Moderator: Sergey Dobrynin

journalist, scientific columnist for Radio Liberty, former scientific editor of Vokrug Sveta

Participants:

Sergei Dobrynin: According to my feelings, for the last two or maybe three years, Russian scientific pop in a broad sense has been experiencing a renaissance after Soviet times. There are good popularizers who give great lectures, very strong new publications and science journalists, and science journalism schools. So far, all this, as I understand it, is popular. Does the Russian science pop audience have a limit?

Of course, there is a limit - the population of the country, of course. A purely mathematical answer. Schools appear - that's good. But people are still in short supply. If we compare the level of average attendance of materials with those that fall into the top, the difference will be an order of magnitude, or even two. So there is room to grow.

Ilya Kabanov: The more scientific schools and schools of science journalism, the better everyone is, probably. Someone will be better for sure. School organizers will do well. I think that such institutions in any case contribute to broadening one's horizons. The broader our horizons, the better.

Andrey Konyaev: I don’t know a single science journalist who studied science journalism courses and became a good science journalist. Moreover, my entire experience of working with people who studied in science journalism courses shows that if a person says that he studied in science journalism courses, there is a 90% probability that he should be sent *** (further away. - Ed.) straightaway.

Sergei Dobrynin: Andrei, the question is still not about school. Although I understand that this is a burning topic. The question is about the audience. Maybe we will soon reach some kind of plateau, after which interest will disappear? They discovered a new planet, fifteen or twenty publications wrote about it. The twenty-first appears. Why is it needed?

Andrey Konyaev: This is an illusory saturation with popular things. In 2008, everyone read the news on astrophysics, now no one reads them. Nobody needs them, but everyone writes them. Interest in the Nobel Prize has been steadily declining from year to year. This means that you need to look for new horizons. And there are quite a few of them.

Andrey Palamarchuk: If the paper gradually sags along with the entire market, then our site, on the contrary, is growing steadily. It cannot be called popular science in its purest form. It is, after all, rather a popular scientific, popularizing site. There are not many purely scientific topics, there are topics related to ecology, general interest. It seems to me that if there is interest, then this should be used. Indeed, the main task is to find some new moves.

If we say to a doubting person: “You don’t believe in vaccinations - you’re an idiot,” then we will not convince him of anything. And if we just calmly tell you what and how it really is, then there are chances

Sergei Dobrynin: Over the past few years, officials at various levels have been saying a lot about the need to popularize Russian science more. Even Academician Fortov (RAS President Vladimir Fortov. - Ed.) came with an important program in which the Academy of Sciences should be engaged in popularization. Moreover, if you call a Russian scientist for a comment, you usually end up in the press service of the institute, where they tell you: "Call back the day after tomorrow." Do you think the state should popularize its primordial science? Should we write more about Russian science than about other?

I don’t know, the press releases of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences still resemble reports from the plenary sessions of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Fortunately, there are several institutions that have developed good press services over the past ten years. But some institutions say: “Why do we need this in principle? They give us money anyway ”.

Sergei Dobrynin: Do we need this? Ilya, do you have any special attitude to Russian science? When you see that Russian scientists have discovered some kind of crystal, you drop everything to write about it, precisely because they are Russian scientists?

Ilya Kabanov: No, probably. It seems to me that science is international. All scientists are great fellows. Let them open up - no matter where they live. Yes, indeed, it seems that the situation with scientific PR is getting better. Science press secretaries are getting smarter. Rates appear at universities and institutes. The fact that government agencies, organizations, officials have learned the phrase "popularization of science" is also not bad. They love to learn words and bring them to the point of absurdity.

Sergei Dobrynin: Andrei, are Russian scientists better than foreign ones?

Andrey Konyaev: Yes, you shouldn't fall into the sin of cosmopolitanism, otherwise you can be shot for that. People who talk about science confuse science as a social institution and science as an institution that produces knowledge. The second can be popularized. To popularize the former is like popularizing housing and communal services: this is a rather stupid and pointless activity. The problem is that Fortov means the former. It seems to him that the main drawback of the RAS Institute is that the RAS is like a "Fight Club". The first rule of the RAS: never talk about the RAS. It seems to him that if this paradigm is broken, flowers will bloom everywhere and everything will immediately become good. This, of course, is complete nonsense. As for scientific PR, it appears. Rather, it happens as a byproduct, and it's great what happens. It seems to me silly to write separately that a Russian scientist discovered something there. The phrase "Russian scientists" worked on the Internet in 2010, and now it is 2016.

Sergei Dobrynin: Andrei, you have a lot of translated content, as I understand it, from the general edition. Are you adding something from yourself about Russia?

Andrey Palamarchuk: Yes, the task is very difficult - as they say, science has no nationality. We understand: why write about Russian scientists, about Russian science, if there is excellent verified content? We are lucky, we stand on the shoulders of giants, we have the international edition of National Geographic. For example, we write a lot due to our specifics about archaeologists. Accordingly, we have a pool of archaeologists who work great with the press, bring their discoveries, finds, and we publish them with pleasure - if at the moment when they were made, they did not forget to photograph them normally (for National Geographic, photography plays almost primary role). I do not have a special quota for Russian materials. There are well-functioning institutes with normal press services. The Institute of Material Culture in St. Petersburg, for example, works great. I could do news with them several times a month. There are a number of other normal places. There will be more - we will write more. If they bring reasons.

Sergei Dobrynin: Almost everyone in our scientific journalism community has to spend a lot of time explaining why GMOs are not harmful, vaccinations need to be done, homeopathy does not work, and a perpetual motion machine is impossible. The further you go, the more likely you will have to deal with this. It is clear that people who advocate homeopathy do not choose methods: they can use outright lies, they can speak emotionally, whatever they want, and on TV. As people who respect themselves and defend science, we have a limited set of methods. Nevertheless, who will fight them if not science journalists?

I prefer not to fight against. I prefer to fight for. Lesha Vodovozov and I launched a blog about vaccinations, telling what is there and how. We understand very well that if we say to a doubting person: “You don't believe in vaccinations - you’re an idiot,” then we will not convince him of anything. And if we just calmly tell you what and how it really is, then there are chances. The easiest way to explain something to a person is when you sat down with him and drank. There are never problems, really. We tell what is interesting. This is the main way to fight.

Ilya Kabanov: Many worthy people participate in the crusade against obscurantism. I have no place among them. I remain in the rearguard: I write about birds, spiders, women in science and leave it to other people to fight for vaccinations. They can do it better than me.

Sergei Dobrynin: When the full telegony comes, maybe there will be no cage left for the birds.

Ilya Kabanov: No, it seems to me that we are exaggerating. There are always strange people, there are crazy people. It seems to me that you shouldn't think about it at all.

Sergei Dobrynin: Andrey, do you have a mission “for all good and against all bad”?

The Shire is a country described in the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

Andrey Konyaev: Do I have something? No, of course you are. The first thesis: Shir * will also fall sooner or later. So I had to carry the ring. Second, the question of whether to fight is the classic paradox of good people. Because the scoundrel is ready for a lot, and in the choice of tools, bad people are a little more free than good people. But somehow good people don't die out. Although at first approach it seems that if everything suits the scoundrel, then sooner or later they must win. I hate propaganda. If you have played it once, then everything is for you. I do not accept propaganda, even in the name of good.

Andrey Palamarchuk: I have a very simple answer. It was fully voiced by Ilya. Yes, we write about birds, spiders and prefer to preach to the righteous. I think it is comfortable, convenient and correct. To fight - no. National Geographic magazine is against the war.

Sergei Dobrynin: About a year ago I interviewed Boris Stern - he is such a physicist, popularizer, author of books and editor-in-chief of Troitsky Variant. He wrote another book. I asked him why it was so complicated: he did not try to do without formulas. I say to him: "Isn't it important to convey this to the largest possible audience in order to scatter the grain of common sense, love for science, love for complexity as widely as possible?" He said that Russian society is in such a state that it is too late to drop grain somewhere. If there are few islands of educated people left, you need to support them - and it can be difficult to write for them. Then, maybe, when all is well, these islands will grow again. Do you agree that there are only islands left? Or do you still need to apply, conditionally, to housewives?

I am against such intellectual chauvinism. When you meet a person one-on-one, there is always something to talk with him about. I travel a lot around the country and meet with completely different people, not only in science. Outdoor sports, for example. It is very interesting to communicate with grooms. I have a very bad attitude towards those who believe that if you are a man of science or a being who has something to do with the coverage of science, even if you work as a janitor at an institute, then you are a superman, a god, and everyone else is a petty rag.

Sergei Dobrynin: Alexey, here are three news about Alzheimer's a month ... Is this interesting for the groom?

Of course, insanely interesting. There is a wonderful Zhenya Timonova, who correctly says that there is a ladder of popularization, where everyone has their own step. Someone removes "Fixies", which are also very important, and someone publishes the journal "Priroda" of the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences, which no one needs at all, but he also quite exists.

Andrey Konyaev: I remembered the quote. I endured, held on, but the group "Nautilus Pompilius" has a song "Doctor of your body", which contains the line "We will save only the one who can be saved." Boris Stern also saves only those who can be saved. In general, this is a normal mission, even if he does it. I believe that everyone should be addressed. There was very good news the other day. People with high IQs were no better than dumb people. They are also prone to prejudice. It's just that the prejudices are different: people more stupid like to segregate people by skin color or beliefs, and smarter people like to segregate people by intelligence. That's the whole difference. It seems to me that it is necessary to appeal to the general population, that there are many people who are interested in this. This is a kind of self-deception that we are doing some kind of magic. If we are not there, then nothing will happen, that we are the very magicians who turn boring scientific formulas into something that ignites the masses. Not true. Science is a very interesting thing in itself. As noted, there is nothing more enjoyable than listening to a passionate person, no matter what he is interested in. He will always find something to tell about. Therefore, I do not believe that this story about the islets is real.

Someone removes "Fixies", which are also very important, and someone publishes the journal "Priroda" of the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences, which no one needs at all, but he is also quite himself

There is a good task. Imagine a plane. You take a polygon, you can multiply it, twist it and try to pave the plane so that there are no gaps. It is easy to imagine how you have paved the plane, for example, with squares. Or triangles. If you take a polygon with more than six angles, then this cannot be done. A certain theorem. All the tilings for the hexagon are well known. For a quadrilateral and a triangle too. This problem has not been solved for the pentagon. Until the 1950s, in my opinion, two tilings with pentagons were known. Until one American housewife subtracted this problem in Scientific American. As a curious woman with a lot of free time, she decided to take care of her. She was not a professional mathematician, she had to invent some of the notation because she did not know the vocabulary. And she came up with, formulating some understandable principles, ten or seventeen new tilings, if my memory serves me. Quite recently there was news that at one institute they finally opened another one. This is a word about housewives. End.

Speaking at the Frigate Pallas Festival, Chief Editor of National Geographic. Russia Andrei Palamarchuk spoke about the very first photographs on its pages a century ago, showed the first Russian issue of the magazine, which came out in 2003, revealed the specifics of its publication in Russia, and also spoke about what he wants to shoot in Ulyanovsk.

National Geographic Magazine turns 130 this year, and in September it will be the 15th anniversary of the magazine's publication in Russia.

Surely, many have seen this girl from the cover of National Geographic magazine, - with these words Andrei Palamarchuk began his meeting with readers in Ulyanovsk. - This picture is one of the most famous photographs of the 20th century and, perhaps, one of the most famous covers of all magazines. This is the work of the famous American photographer Steve McCurry. It depicts an Afghan girl, also called the Mona Lisa of the 20th century. The photo was taken in 1984 in a refugee camp in Afghanistan. The photograph has become an emblem not only of humanitarian problems around the world, but also one of the most beautiful photographic portraits, as well as, perhaps, the most famous photograph in the history of National Geographic magazine.

130 years ago, the journal could be called a messenger of the US Geographical Society. There was not a single picture, but the texts were on scientific topics. For 14 years the magazine came out in this form - without illustrations. The circulation was small - 200-300 copies. And only in January 1905, the first National Geographic magazine was published, in which there were photographs.

These were the first photographs of Tibet in the history, - said Andrey Palamarchuk. - It was very cool - at that time people of the European race were not allowed into the territory of Tibet in general, not to mention the fact that someone was able to take photographs there. It was with these photos that the glory of National Geographic magazine began.

But whose photographs were these?

They were made by two of our compatriots - the Buryats Gombozhab Tsybikov and the Kalmyk Ovshe Norzunov. These are two great travelers and scientists. In the late 1990s, they received an assignment from the Russian Geographical Society to enter the territory of Tibet and, for the first time in history, take photographs of its capital, Lhasa. This mission was very dangerous - it was possible not to return from it alive. Therefore, two people were chosen who could pretend to be their own, which they did. Tsybikov, being an excellent connoisseur of Buddhism, passed himself off as a pilgrim from Buryatia and through the territory of Mongolia with caravans moved to the territory of Tibet. Norzunov in 1900 entered the territory of Tibet through India. They independently took pictures with a hidden camera. And at that time, each of them was equipped with the smallest camera that existed then.

It looked like this:

There are practically no people in the pictures, as they were afraid that someone would see them and betray them. Therefore, they shot mostly landscapes. At that time it was very cool, they were clear good photos of places where not a single person from the west had been. This place was sacred.

Then an interesting story happened, which is known from the words of one of the first editors of National Geographic, Gilbert Grosvenor, who headed the magazine for about 50 years. In 1903, he was still a very young guy, who had just been appointed editor-in-chief of the then magazine without pictures. And on the eve of Christmas 1903, the printers reported that the magazine needed something to fill 11 pages - tomorrow the magazine will go to the printing house.

Now I would solve the issue in an hour - I would write to all the photographers I know to urgently send photos through social networks. But then there were no social networks, and the magazine did not print photos in principle - illustrated magazines at that time were considered bad form, magazines for housewives who like to look at pictures. But then Grosvenor had no choice - it was impossible to quickly fill 11 pages with text.

Here you need to turn again to the photographs of Tsybikov and Norzunov - they returned to St. Petersburg, each received a gold medal from the Russian Geographical Society, which was very happy - it was a matter of prestige: the Americans, the French, and the British really wanted to get to Tibet, but nobody succeeded. The Russian Geographical Society selected 50 photographs, printed a set of photographs, packed them in a case and sent them to colleagues. It was a very beautiful but mocking gesture.

So the young editor Gilbert Grosvenor sits and does not know what to fill the magazine with. And just then his gaze fell on the parcel from Russia, which contained the very photographs of Tibet. He sent these cards to the printing house, and he went to the bar - he wanted to get drunk, because he thought he would be fired for publishing photographs in a serious magazine. But no one fired him, although at first there was a scandal. But then people started coming to the editorial office of the magazine and asking where they could buy it. And the publishers of the magazine thought: maybe this is something. From that moment on, National Geographic began to slowly transform itself into an illustrated magazine with the best photographs.

American Journal of December 1958:

Since 1995, national versions of the magazine have been published all over the world. The first issue of the magazine was published in Russia in 2003. The photo shows the very first issue and the most recent issue of the magazine:

- What is the specificity of the magazine in Russia? - we asked the editor-in-chief of the Russian version.

There cannot be too many differences, because there is a brand and a certain level of quality. We are under strict control from the head office - precisely creative, not ideological. Many editorial offices in other countries simply take the American number and translate it one hundred percent. In Russia, everything is different. We have the largest country in the world, with all the variety of climatic zones, with fantastically talented photographers - and it would be wrong not to use all of this. Therefore, we try to have our own materials in each issue 10, 20, and sometimes 30 percent. Another thing is that the production of such materials is very expensive. The budgets with which the American editorial staff works are incomparable with ours. We work a little more modestly, but no less interesting. Yes, there are many countries in the world that you cannot tell better than the American National Geographic, because they can afford expeditions lasting a year or two. But there is one territory in the world in which we have an absolute advantage over journalists from other countries - this is Russia. No one knows better than us our people, our language, our elusive and indescribable Russian specifics. Therefore, the main priority of the editorial office in Russia is work in our country, a story about our people, our fauna and flora. The geography of Russia is an endless topic.

- Is the Ulyanovsk region represented on the pages of the magazine?

- I want to make material at least for the site, but perhaps for the magazine as well - you have wooden automatic miniatures of Morozov in the Puppet Theater. My dream is to make a video - remove the glass, put the right light on and make a documentary about it. As for some expeditionary tasks, no one has yet proposed, but, of course, we must tackle various interesting topics.

Andrey Palamarchuk on Facebook - about our Volga: “Perhaps the most beautiful view of the Volga”

The program of the "Frigate Pallada" festival can be found at the link

ANDREY PALAMARCHUK
tenor

Born in the city of Norilsk, Krasnoyarsk Territory. In 1997 he graduated from the Norilsk School of Music with a degree in choral conducting, and in 2002 - the vocal faculty of the Moscow University of Culture and Arts (class of Associate Professor M. I. Demchenko). While still a student, in 1999 he entered a competition for the position of an artist of the choir of the Moscow Musical Theater "Helikon-Opera", in a short time he brilliantly mastered the entire current choral repertoire, showing outstanding vocal and acting skills, which allowed the theater's artistic management to entrust him with episodic, and sometimes responsible solo parts, which were always performed by him with inspiration and at a high creative enthusiasm. The impressive professional achievements of the young artist became a significant reason for his transfer in 2004 to the group of leading opera soloists, among whom he is successfully working to this day. At present, in a rich, diverse in style and genre repertoire, already a recognized master of the opera scene, there are about 35 musically and dramatically complex parts of various sizes and characters. Among them are Lykov and Lensky ("The Tsar's Bride" by N. Rimsky-Korsakov and "Eugene Onegin" by P. Tchaikovsky), Count Almaviva ("The Barber of Seville" by G. Rossini), Prince ("Love for Three Oranges" by S. Prokofiev) , Theodore and Misail ("Boris Godunov" by M. Musorgsky), Vitek ("Means of Makropulos" by L. Janacek), Lucio ("Ban on Love" by R. Wagner), The Marquis and Prince ("Lulu" by A. Berg), Tsar Nikolay ("Rasputin" by J. Reese), many others.

A. Palamarchuk vividly demonstrated his increased professional skills at the First International Competition of Lyric Tenors. A.S. Kozlovsky (Moscow, 2011), where he deservedly won the II Prize and the title of Laureate.

The vigorous concert activity of the singer is also one of the important components of his work. His repertoire includes scenes and arias from operas by N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov, P. Tchaikovsky, D. Shostakovich, S. Prokofiev, G. Verdi, R. Leoncavallo, G. Gershwin, romances and chamber vocal works by Russian and foreign composers. They sounded bright and fresh in the solo program "Theater of one singer", prepared and performed by him in 2012 as part of creative events dedicated to the 45th anniversary of the founding of the Norilsk College of Arts.

A. Palamarchuk is an indispensable participant in numerous tours of the Helikon-Opera theater, both in Russia and abroad. He was warmly applauded by listeners and spectators in more than 20 countries, including France, Italy, Spain, Great Britain, Germany, Israel, Lebanon.

In 2010, Andrey Palamarchuk was awarded a commendation from the Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation for his significant contribution to the creative achievements of the Helikon-Opera theater.

REPERTOIRE

  1. Opera roles performed in the performances of "Helikon-Opera"
  1. M. Mussorgsky "Boris Godunov" - Feodor
  2. M. Mussorgsky "Boris Godunov" - Misail
  3. N. Rimsky-Korsakov "Mozart and Salieri" - Mozart
  4. N. Rimsky-Korsakov "The Tsar's Bride" - Lykov
  5. P. Tchaikovsky "Eugene Onegin" - Lensky
  6. P. Tchaikovsky "Mazepa" - Iskra
  7. I. Stravinsky "Mavra" - Hussar, Mavra
  8. V, Ehrenberg "Vampuka, African Bride" - Lodyr
  9. D. Shostakovich "Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District"
  10. D. Shostakovich "Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District" - Teacher
  11. S. Prokofiev "The Love for Three Oranges" - Prince
  12. D. Tukhmanov "Queen" - Ambassador
  13. D. Tukhmanov "Tsarina" - Guardsman
  14. J. Lamp "Pyramus and Theisba" - Wall
  15. J. Lamp "Pyramus and Theisba" - Moon
  16. G. Verdi "La Traviata" - Gaston
  17. J. Verdi "Falstaff" - Fenton
  18. J. Verdi "Falstaff" - Bardolph
  19. G. Verdi "Masquerade Ball" - Servant of Amelia
  20. G. Rossini "The Barber of Seville" - Count Almaviva
  21. W. A. ​​Mozart "The Marriage of Figaro" - Don Curzio
  22. R. Wagner "Forbidding Love" - ​​Lucio
  23. U. Giordano "Siberia" - Alexey
  24. I. Strauss "The Bat" - Alfred
  25. A. Dvorak "Mermaid" - Forester
  26. L. Janacek "Means Makropulos" - Vitek
  27. F. Poulenc "Dialogues of the Carmelites" - Officer
  28. F. Poulenc "Dialogues of the Carmelites" - Jailer
  29. A. Berg "Lulu" - Marquis
  30. A. Berg "Lulu" - Prince
  31. A. Berg "Lulu" - Valet
  32. J. Reese "Rasputin" - Tsar Nikolai
  33. A. Manotskov "Chaadsky" - Zagoretsky (director Kirill Serebrennikov)
  1. Concert repertoire

Arias and scenes from operas, romances, chamber vocal compositions by domestic and foreign composers