation for them. Anyway, there was a month of rehearsals - 8 hours a day - when I came home totally weary and went to bed. A month of rehearsals, a month of premiere nervousness (someone comes, people say something about the performance, fraternization of the actors and so on and so forth). I began to realize something much later. I calmed down and then I became annoyed (I played 8 performances a week for 7 months - that was crazy!). And then another phase began, the most interesting for me. Irritation was gone, and… I am not taking much upon myself, but Stanislavsky used to say - one should play three hours driven by the highest technique and three minutes driven by the genuine feeling. But no one knows when this feeling appears, when it begins to grow! You can't prepare yourself to this moment, the only thing you can do is walk through your role in the right direction. And the most interesting thing was that those "three minutes" occurred in the most unexpected parts.

M.D.: In different parts?
O.M.: Yes! And because of such quick inner explosions there was a mad desire to act. It came when I already understood everything, I knew each reaction of both the partner and the audience (when they laughed and when they were quiet). Here we don't have such thing. Well, only maybe if the performance is on for 20 years, but in this case it's hard to call it a performance.

M.D.: But in this very situation it is very hard for the feeling to grow.
O.M.: Well, you know, it is so. And I think, much depended on Vanessa then. I have never met anyone who had such feeling of partnership. Yes, she is a great actress, undoubtedly. I haven't seen her onstage, I only saw her on the screen. I don't know how she talks to the audience. But how she talks to a partner! It is something beyond boundaries. And at the same time she can be in any mood. Once she played on the day of Tony Richardson's death. He died in America, and she was acting right after she heard about that. There were similar cases in the theatre history before, there is nothing new; but now I am talking about her ability to catch subconsciously tiny nuances no matter how sad or happy she was. Somehow she knew what I felt in this particular moment! And if you ask her about it, she will be surprised. It is in her acting nature, in her swiftness, in her very essence of a woman and an actress, given from God. You are just thinking of doing something and she has already responded.

M.D.: Do you mean that those moments of your life in the performance were evoked by her?
O.M.: I guess, they were evoked by both of us. But you see, you can knock on the door and they won't open. And here you have just came up to the door, and the one behind it has already heard your steps.

M.D.: At some spiritual level?
O.M.: Yes, and it was fantastic, unique experience and education. There was an incident once (you don't have to write about it if you don't want to, I told it not long ago). She was irritated. Not at me, but in general. According to the scene she had to come up to me and splash a glass of shampagne in my face. Well, she did. I started saying my lines and she poured one more glass - and splashed it in my face once again. I was stunned, I couldn't understand what was my fault. And she did it the third time! The moment was very serious, I had to recite Esenin's poems then. I guess, that time I recited them very well! That incident doesn't have much to do with the partnership, of course; but it shows Vanessa's nature. She might have realized she wasn't quite right and the next day I found a silver tray full of fish (she knew I like fish) with lemons and other things in front of my locked make-up room. It was very beautiful! And speaking about education there is one more thing. I learned at first hand that the differences between the theatre schools were basically minimum. There are differences, of course; they are dictated by the national character, the social state of the society (one can't compare the way people live in Great Britain and Russia; I think, in England they want to laugh and rest in the theatre more). But having worked there and in France I understood that all the actors were very close. They can find a common language. I heard someone saying it before, and now I can say it myself - it is really so. And, of course, I saw London - one of my most favourite cities, I spent much time there. I found many friends there. So it was all that.

M.D.: You learned the language.
O.M.: No, I didn't learn the language! I played in Russian. Later, when I played in English, I had to learn it, I had to attend an English school. But still there were Russians to talk to, there were wonderful meetings. For example, I met Maria Saint-Just. She was Russian by origin, Lord Saint-Just's wife, a true lady. She was Tennesy Williams's close friend and a heir of his copyrights. Marlon Brando was her close friend and Domingo sang for her (imagine, what kind of place it was if she was a friend of Williams!). She died…

M.D.: Was she old?
O.M.: I didn't know her age! I realized she was at some serious age, but she was a strong, determined and very touching in this strength lady…

M.D.: Do you like to work in general?
O.M.: Those who worked with me know that I don't like rehearsing. It is really so. What does it mean - rehearsing? I don't like to repeat the same thing 20 times onstage, I get bored. If I come onstage to do something for the second time, I believe I have no right to do it the way I did it before. When I am looking for something and have to achieve some result, I will look for it. But if I realize and know that I can do it, I won't rehearse. Sasha Feklistov [Oleg's partner in "N"], whom I adore, wrote once that it was impossible, that he needed to feel me as a partner, but he started to get something from me only after we began to play the performance. I mean I understand it is bad for my partners, but that's my method (Laughs)… if you can call a method the situation when you deprive your partner of something. It is the same during the shooting. I don't like this kind of work. I like working at home, where I can sit, lay and - pardon me - think and invent. Well, I love that! The character is walking and speaking in my head…

M.D.: That's the way it should be! According to Mikhail Chekhov.
O.M.: Well, yes. I don't like to do it at a rehearsal when there are many people. I've told you, no one believes me, but I am shy…

M.D.: No one believes me either…
O.M.: So you see! Everyone is looking at you at the rehearsal and you have to reveal your soul. But sometimes it doesn't want to be revealed! I guess, that's the reason why I left theatre. It was boring: when you are constantly among the same people, you know what to expect from everyone onstage; you know that you'll come and hear the same senseless conversations… I wanted to have my own criterion independent from some particular theatre. They say, "That actor plays very well!" But only the troupe knows he plays well in comparison to his skills five years ago, and the audience doesn't notice it! And it expects something different from him, not the progress happening inside of him!.. That's why I left (we've discussed it already). That's why I like my "second work", a constant one happening inside of me. I get a role and start thinking it over…

M.D.: And what is an actor in general? What is an actor's nature?
O.M.: Nature? I don't know… I'll try to say now… I guess, it won't sound impressive, but an actor is a profession. For me it is a possibility to cognize myself. It so happened that I chose this path… I don't know…

M.D.: Bitov writes in "Pushkinsky Dom" that there are two ways for an artist to stay invisible: an absolute closeness and an absolute openness. What conception is closer to you? Because you have an image of such a "Kostik" on the one hand, and a very reserved person on the other.
O.M.: It depends on the way I communicate with a person. Like all of us. Sometimes I am not just reserved, I am very reserved. But the closer a person is for me, the more overt I become. And the openness is more natural for me.

M.D.: Do you have many close people and friends?
O.M.: There can't be many of them, although it's great when there are many. It is wrong that there must be just one friend. There may be twenty. But I don't have that many.

M.D.: What is happiness?
O.M.: There we go! (Pauses.) I guess, for the time being I can say this: happiness is when you can understand who you are and what you can do and what you can't and when you know your place. Many bad things happen because we lay claim to something or get offended as in our opinion, we don't have things we should have…

M.D.: Maybe it is not happiness? Maybe it is peace and will?
O.M.: And what is that? (Laughs)

M.D.: That's not happiness! (Laughs)
O.M.: There's no happiness in the world, that's what I am talking about! (Laughs) Let it not be!

M.D.: Let it be! But happiness is one thing, and will and peace - quite another. And what you are saying looks more like peace and will.
O.M.: Yes, I am talking about them. Let's assume them as a basis. And let's add…

M.D.: Is there happiness in the world?
O.M.: Yes, of course. When you are in love, it is happiness. You fly.

M.D.: That's when you are in love. But when you love, it is suffering…
O.M.: Probably. You know, once I said that great artists can't love anyone. And everyone jumped on me - "how is that?!"

M.D.: What about Dante? What about Petrarch?
O.M.: They were in love. To love means to devote yourself to your beloved person. A great artist can't devote himself to anyone. He can be head over heels in love. But a creative person can't love, devote himself to another person, make this person happy - he can't do that!

M.D.: Yes, as Pushkin wrote, "Love was gone, the Muse came…" That means, when a person loves, he can think about just one thing and there is no place for Muse. Then when love fades away, a place for Muse appears.
O.M.: Amorousness and love are different things.

M.D.: Of course, they are.
O.M.: Do you think Alexander Sergeevich [Pushkin] loved? I don't know, I am asking you.

M.D.: I don't know…
O.M.: What about Natalia Nikolaevna? Did he love her?

M.D.: Who is interviewing who?
O.M.: Amorousness is not a bad thing, it is a state of mind when you are sure it will last forever… I am afraid we can get lost here. Every word means different things to different people!

M.D.: I said "Love was gone, the Muse came" to illustrate your words that an artist can't love.
O.M.: Like, "you don't even need to try"?

M.D.: Peace and will - that's cool. You lead you life - with such peace and such will… And soon you get bored to death.
O.M.: I've said - that's what I think now! It can change in a week.

M.D.: Do you believe that everything we've done reflects on us?
O.M.: Not just the things we've done, but also what we've thought about. And the most horrifying thing that our bad deeds can reflect on our children. Nothing disappears, never.

M.D.: Are your words based on some experience?
O.M.: I know it is so. Although I can't say I have some proof. That's a high topic we are discussing, right? No one can avoid it. And if there is some proof, you won't be able to put it into words anyway. You can only realize it is the very thing we are talking about. The thing that returns.

M.D.: Venichka wrote, "Only Nikolay Gogol and Solomon led a boring life". What about you?
O.M.: Noooo!!!! Everything, but not boring.

M.D.: Do you stage performances on our own money or do you attract sponsors?
O.M.: I attract sponsors. I have an administrative team.

M.D.: Are you ready to work with a director who will tear you off a strip?
O.M.: With great pleasure! But I must really believe that he knows what exactly should be torn off me and what he wants to achieve doing it. He should not just tear me off a strip - make Pinoccio of me; there should be some aim. I won't ask him what it is, but I must realize it exists.

M.D.: Can I put it as you miss such a director?
O.M.: Every actor does.

M.D.: What gives you a feeling of being independent?
O.M.: Independent from what?

M.D.: Independent socially. You are independent socially, aren't you?
O.M.: Certainly.

M.D.: Does money make you independent? Unfortunately?
O.M.: Money exists "unfortunately" in general. But I am not independent from people who are around me. In this sense I am a very depending person. As for the independence you call social, financial - yes, I have it and I am very glad about it. In no way I am going to compare myself with Chaplin, but if I am not mistaken, it was he who said that fame helped him to remain a decent man.

M.D.: It was said in a different country. Here it is "indecent to be famous".
O.M.: (Laughs) It was said by one of the most famous people. And I think the idea is that you shouldn't want it too much… Well, and what if you are famous? What should you do? Leave everything and disappear? I don't want to discuss Pasternak now, I respect him very much. But a person who wrote such words should leave this world, go to a cloister, because life is more correct there. Or live on the top of some mountain. That would be great! I am serious. But as we stay in this world, we are "alive, that's all. Till the end". This one is more precise, I think.

M.D.: Oleg, if there is your film you don't like, do you hide your opinion? How free and independent are you in this case?
O.M.: You know, I don't like watching my films, I do it very rarely - maybe at the premieres I have to attend. What do I do when I don't like it? Well, I didn't want this to happen; like everyone else who participated in the making of the film. I've never acted in wittingly dishonest or pot-bolier films, I've always made conscientious choice. Who knows why things don't work out sometimes? Why does it happen? In my opinion, the most important thing is fair and right intentions. When I watch a film, I think about the group, the people I worked with. Spectators are watching an episode, but I remember the story behind it, what was after the shooting. Like, that day there was a party…

M.D.: "The day there was a party we shot this awful scene!"
O.M.: (Laughs) I am not watching a simple film! I am watching a part of my life!

M.D.: Can't you keep aloof from it?
O.M.: But how?! No, I can't do it. Look, I can't keep aloof even when I watch other films. Very rarely I forget about everything watching a film. Once I watched a fantastic film, yet it was just the first time when I watched it with bated breath, the second time I couldn't get away from some professional thoughts. Actually, we all know what we can do and what we can't. Everyone knows. The extent of the knowledge can be different. For example, I had no idea my role in "Burnt By The Sun" would have such resonance. I swear. I had no idea. Regardless of how it was actually played.

M.D.: It was played well.
O.M.: That's Mikhalkov's merit.

M.D.: I deliberately don't want to ask questions about "The Barber Of Siberia".
O.M.: Then don't! (Laughs)

M.D.: I was laughing non-stop for three hours. I began laughing at the fifth minute of the film - and couldn't stop.

O.M. laughs.

M.D.: A film showing the lives of Barbie doll, her husband and the whole their family. Celluloid.
O.M.: That's what he made. He made an opera.

M.D.: To make a soup opera one doesn't need much talent. It is most bad and harmful when lifeless matter gets filled with talent and live energy. And this "lifeless" product brought to life by talented people is presented to me as if it were life. Do you understand me?
O.M.: I do.

M.D.: It is very hard for Mikhalkov to kill his artistic taste. He tries to do it, but his skill, professionalism, his nature resists - and everything is mixed there: some mighty, wild, historical, age- specific, stylistic, genre mixture… Everything is mixed - Moscow and Petersburg; "the Russian cinema" and the English language (it was the height of absurdity to make a national film in English). There was also absurdity with the sound, when I heard the slam of the door behind my back and saw the room on the screen…
O.M.: He should have probably shot the film 10 years ago when he wanted to do it. They didn't find money then. But if you began doing something and then gave it up - you'll have to answer for it. One shouldn't give up what was started. The result may be worse than you expected it to be, but it is a result. Mikhalkov didn't want to give up the idea.

M.D.: But what a fine article was written by T. Moskvina in "Iskusstvo kino", No. 6! "The Barber" was worth shooting just for that text!
O.M.: Marina, but I saw with my own eyes that after the film was over 2000 spectators stood sobbing for 20 minutes. And it was like this in all the towns where the film was on. Really! I am not trying to protect the film, that's just a fact to think over.

M.D.: I don't think we'll find a formula of full and empty auditoriums now.
O.M.: No one will ever find it.

M.D.: Let's believe Moskvina! When you staged "Woe From Wit", did you study the scenic history of the play, the literature?
O.M.: What do you think? It's interesting! Of course! (Laughs)

M.D.: Oleg, last time you began to speak about your plans cornerning Nyakroshyus's "Hamlet".
O.M.: I wanted to invite some great director in the production. And not just great - the greatest! And his name came up. He said he'd think about it. Then he asked, "What play?" I was like, "It doesn't matter; if you are in the project, it doesn't matter! Whatever play you choose!" But he kept saying, "Name the play". And suddenly I (I had never wanted to play Hamlet) said, "Hamlet". A week later he invited me. We negotiated for a long time. And then he said, he was scared to leave his city, his theatre, his actors, that he was afraid of stars. He even apologized in some way in an interview; he thanked us and said that I would play Hamlet one day… But this way or that, we gave him the idea to stage "Hamlet"! At that time he was staging "Three Sisters" [by Chekhov], I came to see him in Vilnius; I stayed at his place, attended his rehearsals. The evenings were great. His wife laid the table and left; he ate, then he smoke a cigarette after cigarette; I didn't say anything. And it was 30 or 40 minutes like that… Then he said, "Time for bed, right?", and we went to our rooms.

M.D.: All nowaday Hamlets are rather questionable - why Hamlet is played by this actor and not that one? There were no such questions with Vysotsky. And now wherever you look, everyone is Hamlet.
O.M.: You know, that's another story. Everyone is sure due to some reason that I should play Hamlet. Why should I play him?! Actually I started to consider such possibility and I realized there was a big problem with the translation. One should translate it all over again, especially Hamlet's part. The door is not open there yet.

M.D.: Are the translations too authorized?
O.M.: Too much! Too authorized but not open. The mystery of the role is not revealed. The translation congenial to the conception is necessary.

M.D.: Huh-huh!
O.M.: "Huh-huh" indeed! Otherwise, it isn't worth beginning working on it.

M.D.: What do you dislike most of all?
O.M.: Stupidity. It is the most horrifying thing on Earth. There is nothing more dangerous than stupidity, because fools don't even realize what they are doing. And they are not smart enough to appreciate what they've already achieved!

M.D.: You are Scorpio. Is it hard to be Scorpio?
O.M.: It is wonderful! Is there a man who will say his sign is bad?

M.D.: Yes, I am Libra, and it's hard.
O.M.: Well, life is hard, you know.

M.D.: And finally, you promised to remember your childhood.
O.M.: You know, there are flashbacks to my childhood sometimes. Sometimes I can suddenly remember some things - not in a chronological order. But I don't remember the very first thing. Or maybe I remember, but subconsciously… I guess it is the sea. My parents used to take me to the seaside. In fact, I can't live without water. So, I remember the sea.

"They dragged me off to Moscow: there began diversions, balls, all sorts of expenses, acquaintances… razzle-dazzle, blether!" - A. B. Cukhovo-Kobylin 'Krechinsky's wedding'.