From the program "Only a man can create a masterpiece"

Michail Shvidkoy: I want to draw your attention to the fact that there is a provocation, a provocative statement in every topic of our program. They always advise me: put a question-mark, at least dots. It would be easier to watch. But believe me: if you watch this or that program to the end, you will understand the point of people, who make the program "Cultural revolution"…

…The topic of our program (and we insist on it) is the next: only a man can create a masterpiece… Viewers, sitting in front of TV-sets, are certain to say: can it be true? And they would start to name of women from Ekaterina the Great to Sapho, they would remember all the authoresses of the 90th from Ulitskaya to Petrushevskaya, Tokareva… And nevertheless, I insist that these were men, who made outbursts and breaks in arts, created phenomena, which determined the development of the culture for decades and even hundreds of years. Alexander Gordon, the TV-presenter, is of the same opinion.

…Alexander Gordon: I must add two reservations, otherwise, women themselves would harass us… I cannot deny the role of women in creating masterpieces by men; I appreciate this role very much… Without discussing the meaning of the word "masterpiece" - each of us instinctively understands what it means - I wouldn't insist that women cannot create masterpieces in the two fields - in performing art and in poetry. It is stipulated by women physiology.

…Men and women differ, and though zoologists ascribe them to one species of Homo sapiens, sociologists divide them into two subspecies: Homo sapiens - a human being, in many languages synonym of a man (for example, in English - man), and a woman - something, biologically similar to a man, but playing absolutely other social role. And this social determinancy of women is explained not by specific conditions of the civilization, in which we have lived for more than one thousand years, but by the nature, which made men in such way that left cerebral hemisphere is dominating. Left cerebral hemisphere is absolutely different from to the right one, as far as its functions are concerned, though they communicate with each other and sometimes find common language, and most often masterpieces appear in this cooperation. Left cerebral hemisphere is a thing, that we weren't quite given by nature, but created ourselves during a long period of social evolution. Women brains are oriented so that right cerebral hemisphere is dominating, it is far more ancient and stable than the left one, but unfortunately, it doesn't allow women to work in those fields of activity, that lead to creating masterpieces.

Michail Shvidkoy: You chose a dangerous way, since Europeans and Asiatics are distinguished in the same way.

Alexander Gordon: It's not quite so. As I've already mentioned, the cerebral hemispheres communicate with each other, moreover, if one of the cerebral hemispheres is damaged, the other assumes the functions of the wounded one. And our Western European Christian civilization made everything in its power to have the left dominating hemisphere to create the values, which we define as masterpieces. In the Eastern culture everything, which is created by dreams, barely audible mutters, hysterical cries, birth pangs, that is created by the right hemisphere, is considered a masterpiece…

... Alexander Gordon: It is a great error to think that functional disproportion of cerebral hemispheres doesn't influence creation of cultural valuables. It is absolute women nonsense…

…Maria Arbatova: I want to remind, that women were allowed to get education not long ago, only a century and in most countries of the world only half a century ago, that is why we may speak of creativity, of realization in creative work only with due regard of the initial conditions.

Michail Shvidkoy: Men cannot give birth to children, that is why they cannot create masterpieces in this sphere, while women create such masterpieces…

Alexander Gordon: And that is enough…

Karen Shahnazarov, producer: I agree with the minister. In our history there are more examples of masterpieces, created by men. But it seems to me, that women don't set themselves such a task… Very often in my life I met men, who really wanted to create masterpieces. But socializing with creative people, I had never met a woman, who was sitting, drinking vodka and dreaming of a masterpiece… In fact, women can create masterpieces, but they don't want to.

Ivan Dihovichniy, producer: Alexander Gordon, with his provocation, reduced me to proceed to the other camp. Striving for masterpieces is not enough, it is a very profitable position… For example, we just say "we create masterpieces", at once crowds appear behind us, and none of us is likely to have created anything… but we are likely to create. It's quite indelicate question setting. Women have created many masterpieces and you (addresses to Shvidkoy) know it. Let us look through historical context, as Eidelman said. We should give women a chance and then we will see… We would also be better…

It is, of course, easier to examine cerebral hemispheres, but it is difficult to watch them while the person is alive, a postmortem should be made.

Alexander Gordon: Today our opponents tried to turn our mind to the present, or even to the future, they say we should wait, give them time and they would show what they are capable for. In the beginning of the 20th in the USA a historical decision was made stating that a woman is: a) a human being and b) is almost equal to a man. What was achieved in the XXth century after women had been liberated (it doesn't matter, whether we take West or East)?.. Women were allowed to take off the yashmak, were given a passport and allowed to vote. What did a woman vote for? Remember concerts of Beatles and squealing, shouting girls - they are those mass viewers, absorbers of pop-culture. Who watches television? Those who consume women shields. Who vote at the elections? Who elects our presidents, Zhirinovsky? Women. What do women vote with? Women vote with their hormones. Women hormones change to opposite ones every two hours. How can we deal with people, who change every two hours?..

Maria Arbatova: Everybody, who makes such statements in a Western sitting room, would be considered racist, chauvinist.

Michail Shvidkoy: I am glad we are not in the Western sitting room.

Michail Shvidkoy: Of course, when we offered such a topic of our program to the audience, we realized that such questions are impossible at the Western television, people are usually brought to court for such statements, but we chose rather smooth form. Many of our statements would be enough to cause revoking a license from the TV-channel "Culture", if the program was on in the USA…