Ploho biography

How can you interpret this phrase? There were theaters, where the chief director led, there were - where the director. But at the same time there were the Pidustus Pskov Theater, the theater of Khanzharov Omsk ... - It is clear that Khanzharov was a unique director, but with him the Omsk drama existed as the theater of Kirzhner, Khaikin, Trostyanetsky ... They determined the path of the theater.

And now it is mainly determined by the directors. And the functions of the director were then not in extracting money - the directors who guessed the wishes of the leadership and could substantiate the need and significance of a particular original production in an understandable language, could push it out. The rest of the theaters earned themselves, and the expenses were such that it was enough.

And now the share is state. And on everything that makes up the elements of professional life, the theater must earn itself for staged expenses, the maintenance of the building, the maintenance of infrastructure, for advertising, etc. Therefore, each ruble from its own income, in excess of state revenues, weighs much more than the ruble that was in Soviet times. This is a paradox. And in order to provide the theater as a professional life, the director has to be more inventive than before.

This is due to the infinite variability of our regulatory, legal framework. Every year we get new documents that change our just established life. Previously, there was only a provision on theatrical and entertainment enterprises-and some comments on it. So we lived for decades. But if we put all the regulatory documents of the Soviet era in a row, we will see that there was not a single document that would worsen the position of the theater compared to the previous period.

One way or another, they developed the situation. And now we come to the fact that the state worsens the situation: for example, having accepted in the city, it is recorded: if the theater has money that he earned himself, this cannot be the basis for reducing budget financing. But in fact, all the time there is a threat of reducing budget financing by the amount that the theater earns itself.

And then we take the decree of the year, the minimum settlement standards are recorded there, according to which the state should finance the theater: remuneration, staged expenses, etc. Gradually, over the years, all articles have been reduced. We get only a salary. This year, the Omsk drama received transfer to extrabudgetary funds in only three months! The law is not implemented, all theaters are left one on one with a pension fund, all theaters had tremendous debts.

That is why the director becomes a figure, not only the leading theater to some future, but also a person who provides the life of two hundred families-at least. Behind people, and when for four months we are delayed the salary, then you come into a sad fortress. Every day you come and catch the views of people, and you are responsible for the situation that you yourself do not create.

Here you have the era of directors. Petrov, you are the director. Why do you need a art? But we have been working with him for the fifth year. I believe that the theater without the main director is a complete absurdity. This contradicts the understanding of what a Russian stationary professional theater is. And the change of main directors is not my biggest victory.

A strong, stable, gathered for decades, the troupe of Omsk drama requires high professionalism from directing, requires the fulfillment of ethical norms. We are talking to Petrov on any topics, we are open to each other ... B. Mezdrich takes a parade on the theater's anniversary. Photo by V. Shevorkov - Do you discuss art issues with him? Should you think about this? He must understand the financing strategy.

When we released a huge performance of the “Dawn ceremonies”, I asked him to organize the process, correlating with what my ability to pay one or another part of the production. Of course, I always discuss with the chief director, where and how we will invest money. Talking with the directors about finance is useful, I noticed: they often offer solutions that would never have occurred to me.

At first it seems - absurd, and then you think, you say, agree, use it. The directorial consciousness always complements our formal view of the usual life. The reason for the extinction of the institute of the main directors seems to me a consequence of the totalitarian directorial system. None of the famous main directors left behind the successor.

I really respect the chief director E. Tabachnikova, with whom he worked for many years in Vladivostok, but in nine years of his work, another 14 passed, nine of which later became the main ones. But not with him. Some directors passed the theaters, the directors never. Maybe in this profession continuity is generally impossible? But at the same time, the Omsk drama showed the opposite.

Kirzhner had another director Khaikin. Then he became the main thing - Trostyanetsky the next. Then he became the main one. On it, the thread broke off. And now one of our problems is the lack of another. This gives mobility. While maintaining a general course that Petrov leads.You have one of the few theaters preserving the idea of ​​the Theater-Dom, the repertoire theater.

How do you feel about these problems? He was equivalent to Soviet life, where he looked like the previous one every day. Now everything is different, very diverse, and the management and financial approaches are old. The theater network remained the same, and the financial field narrows and narrows. The question arises: what to do in this situation?

We already feel that we must decide: whom to finance among this mass? Why do you need to finance a certain number of troupe from year to year? For example, it is profitable for me to compress the staffing in the market and invite the company from the outside - the highest sample professionals to the staged work of the company. He invited the welder - and I do not bear social responsibility for him.

It is necessary to diversify the theater structure. Maybe there are not so many stationary theaters, but let there be rental sites, studios, and entreprises. Let the theaters of one production will be on the rights of projects. You need to go to the grant system. When he has obligations, this is understandable. But if you choose - who will be judges? You need to cut something. Only you need to see us in the general context: how much does the theater earn, what attendance ...

How many theaters do you need in the region? Why not have a common area where we will give artists from different theaters? It is only beneficial for me if an energetic young team develops nearby. I'm not afraid of competition. But do not inflate the states. The state should choose, we will not survive - this is understandable. More independence. No one intervenes in the creative process, does not engage in checks.

And if salaries were salary on time, you can live. We are able to earn money for the rest. Khanzharov - among them. Recently you went to his summer. Do you internally feel that he left you the inheritance? He managed to create such a psychological and professional climate in the theater, in which the interests of the case, the theater always prevailed. Any conflict was resolved in favor of the case - and this is the highest professional aerobatics.

He gathered actors, searched them along with the arts that he brought them. The main part of the troupe is formed by them. For his 25 years and my 10 of this theater there were not a single anonymous in instance. Isn't it an indicator?! Now, however, apparently, they don’t write anywhere ... - What do you write, write!