The Forty-First

(image source: © ozon)
no copyright infringement intended

Сорок первым должен был стать на Марюткином смертном счету гвардии поручик Говоруха-Отрок. А стал первым на счету девичьей радости.

(Борис Лавренев, Сорок первый)

It's during the Russian Civil War; she is a sniper in the Red Army; he is an officer at the Whites and her prisoner; she must shoot him is he to escape; these are the orders; suddenly a storm leaves them alone on a deserted island; the two fall in love (you'd say it's kind of Stockholm syndrome avant la lettre, somehow turned upside-down, whatever); the occasion for him to escape arrives, will she follow her orders or rather her heart? add to this his uncanny gift of retelling the story of Robinson; add to this the strange magic of the Karakum desert - blue sky infinite over yellow sand infinite - and of the Aral sea - yellow sun infinite over blue sea infinite; all this magic can make you falling madly in love, or simply falling mad.

(image source: © otzovik)
no copyright infringement intended

Boris Lavrenev wrote this story in 1924; it was published in Zvezda (a literary magazine led by that time by Ivan Maisky, who would later become one of the most outstanding Soviet diplomats of the epoch); in 1927 Yakov Protazanov adapted the story to film; Grigori Chukhrai made a remake in 1956.

Сорок первый (The Forty-First), 1927
directed by Yakov Protazanov
(video by All soviet movies on RVISION)

I took contact with the three oeuvres in reverse order. Firstly I saw the movie of Chukhrai, sometime by the 1960's. I had already watched his Ballad of a Soldier and Clear Skies and I was very impressed by his his way of telling the stories, distancing from the official artistic dogmas, being simply natural. Obviously I was interested to see also The Forty-First, made earlier than the other two. I wanted to make a comparison, to see if his attitude towards life had been free at the same degree. As for the movie of Protazanov, it was impossible to find it.

(image source: © otzovik)
no copyright infringement intended

The memory of Chukhrai's movie came to my mind recently, and I watched it again, on youTube. A great director, a great cinematographer (Sergey Urusevskyi) producing hallucinatory imagery. And Oleg Strizhenov was unforgettably telling the story of Robinson, setting with it the frame for the magic.

This time I watched immediately also the movie of Protazanov on youTube. Another great director, another great cinematographer (Pyotr Yermolov, I did not know much about him). Ivan Koval-Samborsky was in the role of the White officer, an actor with a dramatic biography.

Surely I wanted to go further, to the original story. I found a very well written summary on the web, then I ordered an English translation of the book on Amazon. I read it in one day. Though I knew now the plot very well, the book could not be left up to the last page.

Сорок первый (The Forty-First), 1956
directed by Grigori Chukhrai
(video by Киноконцерн "Мосфильм")

Lavrenev, Protazanov and Chukhrai, three artists telling the same story, while contemplating it differently.

Let's begin with the movie created by Chukhrai. It was his first movie, made in 1956. The Soviet society was beginning a painful process of freeing itself from the Stalinist referential, of opening the windows toward fresh air. Though this process was tightly controlled and had very strict limits, for many people living in those years the effort was genuine. And the movie of Chukhrai was trying just that: to find out what was beyond the political datum. The director set the story under a deep humanist credo: Soviet musts could not be absolute - beyond them life was claiming its rights to exist. The story of love, yes, that was absolute, and it was tragic, because the political chains could not be broken. The tone of the story seemed very personal: the effort of the love story to liberate itself from the political realities was the same with the effort of Chukhrai to go beyond the dogmas of the regime.

Lavrenev's story (and Protazanov's film) had a different tonality: a fact of life observed from afar and told with a good dose of detachment. This time the political realities constituted the absolute, with their two totally separated universes, the Reds and the Whites. Anything that appeared beyond, like the story of love, was just absurd. But this meant that life in general was absurd, which ultimately implied even the political reality. The two universes were not only hostile, each one was perceiving the other without any correspondence in the reality. It was not clear at all (to use Anthony Loyd's way of telling things) whether they were fighting the good cause for the wrong reason or the wrong cause for the good reason. His Holiness the Paradox seemed to be in control of the whole circus. There is in Lavrenev's story (well reproduced by Protazanov's movie) a subtle sense of Swiftian irony.

(image source: © otzovik)
no copyright infringement intended

But all this irony is greatly balanced by a feeling of empathy for each personage and each fact. From the story author, as well as from the movie director. As absurd as they could be these facts and these people, everything is observed with a great science of the human - human naivete, weaknesses, illusions, absurdity - the whole is wrapped by something like a charm.

And actually this charm links all three artists, Lavrenev, Protazanov and Chukhrai, beyond their different tonalities in telling the story. The magic of the infinite dialog of the sun with the sky, the desert, the sea. Paradox at Lavrenev/Protazanov, tragedy at Chukhrai, it is beyond the same magic, following its unknown laws, maybe unaware of our struggles, however sending us, through these artists and their books and movies, discrete signals of sympathy.


Лавренев родился в зеленом, «уютном, ласковом», Херсоне. Близость Черного моря, старинные крепостные укрепления, излучающие поэзию исторических воспоминаний, широта степного простора вокруг, голубизна южного неба над головой — эти впечатления детства во многом определят темы, место действия, краски, самый стиль будущих произведений писателя, их жизнелюбивый пафос, их праздничную приподнятость, их яркую живописность.

(source: otzovik)

(Boris Lavrenev)

(Yakov Protazanov)

(Grigori Chukhrai)

Yakov Protazanov

Я́ков Алекса́ндрович Протаза́нов
1881-1945
(image source: MUBI)
no copyright infringement intended

Protazanov was one of the funding fathers of Russian cinema. Between 1909-1919 he directed 90 movies. From 1920 to 1823 he worked abroad, then he returned to homeland and made other 18 films. His last one, Nasreddin in Bukhara, was made in 1943.

• Father Sergius (1917)
• Aelita - povestea unui film constructivist
• The Forty-First

(Filmele Avangardei)

(Russian and Soviet Cinema)

Yakov Protazanov: Father Sergius (1917)

Ivan Mozzhukhin in the role of Father Sergius
(http://academia-rossica.org/en/film/leo-tolstoy-on-screen/father-sergius)

A movie made in 1917, just before the Russian Revolution. It would have been impossible to make this film in pre-Soviet Russia - it would have been impossible after the Revolution, either. It was a very thin time window when the making of Отец Сергий (Father Sergius) has been possible: in 1917 just before the Revolution. And just a few months after, the existence of this movie was no more tolerated. It had to wait for another two years to be released: in Poland, no more in Russia.

It is the adaptation of a well-known story written by Tolstoi: I had read it longtime ago, I have found it today on the web and read it again. A passionate story about the tragic paradox of human condition, serving your own demons even when trying to serve God.

A young noble, officer in the Russian imperial army, renounces to everything and goes to the monastery. All his ambition to raise in the ranks of society is converted in ardent desire to approach God. After a long, painful struggle for attending holiness he will succumb to the natural call of flash and find out that ambition never comes from God. At the end the hero will become a foul for the world, a foul for Christ. Will it be the true way this time?

A profoundly religious story about a highly unconventional religious personage - no wonder that the making of this movie would have been impossible in both Tsarist and Soviet Russia.

The director, Yakov Protazanov, was the most important pre-Soviet Russian filmmaker. He made 80 movies between 1911 - 1918. Then he left the country, to come back in 1923. His first Soviet movie was Aelita, in 1924 - a loose adaptation of a SF novel by Aleksey Tolstoi. It is a genial movie. The Soviet censorship hasn't allow its circulation for tens of years. The destiny of great artworks is sometimes very much alike with the life of good Father Sergius: long and painful struggles with horrible adversities.

(video by All soviet movies on RVISION)

(Yakov Protazanov)

(Early Movies)

Aelita - povestea unui film constructivist

Cine este Aelita, o stim toti: este printesa martienilor, insa planeta este condusa de un consiliu al batranilor, unde troneaza atotputernicul Tuskub. Exista acolo si Gos, constructor de dispozitive astronomice de mare acuratete - care este insa obligat sa tina secretul lor cu strasnicie - martienii nu trebuie sa stie prea multe, asa este de parere dictatorul Tuskub.

Tuskub ar vrea sa o tina deoparte si pe printesa Aelita, dar ea vine in ascuns in observatorul astronomic manuit de Gos si priveste prin dispozitivele lui - asa ca vede Pamantul, pe Pamant vede mai intai New Yorkul - apoi Parisul - si apoi vede Moscova, unde un barbat si o femeie, rezemati de balustradele de pe malul raului, se saruta fericiti.

Si Aelita incepe sa tanjeasca dupa pamanteanul cel frumos din Moscova. E chinuitor sa fie atat de departe. Ce bine ar fi sa ajunga oe Marte si sa isi lipeasca buzele de ale ei!

Bine, bine, si de ce tocmai moscovitul i-a dat printesei martiene fiorul erotic? Raspunsul vine de la sine: filmul este sovietic! Este Aelita, turnat in 1924 de catre Iacov Protazanov. Veteranul cinematografiei rusesti de dinainte de Primul Razboi Mondial fusese invitat sa se intoarca in patrie - emigrase dupa Revolutie, se aflase o vreme la Istanbul, incercand sa isi faca drum spre studiourile din Occident. Acum se afla la Moscova si i se incredintase producerea unui film de science-fiction dupa romanul Aelita, al lui Alexei Tolstoi. Avea la dispozitie o echipa formidabila si o finantare generoasa.



Observatorul arata marfa - decor constructivist - scenografa a fost Alexandra Ekster, artista apropiata de Tatlin, de Rodcenko, de Malevici si de Lissitzky - a absorbit tot ce era mai bun in suprematism si in constructivism - iar rezultatul sunt decorurile de pe Marte - wow! Pentru decorurile Alexandrei Ekster am si cumparat dvd-ul cu filmul - sunt inebunit dupa avangarda anilor '20 - dupa suprematism si constructivism - dupa PROUN-ii lui Lissitzky, dupa Pobeda nad solntze, si dupa Povestea celor Doua Dreptunghiuri.

La Galeria de Arta Corcoran din Washington este deschisa o expozitie dedicata avangardei anilor '20 si '30. O expozitie uriasa, cu documente, carti, litografii, afise, fragmente de film, obiecte - am vazut-o de doua ori si vreau sa o mai vad odata. Acolo, in sala dedicata suprematistilor si constructivistilor este prezentat un fragment din filmul lui Protazanov, Aelita. Scena in care se vede observatorul astronomic de pe Marte. Impresia a fost covarsitoare. Instalatiile proiectate de Alexandra Ekster semanau aidoma cu formele geometrice folosite de Tatlin in monumentul sau celebru, a carei macheta o vazusem la intrarea in expozitie, cu formele geometrice ale desenelor lui Lissitzky, desene care se aflau in aceeasi sala, si pe care mai vazusem cu cateva luni in urma la o alta expozitie, la Phillips Collection. Tuburi si conuri de sticla,cu diverse unghiuri de inclinare, in miscare de rotatie, insotite de profile metalice in forma unor compasuri si echere uriase.
In alta sala am vazut un desen al Alexandrei Ekster: era proiectul unui pavilion de realizari in industrie al unei expozitii de la Moscova din 1923. Dar nimic nu se compara cu fragmentul de film pe care tocmai il vazusem, asa ca intors acasa am comandat imediat dvd-ul.



Asadar Aelita viseaza la pamanteanul cel chipes - dar si pamanteanul tanjeste dupa frumoasa printesa de pe Marte. Pamanteanul este inginerul moscovit Los, care lucreaza de ani de zile la constructia unei nave cosmice si care viseaza cu ochii deschisi.
Pentru ca universul martian este doar in imaginatia lui Los.
Sau poate invers? Poate ca Aelita viseaza si isi imagineaza un pamantean chipes care lucreaza la o nava cosmica sa vina pe Marte si sa isi lipeasca buzele de ale ei.
Care univers este cel real? Cel terestru sau cel martian? Bine, bine, daca universul martian este cel real, iar universul terestru este imaginar, de unde stia pamanteanca Alexandra Ekster cum arata un oras martian? Buna intrebare.

Ei, dar suntem in Moscova anilor '20, razboiul civil de abia s-a terminat, e criza inca, si de spatiu locativ, si de alimente, si de toate - iar Los, inginerul visator are o nevasta pe care o cam neglijeaza, obsedat cum e de nava lui si de universul martian - in timp ce un activist bolsevic ii face avansuri.

Erlich nu e de fapt activist - este functionar la soviet, este un exponent al burgheziei rosii care incepe sa rasara in perioada NEP-ului. O nota antisemita nu lipseste din film, dar trebuie sa fim ingaduitori - era de abia anul 1924. Erlich, care este dezgustator in toate, este evreu - daca numele nu era suficient, regizorul a adaugat un amanunt - Erlich isi invata nevasta sa spuna ca el nu ii este barbat, ci frate, asa incat ea sa isi poate atraga favorurile unor oameni interesanti.

Asadar singurul reprezentant al Puterii Sovietice din film este evreu, si este lipsit de orice scrupule - un profitor, a profitat si inainte, pe vremea tarismului, profita si acum, da mita, imbie functionarele cu ciocolata, participa la baluri clandestine la care se imbraca in frac si bea sampanie - dar mai ales o asalteaza cu insistente erotice pe frumoasa nevasta a inginerului Los, care, cum zic, e absorbit de planurile lui cosmice.

Ei bine, Los, inginerul, este un barbat frumos si visator. Si viseaza ca nava e gata si ca pleaca pe Marte.

Cine putea forma echipajul unei nave sovietice? Ei bine, raspunsul e simplu: un inginer, un soldat si un informator. Inginerul care viseaza la nava lui, la calatorii cosmice si la frumoasa printesa martiana, soldatul (interpretat de Nikolai Batalov) care odata ajuns pe Marte porneste o revolutie pentru instaurarea unei Uniuni a Republicilor Sovietice Martiene, iar informatorul se duce glont la politia martiana pentru a depune o nota despre inginer si a cere arestarea lui. Chintesenta sistemului sovietic!

Ei, si multe se mai intampla pe Marte, pana cand Los se trezeste din visul lui de fiecare zi si isi da seama ca langa el se afla o nevasta foarte frumoasa de care trebuie sa aiba grija.

Filmul este o adaptare foarte libera a cartii lui Alexei Tolstoi - aproape ca romanul devine un pretext - trebuia sa se plece de la ceva. Insa filmul si-a urmarit ideile proprii.

Multi l-au criticat pentru ideile marxist-leniniste - altii au zambit ingaduitori la naivitatile din 1924 - de fapt insa filmul este o satira foarte fina a sistemului sovietic - un sarcasm swiftian. Nu e de mirare ca securitatea sovietica a inteles sarcasmul filmului si l-a scos din circulatie imediat. Filmul a fost de negasit pana aproape de anii nostri - a fost tinut sub cenzura totala. Din fericire a fost pastrat in conditii foarte bune, spre deosebire de atatea alte capodopere ale anilor '20.

Si este un film cu multa poezie. Doua universuri, fiecare posibil real, posibil imaginar, fiecare univers posibil numai prin imaginatia unui visator de pe universul pereche. Ficeare univers comunicand cu perechea prin imaginatia unui visator. Iar dupa ce filmul se termina, ramanem zambind, cu gandul la perechea de visatori, inginerul Los si printesa Aelita si intelegem ca noi insine suntem reali numai atunci cand existam in imaginatia celor care ne viseaza.

(video by All Soviet Movies on RVISION)

(Yakov Protazanov)

(Filmele Avangardei)