Vladimir Medinsky: I’m conflictless but obstinate

In TASS special project Top Officials, Russian Culture Minister Vladimir Medinsky speaks about the most controversial issues of Russia's cultural life, his attitude towards Joseph Stalin and much more.

- You were a star student at school, weren’t you?

- And at the university, too. During my studies at the MGIMO institute of international relations back in the Soviet years I received the Lenin Grant. The only one at my department. A hundred and thirty rubles a month - an equivalent of the basic salary in those days.

- That’s what I mean. And now you’ve suddenly plummeted to a C-student’s level.

- What makes you think so?

- The recent VTSIOM poll, which has found that Russians are not quite happy about the performance of government ministers and deputy prime ministers. In 2016, the results of government officials’ activity proved worse than last year’s. Your personal rating has been down from 3.45 points to 3.34 points. Do you agree with this rating?

­- To rate ratings is a very unrewarding business. Possibly, there can be no such thing as A-level government ministers in people’s opinion.

- But somebody has to be used as a benchmark after all?

- Sergey Lavrov, our foreign minister. His rating in the poll was one of the highest. And, generally speaking, Lavrov is an ideal for any MGIMO graduate.

- Do you care about the public opinion?

- Surely I do. But I never do things on purpose, just in order to cater to somebody’s tastes. I just keep doing my job.

The most important opinion is that of the president and the head of government. And my own, of course, the one that is hiding deep inside. It is always bad. I’m never pleased with myself. Exceptions are rare.

- For instance?

- I’d prefer to avoid this Tops-of-the-Pops style speculations. My attitude to such matters is far more straightforward.

- To what extent has the so-called “Restorers’ Affair,” in which your deputy Grigory Pirumov and some other employees of the Culture Ministry were arrested, hit the ministry’s reputation? You will agree that suspicion of gross fraud is more than serious.

- Certainly, any unseemly affair does affect “experts’ ratings.” But it makes few changes to our daily routine: I see my main task in implementing the government’s policy in the field of culture. Current problems and conflicts should not be allowed to have influence on that. Some like the way we go about our business, and others, don’t. It’s always been that way. We do make mistakes, which is also unavoidable. And we do our utmost to correct them as we move on.

Now, about the concrete case you are asking about. We’ve launched a series of checks and inspections, although we always kept an eye on the operation of the department of property management and investment policy from the standpoint of pricing and discounts awarded in this or that contest… We can discuss this on and on. I would not like to repeat myself. I dwelt upon this problem at length at the latest meeting of the ministry’s board. The construction department has not revised its restoration work price lists for four years. According to our findings they are the nation’s lowest. Last year, the average discount off the bid price is 15%, and for some sites it is as high as 24%. In the meantime, in 2011 the discount was just one percent of the experts’ appraisal.

Possibly, it was careless of us to feel complacent. Now we are studying everything in depth once again. Including the quality of work. The results of a comprehensive probe of the North-Western directorate will be available in May. The Moscow Directorate will begin to be inspected after that. Both are our independent divisions…

In their coverage of the Restorers’ Affair the media don’t bother to get into detail. In the meantime it is important to remember that very different organizations may act in the capacity of the customer and, consequently, the entity that accepts the work done. The Ministry of Culture is present there in a very limited capacity. Apart from us there are the regional authorities and individual organizations with their own budget, such as the Hermitage Museum or Moscow’s Maly Theater… They declare bidding contests, they select contractors and then they accept the work done.

The restoration of the New Jerusalem Monastery, for instance, was ordered by a same-name foundation. The monastery is a monument of culture but our ministry neither orders any works nor pays for them.

- What about Izborsk?

- The Ministry of Culture did act in the capacity of the client in that particular case, that’s true. As far as understand, the exposed violations were promptly eliminated. But there was a great fuss…

The problem is far more serious that it might seem at first sight, so I would refrain from detailed comments. Let's leave it to the professionals. The way I see it, it is very good that the federal security service FSB is in charge of the investigation. That’s an elite law enforcement agency. I do hope that the high level of professionalism will let them sort things out calmly and impartially.

- Nevertheless, some of those present at the Culture Ministry’s board meeting said the restrictive measures taken towards the accused should be eased and the arrested released from the detention center until trial. Was it you who sent the message to court?

- The question was put to the vote openly. The board meeting made a decision and the decision is to be honored. We handed the petition over to the lawyers. Everything else is their realm of responsibility.

Incidentally, I would like to remind you that I’ve fundamentally reorganized the system of forming the ministry’s board. I removed from it all functionaries except for the minister’s deputies. The vacated twenty seats have been taken up by creative personalities. The proposal for releasing the accused from custody came from the culture workers. The other speakers at the meeting supported them.

To close the subject: under our legislation only a court of law is in the position to declare a person guilty. I see no chance for me to turn my back on my subordinates before a verdict has been pronounced. Doing otherwise would be not very manly, to say the least.

- In this particular case the Ministry’s board presented a common front, but among culture workers there are many unanimous critics of practically each new initiative your Ministry in general and you as its head, in particular, have come up with.

- You must be reading Facebook in the morning, I guess. Don’t do that. In the evenings, too. I really mean it. I don’t do it myself. And I deliberately avoid opening accounts in the social networks. Just don’t have the time for that. I’m registered in Twitter just for the sake of taking a look at very brief posts on my way home.

- Are you trying to skip negative information not to get upset?

- In my media review I always have information from the opposing flanks. Please get the simple but main thing. My job is not to be liked by everyone. My job is to implement the government's culture policy. If the criticism is about our these or those activities (in the interests of the state and culture!), there is nothing "negative" in it by definition. This is normal routine search for the best possible solutions. If anyone's position denies the existence of the culture policy, we have no subject for dialog. In this event high-profile cases are just an easy media pretext to make a name for oneself. This does not affect our work. That's what we stand for. Full stop.

- But can you keep the discontent progressive public away from the budget pie?

- My personal likes and dislikes play no role here at all. We created a sophisticated system of contested distribution of budget grants for a good reason. It applies to everything – from cinema to theaters. This is a multi-level mechanism of decision-making. It is completely detached from the minister’s opinion. Moreover, I’m ignorant of the outcome of the voting up to the last moment. There are councils of experts that make decisions. In some cases their conclusions are brought to me for approval. But I cannot change anything on my own.

As a rule everything is decided at the level of departments concerned, where the professionals in this or that branch of activity oversee the process. If there is something I disagree with for fundamental reasons, I can intervene and overturn the experts’ verdict. But such cases are very few.

On a bitten hand, Artdocfest, Tannhauser, Kekhman and Moguchy

On foreign exchange, violins, libraries, archives and salaries

On Stalin, the favorite national fun, legends and myths

On Roldugin, Tsiskaridze, toy soldiers, sabers and walls 

- Is the Artdocfest festival an example of this kind?

- Exactly. I don’t deny that. Had the situation had a rerun, I would’ve acted the same way.

- What is it you so much dislike about this project by Vitaly Mansky, who since 2007 has been holding the largest festival of the nation’s best documentaries in Moscow?

- I’m saying once again: nothing personal. I have some questions to ask about the civic position of that film director. Getting support from the state and at the same time biting the hand that is feeding you and spitting at that state is not very decent to my mind.

Mansky was free to go on holding this festival at his own expense or at the expense of private sponsors.

- Which he did last year in Moscow and then moved Artdocfest to Riga.

- Oh, yes. He got so upset that he made a decision to emigrate. It was up to him to decide. He should feel free to hold the event here again, provided he raises the funds. The Ministry of Culture will not give a grant for this kind of event, because, let me say again, the stance of the festival’s organizers runs counter to the basics of Russia’s government policy in the field of culture.

The same is true of the row over the opera Tannhauser staged at the Novosibirsk Opera and Ballet Theater. There was an attempt at an amicable solution. It happened otherwise.

- What do you mean by amicable?

- A public discussion was held. The then head of the theater Boris Mezdrich was asked to make a decision on his own, we proposed a number of measures to settle the scandal, to defuse tensions. There was enough time for that. Mezdrich turned a deaf ear to the opinion of very much respected people. Moreover, he wrote a very rude letter saying that those who don’t like his version of Tannhauser are not familiar to him personally, so he is not going to present any apologies or make any amendments to the stage production. Mezdrich might have at least to tried to explain something, to talk to people, but he preferred to act otherwise. The people got very angry with him. Very many people. What else could’ve been done but for asking that man to bow out? That was our response to his stance…

It is noteworthy that after Vladimir Kekhman, certainly not liked by many, took over, the situation at the Novosibirsk theater has changed for the better. Even if one uses standard business terminology, the economic parameters have improved considerably – ticket sales and seat occupancy… The theater underwent repairs within very tight deadlines. I hear people say today it’s much better. I haven’t seen anything myself yet. I’m planning a trip there in May or June to take a look. At the moment another hall is being put in order. The theater is unique in many respects. There’s just a handful of such companies in the country…

- Don’t you find the string of scandals Kekhman was involved in the past somewhat confusing? There were criminal cases and bankruptcy lawsuits…

- I do find this confusing, but no court has so far found Kekhman guilty. It’s all gossip. As far as effectiveness is concerned, one has to recognize the obvious. Kekhman is not a relative or crony of mine. He is the one who managed to cope well with the task set to him, although he was very pressed for time.

- He is widely regarded as a protégé of yours.

- Every single person I recommend for some position is seen precisely in that capacity. I can’t help. When in Rome, do as the Romans. I can only say that in principle I do not appoint people because they are my relatives or friends.

Kekhman displayed himself as a good organizer in St. Petersburg’s Mikhailovsky Theater. Now he is to demonstrate the same qualities in Novosibirsk, which is far harder. It is not St. Petersburg. The city is smaller, there are no crowds of tourists or any equals of Europa Grand Hotel next door. So it takes much more resourcefulness to attract audiences. Kekhman accepted the challenge. Incidentally, many others looked scared by the job offer: “Oh, no! I’m not good enough for filling the predecessor’s shoes.”

- Whom did you invite?

- I even tried to dispatch one of my own deputies to do the job. We needed not an artistic director for the company, but a general director, a manager capable of getting the business process going. That deputy of mine refused. He did not even discuss the matter. In contrast to Kekhman, who got down to business at once. When a year draws to an end, we will compare the economic parameters, the number of shows and new production in contrast to what there was in 2015… Although I know the better scorer in advance.

Or take Andrey Moguchy, the newly-pronounced laureate of the Golden Mask Award as the best stage director. The Culture Ministry has just decided to prolong his three-year contract with the Tovstonogov Bolshoi Drama Theater. Moguchy may be criticized on and on. The debates on whether his productions are good or bad may last indefinitely. Honestly speaking, I am not a new drama fan. But let’s face the facts: when Moguchy joined the BDT, the seat occupancy rate was under 60%. Now it is up to 96%. Before, the theater earned 68 million rubles a year. Now it has made as much in the first quarter of 2016. This is a difference, isn’t it? Actors say they now cannot get a pass-out to invite friends to top-rated productions. First I thought it was an exaggeration. I tried to order tickets via the Internet to the much-criticized “The Drunk”, “War and Peace” and “Alice.” All seats for April and May were booked. Some were available only for June…

- You would surely be ushered in without much trouble, Sir.

- Clearly, I could’ve taken advantage of my position, but I just wanted to check!

Many theaters have shown considerable financial improvements. Over the past three years they started earning 70% more than before. Seat occupancy has grown, and so has the number of performances and new productions.

- You are talking not just about Moscow and St. Petersburg, aren’t you?

- I’m referring to all federal theaters. We do see certain problems with their repertoire, but they will take time to address. The process cannot be completed just within one season. We’ve been trying to avoid direct dictating. We refrain from creating special panels of artistic experts to judge the merits of this or that stage production or any other latent forms of censorship. Instead we’ve been patiently waiting for change and inconspicuously pressing for the ideas that constitute the basis of the government’s cultural policy.

The museums, too, have seen a 30% growth in both the number of visitors and extra-budgetary funds they have earned on their own by opening cafes, souvenir kiosks and book stalls on their premises.

In the film industry the share of Russian titles has been up from 14% to 18%. The process has now slowed down, but we hope it’ll be up to 25%.

- Is this a goal of yours?

- The goal is to ensure half of the films on the billboards should be Russian. But that’s a dream that may materialize only in the long term. The target set for 2018 is 25%, and meeting it will be incredibly hard.

- If management-by-decree methods are not employed, of course.

- Quotas, you mean? It would’ve been a China-style solution. In the meantime, we are still determined to proceed along the market track. Achieving the desired would be very hard, though, because direct government investment into the film industry has shrunk to five billion rubles from six billion in 2014. In the meantime, as everybody understands, the movie industry is heavily dependent on foreign currencies and the exchange rate of the national one.

To make things clear: five billion rubles is less than the budget of one blockbuster made in Hollywood.

And yet, even in the context of smaller government financing we managed to achieve a greater share on the list of titles running at our theaters.

- What’s the secret of success?

- A combination of measures. Both tactics and strategy. Firstly, ever more good films are made in Russia. This is no merit of ours, but the film-makers’. Also, we are much better in holding contests and pitching procedures. We tend to support the most worthy contestants. At least, we would like to believe this is really so. Before, everything was decided under the table. Put your presentation in a black box and get the result. Now everything is open. The Rossiya-24 television news channel telecasts the debates and voting live for everybody to see. The competitions’ transparency has lifted many redundant issues. In distributing funds the company’s credit history and its previous successes and failures are taken into account.

Each week I have on my table a detailed summary of the proceeds from the Russian film titles currently showing across the nation, both those supported and not supported by the state. In that review I can see everything: the Cinema Fund’s money, the Culture Ministry’s money, recoverable, irrecoverable… These statistics are closely studied.

We’ve managed to achieve full accounting of the tickets sold through commercial networks. Before, there was no such thing at all. Over the past four years the share of tickets sold through the box offices and monitored by the state constituted no more than 10%. Now it’s 100%.

The Americans have a parallel system of keeping track of the Hollywood movies shown in Russia. This information is crucial to knowing the revenue due for this or that film in the end. US managers, well aware that many things in Russia are not transparent, launched their own system, Rentrak years ago. Now, starting from 2016 they have been requesting statistics from us.

- What share of Russian films pays back?

- This question is impossible to answer. The economics of a film running with government support incorporates several components. For its part, the share of government subsidies is split into recoverable and irrecoverable. Under a procedure I managed to enforce part of the money goes back to the Cinema Fund. In the context of a general budget slump we get an extra one billion rubles. The money is invested into film production again. The amount of money grows year in year out, because the amount of recoverable funds goes up. In 2018 we expect to have about one and half billion rubles back. And so on and so forth.

- What’s the recoverable quota?

- Forty percent of the revenues.

- From any film?

- There are companies that tell us from the start that they don’t want to take money they will have to give back in the future. Then they are granted smaller sums at the very beginning. In some situations filmmakers try to not give back what they are obliged to. We take such cases to court. Each producer who concludes a contract makes a written pledge and becomes answerable for default with one’s property.

This arrangement is unique in a sense, but it encountered with terrible resistance from the film-making community. A shower of curses followed. Before the government had given the money and never asked what it would be spent on. Now such questions have to be answered. Domestic film industry majors were getting an annual 300 million rubles in exchange for just a word of honor. In fact, for supporting themselves. The government did not care at all if the money would be spent to produce anything. In a situation like that some managed to make three films for 300 million, while others were unable even to launch just one project…

- What is to be done in a situation like this? The law enforcers called for help?

- We’ve figured out what to do. We devised a comprehensible and transparent scheme. At least, none of our majors is in debt now. Sergey Selyanov was the last. He repaid his debt – 300,000 rubles just recently. At first he’d refused to pay the money back. He claimed he did not owe us anything. It was a matter of principle. The dispute was considered by the Cinema Fund’s Council. He was persuaded and a resolution was adopted. Selyanov agreed.

Another factor that benefited our cinema a lot is we’ve begun to control the timing of releases. Before, only Hollywood premier showings skimmed the cream, while Russian films often overlapped and stole viewers from each other. Now we see to it potential hits should be premiered at certain intervals and domestic productions enjoy priority…

Not to mention the costs of advertising. Half a million dollars to make a domestic movie is an astronomical, unaffordable luxury, while for the Americans it’s nothing. There are many methods, not very significant at first sight but very hard to implement that prove helpful in maintaining the Russian share on this nearly hard currency-dependent market even at a time when the cinema budget has slumped (in its dollar equivalent, by half).

- By the way, about foreign exchange. Maestro Gergiyev lamented in an interview with TASS a year ago that you had not given him money for the purchase of unique musical instruments for the Mariinsky Theater orchestra. He argued that the price of rare violins had only increased since then.

- The ministry helps the Mariinsky Theater with everything it can. But apart from other things, my work consists in setting financial priorities and deciding on who will receive state budget funds, how much and for which purposes.

I understand Valery Gergiev’s sincere desire to provide all orchestra performers with top-class instruments but we have the State Collection of Unique Musical Instruments where you can receive splendid violins for a concert or guest performances. This is what many do.

There is also a private fund, which allocates substantial financial resources for the purchase and delivery of quite expensive instruments into Russia. Unfortunately, we can’t afford to buy them with budget money at present.

At the same time, I’m aware that Gergiyev as a very experienced head needs to seek money for the Mariinsky Theater for guest performances, trips and new musical instruments. This is his work and we endlessly value him for this. But let me also repeat that my direct service duties include managing maximally efficiently the chronically insufficient funds allocated for culture today. We are not the ministry of the Bolshoi and Mariinsky Theaters. We are the ministry of a large country with museums-preserves, libraries, circuses and theaters in all the country’s regions. That is the answer.

At the same time, we certainly meet the Mariinsky Theater halfway when its additional financing is necessary. Thus, the development of the Vladivostok Opera and Ballet Theater can be organizationally managed only by Gergiev. Now the project is under way and considerable funds have been allocated for it.

- How much?

- About eight hundred million rubles a year. The sum includes the funds on the maintenance of the theater from Vladivostok and the process of its merger into the Mariinsky Theater. These are huge funds but they are justified and I was an advocate of this project. We hope that music lovers from Japan, South Korea, China … will be lured by the renowned brand. 

- Do you consider yourself to be a conflicting person, Vladimir Rostislavovich?

- I never quarreled with Gergiyev, if you mean this.  But to speak seriously, it seems to me that I’m a conflict-free person but I’m obstinate as far as principled issues are concerned. 

Nevertheless, I constantly try to reach a compromise, understand another person and come to common terms. But this process should be reciprocal as this is not one-way traffic.

There are people with whom you can’t find a common language because they don’t keep their word. Let me give you one example. Anton Likhomanov, director of the Russian National Library in St. Petersburg, had his five-year labor contract expiring in January 2016 and we didn’t intend to extend it. Again, there was nothing personal in this matter but his work caused a lot of critical remarks. It was a rare occasion when my four deputies wrote reports with a proposal to dismiss Likhomanov. Each deputy gave his own set of critical remarks but the general sense was that it was impossible to work with this person. Okay, this could be a subjective view but there was also an objective reason: the Russian National Library’s new building had not been constructed for several years while a lot of violations were made, some equipment was lost and the results of a financial audit were bad…

It so happens that a person seems to be a good scientist but he can’t handle managerial work. As a result, nothing good comes out of this. So, what do I have to do? I invite Anton Vladimirovich [Likhomanov] in advance to my office and tell him that I have waited for long for the problems to dissipate but this hasn’t happened. I offer him to part without grievances, of his own free will. I say that his place will be taken up by a very reputable specialist, director of Moscow’s ‘Leninka’ State Library Alexander Visly whom we have persuaded to move to St. Petersburg. In order to let Likhomanov save his face, I tell him that he’ll present the new director and brief him on the new position while he will remain the Russian National Library’s deputy director for scientific work with the same director’s salary. Isn’t it a worthy proposal? It seems to me that it is quite worthy. And Likhomanov immediately agreed, shaking my hand for long in a sign of gratitude. He immediately met with Visly and discussed details with him. After that, he returned to Petersburg and … backtracked on his words. He didn’t tender his resignation of his own free will, refused to quit and began hiding with his telephone off. He actually sunk his teeth into this position! When a person clings to his position so tenaciously, you begin to feel suspicious that perhaps there is something to conceal. The decision by the chairman of the Russian government was of principled nature: the government waited until the official contract expired and issued an order dated by the same day for Likhomanov’s dismissal. That was the end of the story.

- And what can you say about the story with State Archive Head Sergei Mironenko with whom you publicly exchanged criticism? Did you play a part in making him resign?

- Yes, of course, I insisted on that owing to some of our substantive and ideological differences, so to speak. But in this case, we found a reasonable compromise. Mironenko reached the retirement age and took the position of the State Archive scientific head while administrative functions will be fulfilled by another person. I believe this option suited everyone.

- How did you perceive the withdrawal of the Federal Archive Agency (Rosarkhiv) from the structure of the Culture Ministry? It is now directly subordinate to the president.

- The decision seriously raises the status of the archive agency. Speaking frankly, the ministry supervised Rosarkhiv very formally and it actually worked as a standalone unit. We didn’t abuse our supervisory powers. In this situation, re-subordination to the president is the most proper step.

- But does this probably mean a loss for you as an historian?

- I haven’t ordered a single document from archives in my capacity as the minister. Unfortunately, no time has been left for history research and I haven’t written a line over the incomplete four years of my work in the government.

- Reports are surely not counted.

- Certainly as we are not talking about paperwork.

- And what is your attitude to letters, in which a group of persons demands your resignation or comes in your support?

- I’m indifferent to the former type of letters while the latter are pleasant for me but nothing more than that. If I respond too emotionally, I won’t have the strength for work while I have a lot of work to do. I try not to spend my nervous energy just for nothing.

- You were among the defenders of the Russian Government House during the coup in August 1991…

- Yes, I wrote, multiplied and distributed leaflets and spent the nights at the editorial board of the parliamentary newspaper Rossiya where I was a freelance reporter. 

- In a word, you fought for democracy and liberal values but now you’re called a conservative and a keeper. Doesn’t this transformation of views seem strange to you?

- I acted absolutely sincerely when I was twenty-one years old and I do this now. I only do what I believe in. With time and painful experience, I have started to look at some things differently but this does not mean that I have betrayed myself. I believe that persons who haven’t changed an inch should evoke more suspicions.

I don’t treat myself as a special conservative but I won’t dispute on this, if I’m perceived as such by others. I have recently read in a survey that I turn out to be both an ideological obscurant and a rational liberal creating a market environment in culture. The author of the article wonders how all these features get along in one person.

But I think not about this but about how to support really those who are the best and help the needy. Cultural workers have started to earn twice as much as before in recent years.

- This is the average figure while the staff at provincial libraries, for example, continues to receive meager salaries.

- I can say that a staffer of the ‘Leninka’ Library used to receive 19,000 rubles a month in 2011 but now receives 43,000.

- I didn’t ask you about the ‘Leninka’ Library.

- The pay at Moscow libraries is about the same. Yes, the salaries in provinces are more modest but in any case these are not just pennies. The average pay in municipal cultural establishments four years ago was about 8,000 rubles and now it has grown twofold.

Of course, the pay differs by place. For example, the average salary of a staffer at the Vakhtangov Theater in Moscow or the Petersburg Philharmonic Orchestra exceeds 100,000 rubles.

- Is this the salary of an actor, a musician?

- The salary of a staffer. Actors and soloists receive considerably more, especially those who enjoy popularity.

Moreover, top stars in the Bolshoi Theater get an extra pay for each performance on the scene in addition to a fixed salary and this is normal. We motivate the heads of cultural establishments to pay more to their staff. Literally the other day I signed an absolutely innovatory order on bonus payments to museum directors. They will be specially remunerated for over-fulfilling the plan of revenue collection from extra-budgetary sources and will be receiving a sort of a bonus like in business. This is the healthy economic liberalism, which we try to introduce within reasonable limits.

What did the pay of the heads of cultural establishments consist of earlier? It consisted of a fixed salary, which was absurd and ludicrous by its size. I was looking through contracts and was surprised to guess what these people had in their minds when they issued such agreements. For example, the salary was 5,699 rubles while the annual bonus paid for unknown reasons – there were no KPIs [Key Performance Indicators] yet – equaled 1,890%. You haven’t misheard: 1,890%! How do you like such contracts? We have hundreds of subordinate institutions and each head had his “individual” percentages, which looked as artificially invented figures. This is actual nonsense!

- Were the Tretyakov Gallery and the Hermitage Museum among these institutions?

- Yes, they were among them. For example, the salaries of the Mariinsky and the Bolshoi directors differed by several times. However, they were unware of such disproportions!

We divided institutions into categories, standardized everything and created a fair system. We introduced clear-cut criteria, such as the number of employees, the amount of revenues, assets and so on. 

And the salaries of heads are now motivated. They get a fixed salary of 100,000 rubles, for example, and a monthly bonus of the same size, given that they fulfil the KPI.  From summer, we’ll gradually switch to a new system where there will be no more than five key performance indicators. Why do we need to know excessive information, burden people with reviews and reports and be distracted by holding audits? Why will the ministry care about how many performances a theater offers while on a tour in a provincial center? This is unnecessary information. Our key indicators are revenues, the number of tickets sold and new performances. 

And this practice is in place for all cultural establishments. Earlier, the museums’ work was judged by the number of exhibitions rather than by the number of people who attended them. And so museums held one-exhibit expositions that lasted one day, after which they requested a bonus of 1,890% for themselves.

We’re changing this system. Why do we need to engage in self-deceit? It is better to hold one exhibition of paintings by Valentin Serov than 355 shows of whoever it may be and for whomever the audience.

- By the way, how many times did you visit the exhibition of the painter of The Girl with Peaches and The Rape of Europa?

- Three times, as far as I remember. I attended the exhibition at its opening, then I accompanied President Putin and on some day I went there in a company of my friends and slightly helped them to cut their time of standing in line to get to the exposition.

- You abused your powers.

- No, I made use of my powers. 

- The USSR Culture Ministry was officially established on March 15, 1953 soon after the death of the leader of peoples… 

- De-facto, it existed before but it was split among several departments. A considerable part of functions was combined with education and was related to the department of enlightenment. This situation existed both in Soviet Russia – let us recall People’s Commissar for Enlightenment Lunacharsky – and during the tsarist period…

- I mentioned March 1953 to ask you about your attitude to Stalin and his reincarnation, which is taking place today.

- Has he come alive? But to speak seriously, I’ll answer in a standard manner: I’m not personally acquainted with Joseph Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili [Stalin] and thus I don’t have and I can’t have my attitude to him. Moreover, he is completely unconcerned about what I think about him.

- Perhaps, he is unconcerned but others are concerned.

- This was a complex epoch that influenced the fates of millions of people and the entire planet. There were fantastic achievements and horrible tragedies. All these things are our history.

- Excuse me, but these are just general words. Meanwhile, Stalin museums are being opened in various cities of the country and monuments to him are being erected. On March 5, the day of his death, crowds of his supporters come to the grave of Comrade Koba [Stalin’s party name]. Doesn’t this concern the Culture Ministry?

- It is important to understand: a memorial doesn’t give an assessment of whether it is good or bad. It is derived from the word “memory.” People remember both heroic and tragic events. I’m generally against demolishing monuments, no matter to whom they were erected. Did it become better when the monument to Dzerzhinsky [founder of the state security service Cheka, predecessor of the KGB] was removed? Did it help to rescue someone from the Cheka basements? Or on the contrary, did it help highlight the outstanding contribution by Felix Edmundovich [Dzerzhinsky] to the campaign to reduce the number of homeless children and the efforts to restore law and order on railroads? Obviously, not.

A monument is also a reminder of the mistakes that should not be repeated to avoid indulging in our favorite national fun and stepping on the same rake again. I believe that it is better to erect new monuments in honor of those people or events, which were once unjustifiably ignored or even crossed out in history.

- And what should be done with the body of Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin, in your view? You once urged to bury his remains and close the Lenin Mausoleum.

- My views as a citizen have not changed but I haven’t made any public statement on this score ever since I became a person whose pronouncements may be associated with the government’s position. This theme is beyond my competence. When I was a State Duma deputy, I allowed myself to make political statements but now this is surely not my theme.

- By the way, does your ministerial position impede your relations with the people whom you have been going side by side with in your life? I mean your comrades-friends rather than your relatives. 

- Do they worry me with requests and do I have to reject them with a heavy heart?

Probably, I’m a lucky person as my close circle includes intelligent and tactful people and this helps us keep smooth and kind relations. To give a clear example, you can ask your boss, TASS Director-General Sergei Mikhailov, about how many grants of the Culture Ministry the news agency has won. Actually no grants. But Sergei and I have been acquainted for a quarter of a century and we have been friends since we were students. So, this would seem more than enough to win the ministry’s grants.

But let me repeat, mechanisms are at work in the ministry, which virtually exclude my personal decisions. I can refuse myself but I can’t push through decisions, bypassing the existing procedure. I especially value the relations with those who have not requested an extra penny for some projects over all the years of my work in power, while remaining my senior comrades and close friends. They continue getting as much from the Culture Ministry as they used to receive before Medinsky became the minister. This is what stays in your memory well!

- Can you give the names?

- Nikita Mikhalkov. He has never requested anything.

- This is unexpected.

- I’m also surprised but this is a fact. Moreover, I’ll tell you one story. Mikhalkov’s TriTe studio has a wonderful project of a sports blockbuster with its potential higher than the film “Legend No. 17” [about Soviet ice hockey legend Valery Kharlamov]. Initially, no matter how surprisingly this may seem, the film plot was suggested by Justice Minister Konovalov. He shared this idea with me and I immediately grew enthusiastic about it as a creative person and started to think about who could implement the entire project. I offered it to TriTe and we met, brainstormed and thought over the project. The film studio found excellent script writers who wonderfully narrated the idea.

When everything was ready, TriTe … decided against getting state budget money available in the Film Fund. They said they were currently implementing a large project, the blockbuster called the Flight Crew, and it was unethical on their part to seek simultaneously state financing for a second film. I said: “the ministry will support you!” They mildly objected: “We don’t get money just for the sake of keeping it on deposit. Let the Flight Crew be released first and then we’ll think about whether we should file a request for state budget money…”

I can tell you frankly: this is the rarest case of direct refusal from state financing for the brilliant idea.

- But Nikita Sergeyevich [Mikhalkov] hasn’t refused. He has just delayed this issue.

- Nevertheless, this is an indicative story. The film studio decided to wait to avoid the accusations of drawing over financing to its side. 

- And what is this film expected to be about? Could you lift the veil?

- This is a thriller about the 1972 Munich Olympics. It will feature a final match of the basketball competition when Ivan Edeshko’s over-the-court assist to Alexander Belov with three seconds remaining before the final buzzer turned the world upside down and brought the Olympic gold to the Soviet team while the Americans staged a demarche and refused to accept their silver medals. This film will also be about the drama with the seizure of the Israeli national team by terrorists. I won’t retell you the whole story to avoid a spoiler.

- The premiere of the Flight Crew was held on April 21 but I can guess you watched it earlier.

- Yes, I was showed its working copy. This is what normally happens in my case. As I mentioned, I try to track the films, on which the state allocates substantial money.

The Flight Crew evoked my feelings of a surprise and pride that filmmakers in Russia have not forgotten how to shoot such large-scale films. They built an aerodrome and burnt it. They blew up a plane, although an old one. Visual effects are also at the level of the best Hollywood movies but cost considerably less. Of course, the Flight Crew should be watched in movie theaters and in the 3D format. 

- And what about books? Do you have time to read them?

- I read very much and relatively quickly. For example, I can read a book of 400 pages during a flight of average duration. Quite recently, I flew to Kuwait on a business trip and was able to read a new volume of the “History of the Russian State” by Boris Akunin.

- And what do you think about it?

- There is too much ideology there.

- And I’m hearing this from you, the author of the book “Myths about Russia!”

- Well, I never disguised myself or tried to portray myself as an objectivist. However, Akunin, as far as I understand, almost claims the role of the second Karamzin [Nikolai Karamzin, a prominent Russian writer and historian in the early 19th century, the author of the “History of the Russian State”]. I don’t want to give any assessments but this History should be treated as quite an ideologized piece of work rather than a chronicle. I don’t dispute, although, that it was written in an interesting manner. I have read all of Akunin’s books, including his most successful saga about Erast Fandorin.

- And what is the circulation of your Myths?

- The first book was written back in 2000 and has been reprinted many times. The circulation has surely exceeded one million copies. You need to publish something new each year to keep the reader’s interest. However, I can’t afford such “luxury”…

- Do you frequently approach shelves with history books in bookstores? Do such a number of trash books scare you?

- I do not belong to persons that can be scared. People write diverse things. The works by Nosovski and Fomenko who have offered their own chronology of the world history also stand by inertia in the History section, although I have long been urging to move them to the Fantasy category … How else can I react, if these books assert in earnest that Tamerlane was Genghis Khan and even slightly Jesus Christ at the same time?

- And here’s a question about a real person who is much talked and written about now. I mean Sergei Roldugin. You surely know him. 

- We met for the first time before I joined the ministry’s staff but still I wouldn’t say we know each other closely. I’m aware of how much Sergei Pavlovich is doing for a search of new talents. He is implementing a project together with the Culture Ministry in the sphere and superintending the music program in the already famous Sirius school in Sochi. He is a real enthusiast. 

Besides, I take counsel with Sergei Pavlovich before important personnel solutions in the sphere of music. Generally speaking, I always try to poll leaders in one or another field so as to prevent an error. Roldugin is one those whom people turn to for getting a clue to a problem. This makes it possible to assess the scene more objectively.  

In addition to it, we launched a unique program titled ‘The Resource of Cadres’. The case in hand is about 500 executives in the field of culture whom we always keep in sight just in case we need to fill new official positions.    

Proceeding from this comprehensive principle, last year we appointed Alexei Vasilyev to the position of president of St Petersburg Conservatoire, the oldest one in Russia. Vasilyev and I were not acquainted before that. He did worked fine as the principal of the Rimsky-Korsakov school of music. The Office of Governor of St Petersburg offered a higher position to him, but we came up to him earlier. Incidentally, on top of his status of an experienced cultural manager, he is also a brilliant musician, a cellist quite like Roldugin… 

- Was Tsiskaridze’s arrival at the Vaganova ballet school a result of the expert community’s consensus? 

- This was a difficult personnel decision. A very difficult one. In some sense, we even conducted a military mini-operation to implant Tsiskaridze there.  

Time showed we did the right thing. A proof of that can be seen in the number of enrollees that has risen several times over. There is virtually full unity among the staff-members there now. When Mr. Tsiskaridze was elected President of the Vaganova Academy a year of performance (as Acting President), he rallied the support of almost 100% staff there. Although at first they didn’t accept him. To describe it as ‘hostility’ would mean to say nothing. They even threatened with bringing children out to Architect Rossi Street [where the Vaganova Academy of Russian Ballet is located] for an action of protest. But as you can see, everything worked out all right.  

- What was it that made you think Nikolai would cope with the task? 

 - He is a knowledgeable and educated person and, in addition to it, he is a genuine professional. The previous President was a successful executive but her weight in performing arts couldn’t compare with Nikolai’s. 

- And who recommended Vladimir Urin to the Bolshoi? 

- On the whole, I recommended taking note of his candidature. Untangling of the Bolshoi’s conundrums had long been overdue or the situation might have gotten out of control there altogether. In one way or another, the Bolshoi is a face of the nation and events in that theater sometimes give grounds to others to judge about the situation in the entire Russia. In some cases, The New York Times would discuss the scandals in the Bolshoi at greater length than the Russian economy. 

- Are you a frequent visitor to the Bolshoi? 

- Far less often than I’d like to. Once in six or so months, actually. On occasion of opening nights or when escorting official delegations. That’s part of my official duties. For instance, the Greek Minister of Culture was opening an exhibition at the State Hermitage Museum. How could I possibly stay away? But quite naturally, I didn’t have time to walk through the halls and look at the paintings. 

-But still you find time for the Russian Military-Historical Society where you are President? 

- By and large, the military history society is interfaced with my main job. The voluntary search teams, the maintenance of monuments and soldiers’ communal graves, scouting and history summer camps for children and reenactments fall into the society’s sphere of responsibility. It does some things in cooperation with the Culture Ministry. Take the festival of military movies or the shooting of documentaries on historical subjects. And so on and so forth? Strictly speaking, what is it that keeps a nation together? It’s language, culture and history. All of that stays within the administrative realm of our ministry to one or another degree. And that’s why I try to rob myself of several hours of sleep every week for the benefit of the Military-Historical Society. I am a fan of history, and military history, too. That’s an ardent hobby from my green years.

- Did you collect toy soldiers then?

- Our family wasn’t affluent and I didn’t have many toys bought in a shop. And it’s also true the shops didn’t offer much at the time. I cut toy soldiers out of paper and painted them over in strict compliance with the coloring of uniforms of different regiments. It was like I used one set of colors for the Ingria Regiment and another set for the Finland Regiment. Then I glued the figurines to thick cardboard and formed the military units. At some point, my friends and I devised a game. We drew a big map showing mountains, rivers, valleys, and cities and organized ‘toy battles’ on it.

-Did you replay historic battles?

- No, we fought a state against a state, an army against an army. Apart from toy soldiers, each one of us had cannons, hot-air balloons, ships, and fortresses. At the start, we all had practically equal forces and the task was to capture the entire toy world – either alone or with an ally. Most typically, a battle would involve from six to eight people. Today’s computer games don’t stand a comparison with it.

- And all that took place in your native Smela?

-  Yes, it was in Ukraine, in the Cherkassy region. I was born there and lived there for some time and then I came there every summer to stay with my grandmother.

- Medinsky is a Polish surname, isn’t it?

 - I thought some ten years ago about an in-depth study of my family’s genealogy but had to put this idea off because of my overly tight schedule. We did have noble Polish smallholders up my father’s ancestral line. They resettled to Ukraine after the revolt of 1830. A part of the mutineers was exiled in Siberia then and some groups were moved much closer, to neighboring lands.

And if you take my mother’s ancestral line, Ukrainians and Germans from the Baltic area have roughly equal positions in it. And here am I, a hundred percent Russian man. The way it should be.

Incidentally, my grandma from Smela taught history at school and while she studied at the history department of Kiev’s Shevchenko University, she had a fellow-student Lyudmila Pavlichenko by name, a famous sniper and a protagonist of the Russian-Ukrainian film ‘The Battle of Sevastopol’. A good film by the way, the one that’s true to fact in the historical sense. But the Ukrainian co-producers preferred to drop off an episode where Pavlichenko, who was on traineeship at an archive in Odessa in June 1941, was writing a graduation thesis titled ‘Bogdan Khmelnitsky and his role in the reunification of Ukraine and Russia’. Our counterparts cut it out of the script thinking this was too much of a good thing.

- When did you go to Ukraine last time?

- I had short business trips on several occasions there and if you mean a longer stay… Some ten years ago I made a car journey. I took along my parents and my wife and we toured a greater part of the country – Cherkassy, Uman, Kiev, Odessa. We spent ten or so days there.

- Do you love driving?

- I love to spend time in the driver’s seat when I have time to. Once in the past, we made trips to Belarus and Lithuania this way. But as for now, I’m too busy. Last summer, my children and I traveled to Altai. And the year before last my family in full force spent almost a week in Kamchatka. As for this year, I hope we’ll find time for a trip to Crimea, all the more so that my daughter has made up my mind to go to Artek summer camp. And the elder son will join an expedition of voluntary searchers for about three weeks. Let him see what people died for and how.

- We veered off the problem of the Russian Military-Historical Society somehow. You said you don’t appoint anyone along the principle of close family ties but the RBC wrote your father is an advisor there and your sister was involved in its operations through affiliated companies.

 - My father gets 0.75 of the scheduled salary of an advisor. I’ll tell you frankly I take pride in his work. In essence, he does much more than specified in his duties. He works enough for three and brings benefits to society like a dozen people would do. But as a man of scruples he refuses to get full-size salary for it.

Tatiana worked for some time in the capacity of a deputy director at Rosizo, a museum and exhibition center where she was invited by Zelfira Tregulova who is currently director at the Tretyakov Gallery. I learned about her job as a fait accompli. She has either quitted the position by now or is going to quit. Frankly speaking, I’d be glad to offer a job to her because she is a highly expert person and she would cope perfectly with the duties of director at any cultural institution but I don’t do this out of ethical considerations. Besides, we’ll be hounded, both she and I.

My father is a retired colonel. Once in the past he was practically the youngest deputy commander of a regiment of strategic missile forces. As a retired military man, he has the legal right to work where he wants to.

- You thought of enrolling for a military academy, too, didn’t you?