[ad_1]
It seems that all major Russian media have had to talk about the HBO television series "Chernobyl". Although the foreign broadcast is only broadcast online to paying viewers, the show has become a kind of national sensation in Russia, where pro-Kremlin media have launched a mini-crusade against she.
Komsomolskaya Pravda (KP), the most popular newspaper in Russia, has raised suspicions that rivals at the state atomic center Rosatom were using the series to tarnish Russia's image as a nuclear power.
Argumenty i Fakty, a popular newspaper among the elderly, described the show as "caricature and not truth".
"Only bears and accordions are missing!" joked Stanislav Natanzon, principal presenter of Rossiya 24, the main news channel in the country. He pointed out plans showing modern storm windows on a Pripyat building – visible only if you greatly enlarge the image – as evidence of a bad shoot. However, critics of the series have criticized more than minor details.
"The scientist Valery Legasov not only LED the government's response to the Chernobyl disaster, he also openly criticized his management of the nuclear industry. "
In his program, Rossiya's presenter 24 highlighted an important article published by KP, saying that the HBO series was wrong to imply that the Soviet authorities were afraid to admit their mistakes and that this reticence had terrible consequences.
According to the anchor, the article by Legasov in the main newspaper of the country shows that this is not the case and undermines one of the main theses of the show.
Unfortunately, state-controlled media often try to unmask one set of lies with the help of another. It is true that Legasov wrote such an article for KP in 1987, but the editors did not like it and refused to publish it.
At that time, Legasov was exhausted: the Academy of Sciences had rejected his ideas and the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev had refused to give him the honorary title of hero of socialist work (although he granted it to others who worked with Legasov in Chernobyl).
After a meeting at the Academy of Sciences, Legasov was hanged. Two weeks after his death, KP canceled his decision and published the article by Legasov in 1988.
"Chernobyl" is relatively historically accurate and filmmakers devote a lot of attention to detail. Nevertheless, I anticipate that the release of the last installment will trigger a new wave of unfounded criticism.
The ultra-pro-Soviet columnist Anatoly Vbaderman proposed what is probably the most sincere of all criticisms of the series: "If the Anglo-Saxons are filming something about the Russians," he said, "this is not will certainly not match the truth. "
In saying this, he spared himself the need to look for hidden windows or other historical inaccuracies. "These people are always wrong. "Nuff said."
In fact, it's been a long time since even the Russians did not shoot historical films about Russia without controversy. In this context, HBO's "Chernobyl" does not look bad. So why is the pro-Kremlin media opposed to it from the beginning?
This is an ordinary case of jealous bitterness"Only we have the right to talk about our history," they say, "so do not interfere." However, the reception given to "Chernobyl" says more about the critics than about the series.
Through the HBO series, many of my colleagues now have a different view of the Chernobyl accident. While most disaster films culminate with the central disaster, only the first episode of this series is dedicated to the explosion of the Chernobyl reactor.
All subsequent episodes focus on the hard and painful struggle that the Soviet people fought against the consequences of the explosion. And it is these people who saved Europe, at the cost of their own lives and their health.
Watching this series provides at least a fleeting understanding of the difficulties they have endured during the process.
Russia, however, does not honor these individuals as heroes who saved Europe.
Just go to the official Kremlin website to find out how often President Vladimir Putin mentions the Chernobyl survivors – many of whom are still alive and suffering from various radiation-induced diseases.
Putin's only references to these appear on important anniversaries of the Chernobyl accident. He mentioned them for the last time in 2016, on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the disaster, and again in 2011, on the occasion of the 25th anniversary.
Strange as it may seem, the clean up effort after the Chernobyl accident was almost as important to Europe as the Allied victory in World War II.
What started as a day of solemnity and Sadness, Victory Day has become a noisy party with military parades.
Russia will never celebrate the events of Chernobyl as holidays – and if leaders can not make it a celebration of pride and national grandeur, so it's best to forget that this has never happened.
Nevertheless, an attempt will be made to give a totally different twist to these events. The Russian NTV channel has already announced that it is shooting its own "Chernobyl" series, based on the badumption that the CIA sent an agent to the Chernobyl area to commit acts of sabotage.
Russia, however, does not honor these individuals as heroes who saved Europe.
As justification of historyAlexei Muradov, the director of the film, quoted marginal conspiracy theorists: "One theory holds that Americans have infiltrate Chernobyl nuclear power plant and many historians do not deny that on the day of the explosion, an intelligence officer of the enemy was present at the station. "
Instead of a moving tribute to the heroic men and women who sacrificed everything to defeat the aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster, Moscow offers us a thrilling detective film based on a conspiracy theory in which a KGB officer fights for counteract the American spies – the new villains in this national tragedy.
The fact that an American television channel, not Russian, tells us about our own heroes is a source of shame that the Kremlin-friendly media can not seem to be slaughtered. And that's the real reason why they find the HBO "Chernobyl" series uncomfortable.
The opinions expressed in the opinion articles do not necessarily reflect the position of the Moscow Times.
[ad_2]Source link
