- We harbored illusions that, perhaps, with evolution and new technologies, people will also become better and more perfect. But this is nothing more than an illusion. And the ideal example in this case is the Cathedral of Notre Dame. Is it not madness that we are talking about singularity, about the “upgrade” of the human race, about the colonization of Mars, but at the same time are not able to put out even a simple fire?
- It seems to me that our civilization is now reaching a point where new values will be brought to us by the people who will be the first to go to Mars.
The fact is that earthly values are now collapsing. Not only Notre-Dame de Paris, but also all that lies at the heart of Europe, its morality and identity are in fire.
- This applies only to Europe or the world as a whole?
- I think, first of all in Europe, since it was she who became the cradle of the new world. Before that, there were Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great, there were Spanish and Portuguese colonialism, the British Empire was the largest in the world.
But after the Second World War, when the Americans came to the rescue of Western Europe, they were already in the lead. So there is one more force here, based on the enormous power of which lies decline, the collapse of the value system — all of this is observed in the United States.
We are now in the heart of Europe trying to put out the fire, based on Greek mythology (on which all Christian culture is based). And I speak not only about religion, but also about culture as such, the influence of which began to weaken a long time ago - even during the fall of Constantinople.
- Especially acute changes began to be felt with the advent of new technologies in our lives. After all, they, as you noted, radically change the system of values of humanity, as well as the paradigm in which we will exist in 5-10 years.
- Recall the era of Genghis Khan. He "opened" a catapult. Contrary to popular belief, it was a very serious warrior, and not just some kind of daredevil on a horse.
So, he began to use catapults - he threw the corpses of people who died from a contagious disease through the fortifications of Europeans.
Today, we may not have biological weapons that could destroy the entire planet, but then there is a lot of other things. The main question here is: can we assume that since the time of Genghis Khan we have achieved something more? Can we say that women have become better protected (at least a little) and that we have made significant progress with regard to our self-awareness?
Judging by the majority of the films that everyone is currently watching on their gadgets, the evolution you are talking about seems rather weak. We reject the best that we have, but at the same time, against the background of the multitude of problems facing humanity, we still believe that we have preserved our value system and morality.
Take corruption, for example: it is characteristic not only of the countries influenced by the East. We see it all over the world. And in the United States and in Europe. Taking into account all these social “symptoms”, it can be argued that exactly what I said before occurs in our life.
- Emir Kusturica
- © RT
We have a perfect picture that perfectly shows what we are. And this picture is used to immerse us in ourselves. When you do not have any convictions, you do not have a solid idea of what unites you with the rest of humanity, you will move deep into yourself - and not towards the Holy Trinity, as it was before.
And some are already beginning to realize that individualism has gone too far. We simply forgot about common sense. So it is hardly possible now to say that morality is characteristic of our time.
- Until today, the Western system of values, liberalism was considered the only correct paradigm that people should adhere to, since it implies a tolerant attitude towards others.
It turns out that if you do not accept the point of view of all the others, then a dictatorship of tolerance arises. And if you, like Brexit or Trump supporters, try to take a step aside from such generally accepted “tolerant” values, then become an outcast.
- Marx was right. If we compare America today with ten years ago with America, then we can see that China has gained its strength due to the fact that it is a weak point of any society - due to cheap labor.
Nixon and Mao Zedong agreed to invest in China in order to gain additional profits at the expense of a huge mass of extremely cheap labor - it was China that offered it.
Capitalism, as it was before, when a person owns a medium-sized company and pays taxes, is self-aware and adheres to Kant's ideas about morality and honesty, is a thing of the past.
When it comes to the understanding that Massachusetts had "dried up" due to the fact that production moved to China, the emergence of the Trump phenomenon in America seems to me to be the inevitable consequence of such events. Trump symbolizes a crisis.
- Is a state or world crisis?
- I think worldwide. The fact is that now we have to deal with new forces in the East - China, Russia with its potential, even with Vietnam.
The Italian philosopher De Crescenzo said: "One civilization follows the other, moving after the sun." And now the turning point has come - the time of returning to the East. Looking at how, under Trump, the US GDP increased by 3.5%, one must understand that this is because he wants the funds of investors to remain in the country.
Trump keeps to his course, and the country's economy, albeit not at an ambitious pace, is still growing. I want to say that the situation now is definitely new.
It reminds me of something before the Second World War, when people died of pneumonia, but there were no antibiotics yet. Pneumonia with their help began to be treated immediately after the war. With the advent of antibiotics, a wide range of treatment options has opened up.
Today, we are overwhelmed by many ailments caused by what is commonly called “liberal capitalism.” So, liberal capitalism is not and was not.
- In Russia, hatred that does not translate into a crime is not prohibited, unlike in Europe and America. There to hate someone is simply unacceptable. In Russia, if you hate someone, then you have the right to say so.
- You can not hate anyone, except when it comes time. In general, you are right, perhaps. But if we talk about manifestations of intolerance, then this, I think, is a question of discipline - I mean self-control, necessary in order not to encroach on the personal space of other people.
We Slavs, often without any talk, interfere in the affairs of others. We believe that we can always come to a friend, find him in shorts or for some personal matter.
- © A still from the Emir Kusturica film “The Time of the Gypsies” (1988)
There are certain things that distinguish us. I think this is also a matter of the differences between the Catholic and Orthodox churches, the orders they have established over the centuries.
Today it is impossible to talk about the significant presence of the Catholic Church in the life of Europeans, but we see that there is some kind of community here, something that unites people. I call it "God as a culture." God can be seen in culture.
Much of what, as we believe, is peculiar to God, can be found in the most varied manifestations: in dramas, novels, in works of art, through which we learn about our past and future. So God can be in a work of art, if you think outside the history and church interpretations of what God is.
- How do you see the place of culture in the future, which in 5-10 years will give us scientific and technical breakthroughs, robotization and the emergence of artificial intelligence to the first positions?
- I am absolutely sure that the process of globalization was started by Genghis Khan and is still ongoing.
If time stopped, and I had the opportunity to choose from which part of American society I could embrace globalization, I would pay attention to the wave of beautiful films after the Vietnam War.
As a person of art, I live in creativity, representing to your look a mixture or synthesis of existential, political, historical and human views on conflict and on the plot that develops in your picture.
Looking at the American society of the seventies, we saw how life could be. Today, nothing of this is left. Hollywood has a poisonous effect even on Russian cinema.
The language of cinema becomes propaganda. In such conditions, I want to preserve my culture and I believe that a sense of ethnicity is necessary for me, not only for a philosophical world view, but also for psychological stability. After all, how many people were struck and at the same time completely devastated by a wave of stupid Hollywood films that have penetrated into our daily life.
- © A still from the Kusturica film “Arizona Dream” (1991)
Ten years ago, I argued that the language of cinema suffers greatly due to advertising. And now she is right in the movies. Today, a successful Russian or Hollywood film is pure propaganda in one way or another.
Each scene plan, if it lasts more than two seconds, is as an advertisement for L'Oreal. We see the same thing when it comes to some historical events. And the language is changing. This is not the language of culture. Each author is evaluated according to his perception of time and place. And here - no time, no place. Speak quickly, change more often - and everyone is happy. Anyone can make a movie from a quick change of small pieces.
- And this is a characteristic of our time? They say that cinema always eloquently draws its era.
- Cinema is like architecture. If we are talking about a great author, then he will even have a feature film as a documentary.
Chekhov has a story or a story about one city in Russia: the son loses his existential perspective, and his father destroys the city, bringing nonsense to the location of the houses in it.
Today it does not matter to anyone. All build huge buildings and glass complexes, and no one wonders how this will affect the feelings of the creature, who feels that everything is changing for him. His opinion, his feelings and everything else begins to change organically. Today, global culture is killing us, it is preparing us hell.
- You are a man of the old code of honor. They were brought up in a certain way and in a certain epoch.
- I am a man from the last century.
- In the new world, there is no place for those values that accompany you all your life.
- Don't get me wrong. I am not against electronic devices. There are still good films, good events, manifestations of the real mind. I'm not saying that the end of the world is about to come. But for the modernity, most of the values with which we lived in the seventies become alien. That's what it is about.
“But then, it turns out that you, Emir Kusturitsa, a great director, are not needed.” Because the farther, the more machines will surpass you in the ability to write scripts and make movies. Here is a collective image of what is happening.
- I understood this a long time ago. And so now engaged in gardening. I bought 35 hectares of land near my village and will produce juice.
“But won't machines make juice better than you?”
- Not at all. Here is the same as with cinema. You can use technology, but for the time being we have not reached the point where machines are able to surpass us.
- It’s not about what will happen in two centuries, but about our century.
- I will ask a question. Can a robot appreciate the smell of beautiful water or a beautiful woman?
- Not now. But in the future - it is possible. There is in fact such a thing as artificial intuition.
- And what should we do then? Commit collective suicide?
- I wanted to ask you this.
- I do not know. Therefore, he said earlier: maybe they will open another planet, go there, meet something new there. If those who were "enfan terribl" of this world, do not go to Mars and do not find water there, then here they will not be able to survive.
After all, there are a lot of people on Earth. Such a problem might not be. The population can easily be reduced. If you allow them to eat and live normally. If you give them a chance to live and eat normally, then there will not be such a population growth as it is now.
- Do you think we can now, standing on the threshold of change, adjust something? For example, to say: "Everything, this is the limit in terms of the intervention of robots in such an intimate sphere of human life as art."
- I have a good idea. We can enslave them.
- Maybe they will enslave us?
- Very unlikely. It is possible that there will be some crazy geniuses who will achieve this in the end, but we need to take one old approach here. I am talking about the times of the colonial power of Portugal and about the British Empire. They trafficked people. It is necessary to follow this historical example - to enslave the robots themselves.
And smart people should make sure that a nuclear war does not start. It should be understood that if the robots attack us, then we will become their slaves.
- And we are not far from this. This area is not regulated.
- Well I do not know. Recall Oblomova. I believe that we are very lazy and our laziness can save us ...
- ... and greedy - because you can earn on robots.
- Yes, lazy and greedy. Robots will always be just an indicator of our position in life. I do not think that people will have enough generosity to allow them to do something more than open the door.
- Well, generosity, maybe not enough, but enough nonsense.
“Those who rule the world are not fools.” They know what they are doing. This is their profession.
- How will the political paradigm change? What happens when cars are everywhere? What awaits us - technocracy in the literal sense of the word?
- We will come to technocracy, but I am afraid that totalitarianism may follow.
- Even bigger than the one that is now in some countries?
- Much, much more. We reject what is good in us. What religion has supported in us - I call it “God as culture”.
And because I am fighting for culture. When she is not, there is no God, there is no connection, there is no human feeling for each other. This is what could be a ruin for us — a future in which we do not appeal to the outside world, but we lock ourselves in, isolate ourselves.
We will find ourselves in a situation already familiar from history — we will be ruled by a new form of colonial power. Moreover, modern technologies already manage us through social networks.
- Emir Kusturica
- RIA News
- © Ekaterina Chesnokova
There is a good metaphor, it can characterize our current state of affairs. When a wolf sneaks into a flock of sheep, he does not have to kill them all. It is enough to bite only one: blood appears - and he starts dragging the sheep behind him. So, the rest of the sheep follow. And while he is dragging her, while blood is flowing, they will continue to follow him. Until the end.
- I would like you, as a director and thinker, in two or three, maximum four sentences (a sort of “synopsis”), to describe for us that world and those heroes that are prepared for us ...
- In the future, do you mean?
- Yes, in the future. In that conditional “tomorrow”, which has already arrived and imperceptibly turned into “yesterday”.
- The future has already begun. And here I will repeat the thought voiced by me in the first part of our conversation.
The feeling of community, the feeling of solidarity and all that we have become people, is overshadowed by endless individualism, the desire to concentrate on ourselves.
As a result, we will lose friends, lose the sense of connection with other people in the society in which we live.
- Will there be a hero in this “film” who - as usual in Hollywood cinema - will save the world? Or is it going to the end of the world?
- The fact of the matter is that this should happen just in real life.
Big changes in history (which, subsequently, is reflected in the cinema) occur when a new messiah, a new actor, appears. In general, a person who will be able to motivate us strongly enough to change the world. However, this one must suffer for us.
- Do you have an idea about this messiah who will save our world?
- Jesus Christ became very popular due to the fact that he was a kind of "left" at a time when the division into left and right did not exist. At the end of the twentieth century, Time magazine called him an "orphan."
The image of Christ was used very often. And the goal was set to move away from this culture, to strengthen the position of multiculturalism. If you look at the life of Jesus Christ, we will see, in fact, a revolutionary, a man who changed the world, taught compassion for the poor. Similar plots underlie good European films. Directors like Ken Loach make wonderful pictures of people who are suffering under the yoke of corporate capitalism.
The full version of the interview in two parts, see the website RTD.