We are in social networks. Leila Alexander-Garrett: “We did not have an affair with Tarkovsky. There was mutual adoration How Tarkovsky worked on the set

Interview with writer and translator of Andrey Tarkovsky Leila Alexander-Garrett

Although we have known Leila Alexander-Garrett in absentia for only four years, it seems that we have known each other for “a century”. Then, in 2010, I wrote a review of her wonderful book "Andrei Tarkovsky: Collector of Dreams". Leila was the great director's translator for his last film, The Sacrifice, which he shot in Sweden. Since that time, our correspondence with her began.

I can say that my correspondent is completely unique person, prose writer and playwright, polyglot, bookworm and erudite, tireless traveler. Leila has a million friends (and she came up with a name for herself, or rather, her friend gave her) a million, they live in all parts of the world, and each is a creative person: this is the writer Lyudmila Petrushevskaya, and the director Roman Balayan, and Marina Tarkovskaya the director's sister. And how many of her friends are writers, poets, artists and directors - from London, Stockholm, Oslo! She is the connecting thread between them and Russian culture. Leila Alexander-Garrett has already given an interview to our magazine, but then I, and the readers, had a lot of questions for her. The new interview will partly fill this gap.

Irina Chaikovskaya: Leilochka, I would like to delve into your complex biography. You were born in Uzbekistan, but you are Russian, Leila (Layla) you were named much later, after a song popular in the 1970s. By the way, did you begin to feel differently when you turned from Alla into Leila? Has something changed in you? I think that people began to perceive you in a different way, yet Leila is a specific, oriental name ...

Leila Alexander-Garrett: I was born 10 years after the war. In St. Petersburg, my future husband from Sweden called me Leila, who was writing a dissertation on Russian and Polish prepositions, as well as on female characters in Dostoevsky's novels. In the early 1970s, everyone was crazy about Eric Clapton's "Layla". So I became Layla. It would be correct to pronounce Laila - that's what Sven Nykvist called me - the great Swedish cameraman who shot the film "Sacrifice". As Arseny Tarkovsky wrote: “But the name is so firmly attached to us, / That there is no power to rename, / Although each one is erased and captured. / It’s not in vain that they say about the name: / It is a birthmark.

Layla imprinted. I also have a secret Tibetan name“The Lamo Jeduq, which was given to me by Reverend Kalu Pimpoche, the spiritual master of the Dalai Lama. This happened during the initiation into the teachings of Kalachakra (“Wheel of Time”). According to Kalachakra, all external phenomena are interconnected with the person himself and his psyche, therefore, by changing himself, a person changes the world. The teaching is incredibly complex, but I did learn one lesson: never blame anyone for anything. Millions of people come to mind, blaming their own and foreign rulers for everything. But all the vices in us - the rulers are just our concentrated, focused reflection.

And also a funny story with the Swedish officials in the police, who systematically returned papers to me demanding to write my full name, because “alla” in Swedish means “everything and everything.” It seemed to them that it was a kind of prefix, like “della” in Piero della Francesca, but they had no complaints about the name Leila.

As for the East... my past is undoubtedly connected with China, and if you remember the words of Kalu Rimpoche, with Tibet... even such examples as yoga classes: I get bored in them, although they are very useful, and tai chi and qigong take me off the ground. Literally. The soul soars. I am infinitely grateful that Master Xu Mingtang from China entered my life, who once a year, in autumn, comes to Europe. From different parts of the world, qigongists come to his retreats. We meditate 8 hours a day. That's where you gain energy. Last year we met near Kiev in the most picturesque place Puscha Voditsa. This year we are going to Jurmala.

So I'm used to Leila, I don't attach it of great importance although it is worth considering.

I. Ch. If we continue about the name. Leyla, Leyla in the East - the heroine of the epic, the fatal beauty, looking at which the young man loses his mind, becomes a madman - "majnun". Have these charms been passed on to you?

L.A. What a tricky question! But he is not to me, but to the “majnun”. Although the poet “explained” everything: “To be a woman is a great step, / To drive heroism crazy.” I am now reading everything written by Lou Andreas-Salome and also about her. This brilliant woman was known as the muse of Nietzsche (“brilliant Russian” was christened by the philosopher who was in love with her), Rilke, Widekind and Freud. By the way, in the Letter of Safe Conduct, Boris Pasternak describes a meeting with Lou Salomé and Rilke at the station, when they were on their way to see Tolstoy in Yasnaya Polyana. Andrei Tarkovsky said that the story of the tragic love of Leyla and Majnun made a strong impression on him. Andrei was a man of extremes: if he loved, then "without a trace", if he hated, then with black hatred, from which he himself often suffered.

I. Ch. How did your life begin before marriage and departure? I know that you studied in St. Petersburg at the Academy of Arts. Did you draw? Wanted to be an art critic?

What did you like about the country then and what did you not like? Have you thought about emigrating?

L.A. I never thought about emigrating. Then the West seemed like the planet Mars. But everything is written from above, I just know how to hear this voice. From the Academy, as soon as I met my Swedish husband (the KGB worked tolerably), I was expelled for "cosmopolitan appearance and views." As for appearance, this is from the field of black humor: a blond girl of the Scandinavian type, as Joseph Brodsky described me, and our views differed from those of Soviet officials. True, my views often do not coincide with officials of all stripes and spills.

Of course, I drew, but I'm not an artist, I'm more attracted to painting itself, authors-artists, art history. The best antibiotics for me are visiting exhibitions of ancient masters. Proven experience: if I feel sick, I drag myself by the scruff of the neck to the National Gallery at Sainsbury Wing, where masterpieces from the 13th-16th centuries are collected. The spirit captures - I am cured!

I.Ch. You are married to a Swede. In what language did you communicate with him? Stockholm near Petersburg. Could you come to Russia? Did you want to? What was the first thing that struck you about Sweden? Interested in living there? Is not boring?

L.A. We communicated only in Russian, he was fluent in the language, and then, first in Uppsala, then in Stockholm, I studied Swedish, which I love to adoration! Admitted to the University. I often went to St. Petersburg and Moscow, because my husband worked as a guide with tourists, and I with him. The timing was great! Youth, friends, feasts! Everyone was alive! Sweden struck me with a terrible picture, the very first unforgettable impression: we arrived at the hostel, where we had a nice room with a shower and a common but friendly kitchen, or rather, its inhabitants. And now I see: a man is lying on the steps, and everyone is passing by. We arrived in the evening. In the morning he lay there. It turned out that a very young guy died of a drug overdose. Philosopher. I wanted to come up to help, as is customary with us, but they explained to me that it was impossible to come close without the police. Tears, shock, despair. Many of my close Swedish theologian and philosopher friends died of alcohol overdose - the smartest people. The Swedes have some kind of weakness, unlike the Swedes - they are a rock! Reliable, hardy, independent and in addition beautiful. Sweden is my favorite stepmother. The beauty of Stockholm cannot be described, you need to see it, breathe it in! Ingmar Bergman has repeatedly said that no better place on earth than Sweden in the summer. Bergman's opinion was shared by Brodsky, who liked to spend the summer months on the islands, and the Stockholm archipelago has about 24 thousand islands. There is where to roam! Stockholm is a must!, as the British say.

I. Ch. You were Andrei Tarkovsky's translator and assistant on his latest painting, The Sacrifice. When you look at some of the photos where you are alone with the Master, especially the one where you celebrate Christmas (or New Year?) with a glass of champagne in your hand, it seems that you are two lovers. What do you think?

L.A. You are absolutely right! It is impossible not to fall in love with Tarkovsky! Our whole team was in love with him. Until now, I meet people - very young, of both sexes, in love not only with his work, but also with him. Such a rare passionate personality! It combined indestructible masculinity, chivalry and some kind of childish, tender gullibility, refinement of the artist, significance (Andrey certainly knew who he was in art!), At the same time simplicity, accessibility, but only with those whom he “accepted”. It was difficult for him to split the power of his talent, inspiration, torment and his everyday life; although I saw him both bored and sad, distrustful, even extremely suspicious, caustic, irreconcilable.

I.Ch. Andrei Tarkovsky in some cases was very cruel, he could wear out the actor, achieving the desired performance. They say that this is how he wore down his favorite, Anatoly Solonitsyn. He, despite this, idolized Tarkovsky. And how did AT behave with the Swedish actors? Did they treat him well? Were you whispering behind your back?

L.A. Whispered, how! These are the actors! Angry that he left them unattended. It seemed to them that a wrinkle on a tablecloth or a drop on a juniper tree was more important to Andrei than the actors, but they trusted him and tolerated him. Erland Jozefson - main character film - accurately describes the “endless expectation” of the actors in his delightful play “One Night in the Swedish Summer”, which was staged in Tallinn at the Russian Theater (a theater of extraordinary beauty!) for the Days of Tarkovsky. Again, theater officials assured that the play would not last even a week - too “intellectual”, but it was played for two years, tickets could not be obtained! I am glad that I played a small role in the implementation of this project, advising the organizer Ella Agranovskaya to take a chance and put on a play. Ella believed and did not regret it. I also have a part in the play. Erland called me Sonya the translator. What wonderful actors we had in the film! Huge thanks to all of them! And to those who are no longer alive - Erland Yuzefson, Allan Edval, Susan Fleetwood.

I.Ch. Andrey consulted with you about the picture? Music, light, colors, landscapes - did he choose everything himself? Did he need an adviser?

L.A. Very even, but this cannot be called “advice”. When Andrei chose actors, he looked at his surroundings, how does anyone react? In the choice of Adelaide - the main character - Susan Fleetwood from London and the Kid especially: he walked, frowned, looked inquiringly straight into his eyes, as if asking: what do you think?, biting his nails. I describe his torment in detail in the book Andrei Tarkovsky: Collector of Dreams. The same can be said about the choice of nature. He seemed to be all over, his whole figure turned into a question mark. Perhaps he asked himself? Asked and asked again.

I.Ch. How did it happen that in the scenario of "The Sacrifice" Tarkovsky seemed to foresee his fate? After all, he found out about his fatal illness after he made the picture ...

L.A. That's right, although the script for "The Witch" - that's how the film "Sacrifice" was originally called - written in Moscow long before "Nostalgia", told about a man with terminal cancer who is cured by a witch. In Sweden, Tarkovsky considered that the healing of one person was a rather banal story and made a rapid upward spiral. The hero of the picture, Alexander, saves the world, humanity from an atomic war, having promised God to give up everything that is dear to him in life: from his son, family, friends, home and “empty talk” - he takes a vow of silence. When Andrei found out that he himself was terminally ill, he said that the last two films in some fateful way influenced his life. The hero of "Nostalgia" dies in a foreign land, the hero of the last picture sacrifices himself. A great artist always foresees, weaves his own destiny, in Russian literature there are more than enough examples.

I.Ch. Leilochka, you live in London. You constantly receive Russian directors, artists, musicians. You accept figuratively - sitting in the hall, and quite specifically - at your table.

I know that Marlen Khutsiev was at your table recently. And in the theater you met with Dmitry Krymov, Andrei Konchalovsky... Tell us about your impressions. How is Russian art perceived by the British?

L.A. The British are known to be reserved people. As Chekhov said: "The Englishman is descended from frozen fish." Of course, this is an exaggeration, but they do not show delight, except in ballet. They shout: bravo! For me, meeting with such legends as Marlen Khutsiev is an unforgettable gift! I met Krymov and Konchalovsky only at performances and evenings at the Pushkin House in London. Both are different, interesting, but I will say a seditious thing, for which I will become, as I once did because of Tarkovsky persona non grata: Chekhov is staged better, the British understand deeper. Everything was powerful at Konchalovsky, but Chekhov was not there, but in the London performance of “Uncle Vanya” by Lucy Bailey, Anton Pavlovich stood in a dark corner and was touched, this could not be overlooked. The British and Russians were delighted. Although there were flaws, but the Chekhovian atmosphere grabbed by the throat from the first minutes and held until the end. The performance was staged in a small theater, repeated twice, and I even contacted the directorate of the Chekhov Festival in Moscow to bring it, but mastodon performances are being brought to Moscow, and this one, alas, remained unseen in Russia.

I.Ch. There is a Pushkin House in London. Could you tell us more about it? Why was it called that - in pandan with St. Petersburg?

L.A. Pushkin House in London turns 60 this year. It was founded by Russian emigrants - the Kuhlman family. I remember his old location in Ludbrook Grove, home tea meetings. And they called it that ... but what else can you call the first literary house in England? They have Shakespeare, we have Pushkin! Everything is simple.

I.Ch. Your plays were staged in Ukraine, in Kyiv. You have many friends there. What can you say about the “Ukrainian events”?

L.A. Friends remain friends. I loved them and no Maidan will change my attitude, even if we are on different banks. We keep our distance with some of our friends. Bye. Revolutions of any color are deeply alien to me, which I did not hide. But I accept their choice.

Some kind of worldwide diabolical obsession of the revolutionary plague! But this is a lesson for all of us. A very scary lesson.

I.Ch. You, I know, are passionate about esotericism. What is your forecast for the future of Russia and the world? We are going through some very scary days.

L.A. Yes, dark clouds of hatred are hovering over the Earth and in our hearts. Everything that happens is terrifying. They say it's easy to make a mistake, but it's hard to convince yourself that you're wrong. Everyone wants to be right. Wouldn't it be better to recognize the same right for others? He is different, but he is the same as you. As my Chinese Master says, you need to devote at least 5 minutes to the light: just sit down, calm down and mentally send light into the Cosmos, because we are all sources of energy. Magnets. We cannot live without light - neither we nor our children. To be in nature more often, to thank her for protecting us. And breathe more calmly ... Breathing, “prana”, “chi” - life. At least occasionally you should remember this. And do your job, live your own, and not someone else’s life (this applies to Russia, Ukraine, America and “all kinds of other Swedes” - very beloved!). Then there will be inner harmony. But we cannot avoid trials. Something fatal with the dates of birth and death of Lermontov: they could not celebrate his 100th birthday - First World War 1914, date of death too - 1941 - war. Let's live and survive on October 3, and there ... God is merciful, although you hope in God, but don't make a mistake yourself.

Alexander-Garrett L. Collector of Dreams Andrei Tarkovsky. - M.: Publishing house "E", 2017. - 640 p. — (Biographies famous people). ISBN 978-5-699-95388-2

The book is based on the diary of Leila Alexander-Garrett, Andrei Tarkovsky's translator on the set of The Sacrifice, which she kept every day. Andrei Tarkovsky's latest film is a testamentary film calling for the realization of personal responsibility for the events taking place in the world.

Yuri Norshtein: "Leila Alexander-Garrett's book is both documentary and fiction, that is, fiction in the sense that Leila has an excellent command of the Russian dictionary, documentary, because she witnessed all this huge creative process on the film" Sacrifice ", because she was Tarkovsky's translator , and, in my opinion, in three directions at once: into English and into Swedish and into Russian back, excluding Tarkovsky's obscenities. Thanks to her, Tarkovsky's entire speech was in the ears of his assistants - scrupulous, very accurate Swedes whom Tarkovsky during the shooting turned into normal people, in the sense that they have become more relaxed, more free to understand what is at stake, in what direction the film is moving. Although it is unlikely that one of the colleagues can fully understand what is stuck in the head of the director, he himself does not always understand.

Tarkovsky is an improviser, he is able to change the nature of the direction of the scenes in the process of creative work, and without this it does not work at all. Layla writes about everything about it. I like that this book is not flattering. This is not a book of worship to Andrei Arsenievich and exaltation of him as a director and creator. Firstly, he does not need this, and secondly, any such established worship deprives a person of his life and causes only one thing - distrust of the reader. Leila's book is essentially documentary: it is a documentary imprint of the director's state of mind, sensual state, it is a documentary imprint of his torments, his staggering from side to side, winding, when a person does not have the opportunity to shoot, but continues to live under the tension that he asked himself in the beginning of the movie. And then the horrors begin, which can only be understood by a loved one, or the one with whom this happens. It seems to me that Leila had a lot of bitterness in her communication with Tarkovsky and she revealed many bitter features that characterize the hero of this book from different, including quite unsightly sides, but all this cannot be removed from a person’s life: any one contains something and other.

After reading this book, I immediately called Leila, expressed all my enthusiasm for her, emphasizing that this is one of the most truthful books and, most importantly, that it is absolutely accurate evidence, since Leila herself, as a creative person, will not give herself the right to lie, because her the lie will immediately multiply and penetrate the readers, who will turn this lie upside down in their own way, and then a meaningless legend will appear. You should not create legends, but you need to peer into the true face and read out what really accompanies the life of the creator with all the sorrows and joys of discovery. Dream Collector Andrei Tarkovsky is the best written about Tarkovsky, along with biographical memoirs of Marina Tarkovsky, without a doubt, written with love, which is rare in our time. Everything in it is alive, subtle, without varnishing, without embellishment. The main thing is that Tarkovsky is alive in it."

- In The Collector of Dreams, you mention that Tarkovsky bequeathed you "not to be neutral" and even predicted that you would write a book.

-L. G: When I wrote, I remembered these words. Then they pissed me off. I was young, obstinate, and I was outraged that someone was pointing something out to me. But Andrei always guessed, always hit the bull's-eye. And so, I wrote it 20 years later... In addition, there are a lot of books about Tarkovsky that do not correspond to reality. I do not want to judge anyone - everyone has the right to dispose of their knowledge, acquaintances, friendship and write whatever they want, but I was on the sidelines. At least she tried. The book is not about me. I was just lucky to be with him, with the whole film crew, to be a participant in this magical process of creating a movie. After all, this is really a magical process: out of nothing, some idea, a dream, an accident - Tarkovsky weaved out of thin air.

And why did you decide to write a book only after 20 years?

LG: I often repeat, I really liked the Chinese phrase: nothing is too early and too late, everything happens on time. It's true. If I had written this book earlier, maybe I wouldn’t have realized something, didn’t feel it, didn’t digest it ... This happened after the Tarkovsky festival in London, maybe from a meeting with, with Gordon, with Yankovsky, Bondarchuk - this gave an incentive and charged me. They spurred me on, and I wrote not only in some kind of haste and carelessness, but in a hurry that this should be done.

You live in London, studied in Sweden, grew up here. Tell us a little more about yourself.

LG: I was born in the Soviet Union, in Uzbekistan, then I came to Leningrad - I entered the Academy of Arts. Then I met my ex-husband. I didn’t even know then that he was a Swede - we were afraid of them, they were also cautious. Then she got married and moved to Sweden. And when I found out that Tarkovsky's film would be filmed there, I went to the producer. She told me that Tarkovsky insisted that the translator in the painting be a man. Like, a woman doesn’t suit him in character, it’s necessary to shoot early, the work is hard, and he worked with a man at Nostalgia, so he’s probably used to it.

But you still got the job. What do you think, how did you take Tarkovsky?

LG: It would be better, of course, he answered himself! But I never hung myself on him, did not get it, and this surprised him. There were also closer people around him, but sometimes they just clung with their claws. I didn't have it. Maybe because I lived in Sweden, in a different environment. It's a wonderful thing, it's great to be Russian and throw yourself into your arms all the time, but sometimes you need to keep something in yourself.

What country do you consider home?

-L. G.: I am here now - and for me there is only Moscow. And when I'm in Sweden, she is like my favorite stepmother. This is youth, time spent with Andrei, theater, friends.

- You write that Russia is a “generator” that energizes, and you describe the country very warmly. But the tone changes when it comes to Tarkovsky's attitude towards Russia.

L.G.: Andrei knew his own worth, he knew that he was bringing currency to this country, but they brazenly lied to him ... After all, he was often invited to shoot abroad, and these bastards said that Tarkovsky did not want to, he was busy, he was not in Moscow. And he found out about it a few years later. He was treated like a nonentity. Here is even this story, when Andrey wanted to involve in the film "Sacrifice", with which he worked in Italy. They didn't even answer him from the embassy. But Tarkovsky was never a dissident, he refused to meet with many Western journalists, because they stopped seeing him as an artist and focused only on dissent.

Abroad, probably, it was also not easy?

LG: Very hard, of course. It's hard here. And it's hard there. Another problem is money. Here in the picture, he could wait a long time for the right weather, and there we had 55 shooting days, and at least you crack.

-M. T .: Well, here, too, there was the number of meters shot per day.

-L. G: But the budget is bigger.

-M. T .: Well, I don’t know, in general, he worked on very small budgets. It's just that the West has a tougher system.

-L. G: Money dictates everything.

-M. T .: Here they also dictated, but they met him halfway, realizing that he was a great artist, and that he needed help.

-L. G.: He said more than once that in Russia he is given a budget - that's all, he makes films and doesn't think about it anymore. And they reminded me every day. And then, of course, uncertainty about the future. Here he had a home, friends, family, support, there was a rear. There was no. There were, of course, acquaintances - but it's one thing when you're a guest, and another thing - when you're part of society.

How has this affected the films? What do you think distinguishes Tarkovsky's latest paintings made in the West?

LG: Simplicity. Tarkovsky said: simplicity is the most difficult thing. The Sacrifice has a few characters, a simple house, nothing special. Removed everything. Asceticism to the last.

What was Tarkovsky like on set?

LG: Swift as the wind. A whirlwind that came, and everything began to move around. And not to move randomly - sometimes people create chaos around themselves - it was a creative whirlwind. He wanted, which is very important, to include everyone in his creative process.

The Dream Collector is one of the alternative titles for the film The Sacrifice. Why did you choose him for the book?

LG: The director usually embodies scripts, ideas, and Andrey embodies dreams, fantasies, visions. Here, in particular, there was a story when he had a dream in which he died and sees his mother, and Tarkovsky decided to include this scene in the film.

-M. T: We are talking about a scene that was not in the script. The budget was modest, so at first they did not want to shoot her. But then they took it off.

-L. CG: But the scene was not included in the film. There, all the participants are in long dresses, in hats, but I wanted to achieve the utmost simplicity so that there were no beauties in the film. And he cut this piece out, leaving only the beginning and the end.

And what other dreams or, maybe, cases from life got into his films?

M. T .: In the "Mirror" there is an episode in which the boy is shocked. This is a children's joke, I forgot it, I only remember that this boy in the joke grabbed something and said: "Oh, it beats with current." It was incredibly funny, I told Andrey, he also laughed, and then he used it.

Or here in The Mirror: a scene with a boy who throws a training grenade. They also tell him something like: “And also a blockade man, a Leningrader,” they say, he has no right to do bad deeds. Why blockade - probably because in 1943, when the blockade was broken, Leningrad children were taken down the Volga, and for one night they stopped in the village where we studied. Everyone ran to meet them at the pier, people came out with food, but they were not allowed to eat, there were doctors with them. We ourselves were like matches from hunger, but what we saw is indescribable. There were simply no faces, only huge eyes. And, of course, Andrew remembered it.

Like many other things, Tarkovsky was Tarkovsky. At least this story with the long-suffering bird cherry, which he demanded from the poor Swedes for the "Sacrifice". At the end of the war, we lived in a village near Moscow, and my mother sold bird cherry at the Paveletsky railway station. Andrei climbed bird cherry, tore, threw it to us, and my mother and I picked it up. And, of course, he wanted to restore the image of that tree in the film, but it did not work out.

- There are a lot of very personal details in the book, including about Tarkovsky's relationship with his wife. There are many things that the director himself probably would not want to talk about. How did you solve this problem for yourself?

LG: So many unpleasant things have already been written about him! I tried to be delicate, retouched. That's not what the book is about.

-M. T: We cannot place the artist in a vacuum, it is necessary for the reader to understand that Andrey did not live in an airless space. This emphasizes Andrei's inner life, the contradictions that tore him apart. A certain person was present in his life, played a big role, and perhaps the ability to be creative was preserved largely due to the conditions in which Andrei existed. Because the creator needs not only semolina, but also something more serious: overcoming, internal struggle, which, perhaps, gave a creative impetus.

Most of the "Dream Collector", in addition to the introduction and epilogue, are your old diaries from the filming of "Sacrifice" with your own comments. Did you enable the diaries as is or did you change something?

LG: These were notes, pieces of paper, notes on the script. I just deciphered everything, and then collected it. The archival material is huge, I still have a lot left ...

Does that mean we have to wait for another book?

LG: Well, no, probably, it will already be something else, that's enough.

The book by Leila Alexander-Garrett, a friend and translator of Tarkovsky during the shooting of the film, is not only a chronology of events based on the author's diary entries, not only a story about the kitchen of the filming process, which not many of us get to look into. These are impressions of meetings with the most talented people who were part of the film's crew, including the legendary cinematographer Sven Nykvist, who shot over a hundred films and worked with such masters as Ingmar Bergman and Woody Allen, and brief sketches of meetings with Bergman himself. But still, the main thing in the book is a biased eyewitness account of how the unique cinematic language of one of the outstanding directors of the 20th century is born from insights and crafts, from dreams and exhausting work.

We sit in Leila Alexander-Garrett's comfortable London home and have a leisurely conversation.

The film "Sacrifice" was filmed in 1985, and the book was published in 2009, more than 20 years later. What made you take up the pen?

The book "Dream Collector" appeared thanks to Marina Tarkovskaya, the director's sister. In general, much related to the memory of Andrei Tarkovsky was initiated by her, she carefully collects the family archive, edits all the materials published about her brother. So, in April 1987, the phone rang in my apartment, and quite unexpectedly I heard her excited voice in the receiver: “I am collecting materials for a book about Andrei, could you write a chapter for it?” With the same request, she turned to other friends and colleagues of Andrei, and as a result, a book appeared - a memory, a book - a tribute to memory, in the creation of which people who personally knew and worked with Tarkovsky participated. My chapter was called "Secrets and Mysteries of Tarkovsky", then it was sorted out, as they say, "in parts", and it was published in various editions in Poland, Israel, Great Britain, Germany.

And in 2007, I organized a festival in London dedicated to Andrei Tarkovsky, where relatives and colleagues of the director came: Marina Tarkovskaya, his classmate Alexander Gordon, Oleg Yankovsky, Natalia Bondarchuk, Vadim Yusov. There were many guests from other countries, people told incredible stories related to the director's films.

And after the festival, I realized - "it's time", sat down and, without getting up from the couch, wrote a book in two months. My Tai chi teacher says that you can learn this art at a basic level in a year, but it takes at least 10 years to comprehend, immerse yourself and realize all cosmic connections. So it is with the book: apparently, everything had to settle down, however, it took 20 years.

The book recreates in some detail the chronicle of your acquaintance with Tarkovsky: from the first meeting in 1981 to the end of filming. Did you keep diaries?

I kept a diary from time to time. But since every day I had to write down and translate what, when, how, where and with whom we are filming, all this chronicle remained. There was a script and a notebook where I entered some details, funny phrases, because Tarkovsky asked me to write everything down for him. He was afraid to miss, to forget something important. I had a camera, so there was a photo album.

And how did the name "Dream Collector" come about? After all, it echoes the alternative title of the film "Sacrifice" - "The Collector".

The film "Sacrifice" includes six dreams of the hero, that is, in fact, the film is a collection of dreams. Some of these dreams are fiction, and some really Tarkovsky had a dream. For example, he dreamed that he was dying. He saw his mother in the form of an angel who warned him about something. Waking up, Andrei painfully tried to remember what he was warned about, but he did not remember. I was supposed to play this angel, but this episode, like many other "beauties", was cut from the script. And the dream itself entered the picture called "Cock's Dream". The German producer, seeing this scene, said to me: "Leila, he foresaw his death."

And the dream in the film, in which the war begins, is not even a dream - these are fears embodied. Tarkovsky was terribly afraid that a war could happen - this is the diagnosis of the entire post-war generation. By the way, Bergman, whom Tarkovsky idolized, considered cinematography to be “the creation of dreams.” His phrase is known: “A film, if it is not a document, is a dream, a dream. Therefore, Tarkovsky is the greatest of all. He is a clairvoyant who managed to embody his visions in the most laborious and at the same time the most malleable genre of art. All my life I have been knocking on the door that leads to the space where he moves with such self-evident naturalness.

By the way, Bergman admitted that before each of his new films he revises Andrei Rublev. And the meeting between the two directors, despite the deep mutual interest, never took place.

- How did Tarkovsky work on the set?

It was a whirlwind that captivated everyone who worked with it. Cheerful, sparkling - this is how he was remembered by the film crew, this is how he is captured on documentary film frames, in my photographs. A typical passionary personality. Tarkovsky gave himself to everyone, gave importance to everyone who was next to him. No one could resist, remain indifferent. It was an absolute center of gravity, a generator of energy, feeding others from its source.

Later, I saw the same charisma, the same crazy energy in Derek Jarman, who was adored by everyone who worked with him. By the way, both he and the main actress of his life Tilda Swinton were very fond of Tarkovsky's films - on this basis we met. These directors had in common absolute creative fearlessness. And just like Tarkovsky, Jarman passed away young with AIDS.

However, this is how we knew Tarkovsky in Sweden, but in Moscow, according to the memoirs of Yevgeny Tsymbal, who worked as his assistant on the set of the film Stalker, everything was different: screams, cursing on the set, and alcohol. Probably, this is a different tradition, the tradition of authoritarian "mastery" behavior of the director on the set with all the attributes of power, as it was understood in the Soviet Union. I think that Tarkovsky skillfully played this role.

And in the West there was no moral pressure. Of course, it cannot be said that everything went smoothly - it was necessary to solve the problem of financing the picture. Filming hung in the balance, Japanese investors showed loyalty to Soviet Union and refused to support the project, so that his anxieties ate up like a worm an apple. In addition, the son remained a hostage in Russia - he was not released to his parents, despite numerous appeals to the Russian government by the leaders of other states. It was pure bullying. But Tarkovsky never asked for political asylum, he simply stayed in the West to work after the scenarios of The Master and Margarita and Hamlet, which were hacked to death in Moscow. In Europe, he was offered interesting projects. A contract had already been signed to stage Wagner's The Flying Dutchman in Covent Garden, in Germany he planned to make a documentary about Rudolf Steiner, with the Danes about Kierkegaard. And, of course, Tarkovsky's main idea is a film about St. Anthony. But it didn't happen.

What was Tarkovsky guided by inviting the actors for the role: was the choice rational or rather emotional, intuitive?

The casting process was pretty agonizing. He had favorite types: Solonitsyn, Terekhova, Grinko, Yankovsky. By the way, Yankovsky, whom Tarkovsky invited to play the role of a doctor in the film, was not only denied permission by Goskino to travel, but did not even show the invitation. And Yankovsky saw himself in this role. Much later, when he found out about it, he was completely crushed.

In the process of selecting actors for the film, we reviewed probably thousands of candidates in sportslights (albums with photographs of actors), and hundreds of them were invited to view. Among those invited was Helen Mirren, who did not suit Tarkovsky, he did not know then that she had Russian roots. As a result, Susan Fleetwood starred in the female lead.

Tarkovsky always knew exactly what he wanted to get on film. It was the thinnest, like a surgeon's work. He passed with the actors of the mise-en-scène: "go to the chair, then to the mirror, straighten your hair at the mirror, then to the window, lean over and look there." In this pattern, he gave the actors freedom, but if any nuances of the acting game violated the director's intention, the shooting was stopped. At the same time, Tarkovsky very rarely voiced what he needed. He expected that the actor would find the picture of the role that had already formed in his head. In each film, he developed an almost kindred, physiological connection with the actors and it was assumed that the actor should read the director's intention, his condition. Susan Fleetwood called working with Tarkovsky "water ballet".

Sweden has a different directing school, and at first the actors were very offended by him. Assistant Kerstin Eriksdotter often came up and asked me to tell Tarkovsky to talk to the actors. And then he gathered a group of actors and talked with them on abstract topics: about love, about jealousy, about betrayal, about treason, about cowardice, about suppressing the human will. But all these conversations, one way or another, concerned the film.

What do you think is the mystery of Tarkovsky's films, which look with the same tension today as they did 30 years ago? Indeed, out of seven of his paintings, at least five are very personal in content and difficult stylistically.

I think that the works of the Master are always timeless. Of course, Tarkovsky's films are autobiographical, but the director tells the story of the personal in the language of art, while completely revealing himself - this is the only way to connect the emotion of another person to a naked emotion. Many directors, even extraordinarily talented ones, use the means of cinema to veil, to hide something behind craft, techniques, aestheticism. But not Tarkovsky. Closed, even secretive in everyday life, in art, he tore off his skin, layer by layer, completely exposing his nerves. This absolutely discouraging honesty catches the viewer.

I was recently invited to watch Solaris. To say that I know him by heart is an understatement. But I went, because Wil Self, a well-known British writer, journalist, and media person, was supposed to present the picture. He said something like this: “In my life I loved two women, one man, one dog and one film - Tarkovsky's Solaris. I saw the movie when I was 11 and fell under its magic. On the last scene of returning to my father, I just can’t hold back the tears.” Tarkovsky's films evoke catharsis. People look and something happens to them. At the viewing, the hall was full, beautiful young faces, an interested audience.

- Tarkovsky could not but realize his exclusivity. How did he relate his gift to those around him?

He said that talent is freedom and this is slavery, this is a gift and this is responsibility, Tarkovsky was a deeply religious person. He understood and accepted the gift of ministry. He admitted that in his personal life he was unfair and even cruel. But in art - honesty, openness and responsibility - three postulates from which he never retreated.

- Which of the modern Russian directors could be called the successor of his tradition?

Many film critics consider Zvyagintsev to be Tarkovsky's spiritual disciple. I cannot say that I share this opinion. Zvyagintsev, of course, is very talented, but Tarkovsky is a cinematic Everest, which no one has yet managed to reach, let alone surpass.

Help "CV": Leila Alexander-Garrett is a film critic and a graduate of Stockholm University. She worked as an interpreter for Andrei Tarkovsky on the set of The Sacrifice (1985) and for Yuri Lyubimov on productions at the Royal Dramatic Theater in Stockholm and at the Royal Opera House Covent Garden in London. About her work with Tarkovsky, she published the book "Dream Collector" (2009) and the photo album "Andrey Tarkovsky: photo chronicle" Sacrifices "(2011). Leila is the author of two plays: “The Hanged Man. Night Gaspar” and “English Breakfast”, the organizer of numerous exhibitions and festivals dedicated to the memory of Andrei Tarkovsky. Leila says: “My book is a declaration of love for this brilliant, bright, unusual person. Tarkovsky is perhaps the most powerful figure I have ever met in my life. As Margarita Terekhova said: “The one who fell into his magic circle remained in it forever.”

Today - on Andrei Tarkovsky's birthday, I want to tell you about the book "Andrey Tarkovsky: Collector of Dreams" by Leila Alexander Garrett.

"This book is a confession... a declaration of love and eternal gratitude to a wonderful and complex person, the great Creator - Andrei Tarkovsky." Leila Alexander - Garrett.

This book of 2009 edition came to me before the new year. When I saw it in the bookstore, I just flipped through it. And... I didn't buy it. Firstly, 360 rubles is expensive for me, and secondly, I did not know anything about the author of the book. I thought, well, what can some foreign translator write about the great Tarkovsky. After 2 months, when I came to the store, I saw this book again, but for 100 rubles. Since the book has waited for me, then I will no longer doubt. And I bought it, and ... I did not regret it. The book is real and sincere. I recommend it to everyone who cares and is interested in Andrei Tarkovsky.

Leila Alexander-Garret - the author of a book about Andrei Tarkovsky - was his translator on the last film "The Sacrifice". Leila turned out to be Russian, she just married a Swede.
Leila Alexander was in the picture by accident. She was not a professional translator, in addition, the director preferred male translators, from among whom he conducted a daily “trial” of candidates. But it happened that none of the 14 professional applicants suited Tarkovsky, namely, Leila coincided with the director in "internal alchemy". The film "Sacrifice" was filmed in Sweden, the actors, except for the main character, were Swedes; the production team also consisted of the Swedes, the services of which the great Ingmar Bergman himself resorted to more than once. And, first of all, here it is necessary to name the cinematographer Sven Nykvist, who shot more than 20 films with the famous compatriot. Sven worked with the most famous directors in the world, but it was Tarkovsky who touched something deep in his soul.

Leila became not just a translator, but Andrei's friend and assistant, a spiritually close person.

Together they were not only on the set, but also walked, rested, made many hours of cycling. And she kept a diary day after day, which formed the basis of the book.

The book contains a large number of cinematic details about the filming of The Sacrifice. The film was very hard to make. Firstly, a very limited budget and strictly regulated shooting time. At home, the director could wait several days for the weather he needed, the state of nature. This is not allowed here.

And problems with the actors. Swedish actors who are accustomed to working with directors who know what and how to play, in the person of Tarkovsky, faced with a director of a different plan. He preferred that the actors themselves search for and find the drawing of the role, so that the "scenario" was unknown to them and that they followed not reason, but intuition. He did not set any specific tasks for the actors, but talked a lot with them on general topics - about love, betrayal, lies, death. Tarkovsky, unlike Bergman, improvises all the time. And Bergman hates improvisation, he knows exactly what he needs. Andrew was it is important to awaken interest, to make the actors associates, co-creators.

In the photo: Andrei Tarkovsky, actress Susan Fleetwood, cameraman Sven Nykvist, performer leading role Erland Josephson.

In accordance with the main idea of ​​the film, the fire scene acquired enormous weight, when Alexander, fulfilling his oath to God, sets fire to his own house. By coincidence, inexplicable circumstances, a team of English pyrotechnicians in the very first minutes of the fire lost control over it, and most importantly, Sven Nykvist's camera failed. The final scene turned out to be ruined, the shot for which everyone had been waiting for, preparing so much, spoiled ... There were tears in the eyes of the actors, the cameraman, and everyone present at the shooting. Everyone is in despair - the house, carefully and lovingly built in the protected part of the island of Gotland, burned down, and the picture was left without a final.

Home is a concept hidden for Tarkovsky himself and for the entire concept of the film.

As a result, the director of the picture managed to “knock out” additional funds from sponsors to reshoot this painful scene, which at that time became the longest episode in the history of cinema, filmed without editing joints - in one frame. The house this time was built in just four days.
The scene of reshooting a fire is a heat of physical and emotional tension. "After the first fire, they cried in despair, now, giving vent to the accumulated emotions and immeasurable tension, they cried with joy ... and some kind of loss, as at the birth of a child."

And it was also the last day of filming, that is, everyone understood that they would have to say goodbye to Andrey, to the group that had become so dear to Gotland during this time.
Well, it’s unbearably hard to read the last pages of the book, when the illness, examinations and this terrible diagnosis suddenly fell.

But after reading the book, a surprisingly bright feeling remains that Andrei Tarkovsky has not gone anywhere, he is invisibly always with those to whom he is spiritually close. Interest in his films has not diminished over the years. Nobody has taken his place in the cinema and never will.

Happy birthday, Andrey Arsenievich!