«This is an attempt to reach one person.» Kureichik — on Tsikhanouski's five-hour stream
On October 3, Siarhei Tsikhanouski conducted an almost five-hour stream on his YouTube channel, during which he spoke extensively about Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, her advisor Franak Viačorka, independent media, and the state of Belarusian democratic forces. Andrei Kureichik viewed the situation through the eyes of a playwright and became convinced that behind the public criticism lies not only a political conflict.
Playwright Andrei Kureichik begins his analysis of Siarhei Tsikhanouski's stream by noting that Belarusians, like the British, «also have a royal family, because there are no elections». According to him, just like with the British royal family, what happens in the Tsikhanouski family also generates great interest.
«So, they are again – well, as if on Siarhei's initiative – having maximally public showdowns,» the playwright notes, smoothly leading to Tsikhanouski's multi-hour stream.
Although technically, in Kureichik's opinion, the stream «didn't work out», «this circus had very far-reaching consequences and seriously changed [...] the space of Belarusian political culture and opposition in all directions».
«This entire stream is a cry of his soul»
First and foremost, Kureichik saw in the stream evidence of a deep rift between Siarhei and Sviatlana Tsikhanouski.
The playwright immediately stipulates: he does not have access to their private lives and does not possess any classified information. He offers his version as a playwright, whose profession, according to him, is to observe people and dissect human dramas.
Based on what he saw and heard, Kureichik concludes that normal communication between the husband and wife has likely ceased.
«This entire stream by Tsikhanouski is a cry of his soul, an attempt to reach one person — Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya. In various ways, on various topics, but it is directed at her,» believes the playwright.
One of the main arguments for such an interpretation, as Kureichik argues, is how Tsikhanouski referred to his wife. While he spoke sharply and sometimes insultingly about other people, he consistently referred to Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya by her first name and patronymic — «Sviatlana Hieorhijeŭna».
«How many husbands do you know or have seen, who have at least some kind of relationship with their wives, and would call their wives by their first name and patronymic? I don't know any such. For me, "Sviatlana Hieorhijeŭna" is simply an absolute emphasis on distance, on the absence of any communication. It means: "We are strangers now, so we call each other by first name and patronymic".»
«He said a bunch of really wild things»
In Kureichik's opinion, during the multi-hour broadcast, Tsikhanouski lost self-control and made statements that could have been perceived quite differently from what he himself, perhaps, intended.
«He somehow remembered Charlie Hebdo. Why? It could be perceived as a threat. Then these sexually abusive jokes. Why these jokes? These distortions. [...] He was already lashing out at everyone he could reach, everyone he mentioned.
He went into a frenzy, either completely losing control of himself, or, even if it was done while controlling himself, it was still on the verge or even beyond it,» Kureichik shares his impressions.
«Siarhei went off the rails without mentorship restraint»
In search of reasons for Tsikhanouski's changed public behavior, the playwright notes:
«He is probably in some very critical situation. Because he repeated many times about problems with documents. In the USA, this can only be related to the fact that there are really serious problems with obtaining some normal status, most likely.»
Additionally, among the reasons for the «emotional hysteria», in Kureichik's opinion, could be a lack of money.
«Several times he said that there was no money, and he even had to fire some team he had initially hired. PR specialists, I don't know, cameramen, security guards — everyone had to be dismissed, there's no money. That is, the resources with which he arrived have obviously run out.»
According to the playwright, behind Tsikhanouski's changed public behavior might also be the loss of support for the former political prisoner from businessman Vadim Prokopyev — «a man with a cool head, adequate».
As Kureichik notes, it was Prokopyev who «gave eight months of silence to this world by occupying Siarhei with learning English and attempts to enter some shadow Republican and university establishment».
«Perhaps that has ended. Because now I definitely don't see anything that would resemble Vadim Prokopyev's influence. And Siarhei, without such a mentoring restraint, finally went off the rails,» shares the playwright with his observations.
-
Anne Applebaum: Another attempt to negotiate with Lukashenka will fail
-
Statkevich: Those who could not be intimidated by old age will never be intimidated
-
"For us, the BPF, Shushkevich's nomination was a stab in the back." Naumchyk and Statkevich Clarify the Role of the Belarusian Military Association
Now reading
Two sons taken from a Belarusian woman in Italy — because she did not recognize the state and did not send her children to school or to the doctor 1919
Comments
Таму што гэта форма здзеку, тыпу, капец якая цаца, ужо не Светка як заўжды была, а Святлана ажно па бацюшку Георгіевна. Тут не трэба быць геніем, каб гэта разумець.
[Зрэдагавана]