And you, count, want to say that maniac has blocked the execution of that matrix algorithm?

I guess, Mr. Holmes, that the matter was like this; and there are two proves. The first is that several restaurateurs and their families strangely died in car accidents. It can be interpreted as a showing of the alternative matrix-scenario algorithm realization. Unfortunately I can’t prove it by press essays. And though the Hermitage direction knows everything, they speak very unwillingly of anything of the kind. The second prove of blocking of the destructive algorithm is the appearance of the main symbol of the myth in “Arguments and facts” after eleven years; they said that it was a “casual” mistake of holiday picture montage. Something went wrong in matrix-scenario of destroying the country, proclaimed by West as “the Evil Empire”. And following my hypothesis the second attempt of activation the destructive algorithm after the eleven-year solar activity cycle took place. It seems to me that doings of that “madman” unconsciously resisted to the destructive Gorbachev’s activity, though many people consider both of them to be modern herostratuses. I understand that such a conclusion may seem crazy for the majority of those who had grown up in biblical culture, because the culture itself places bans on appreciating the stereotypes made by it. It means that one grown by such culture isn’t able to ask: is everything nice in his culture? Why there are so many people who behave as potential criminals? And how is the crime-committing algorithm realised in the frames of this culture? May be it is specially putted into unconscious psychical levels in such a way, that he trying to avoid the “predicted” evil would do an evil even worse? But so, making an analogy with myth of Oedipus, one can find the main author or “customer” of many crimes.

I agree, count, your conclusions are so new and unusual that I need a time to find a place for them in my world understanding. And I think that there is a sense in analysing the events of “black Tuesday” from these positions. May be we can find a treacherous “nobody”.

Do you mean the myth about Odysseus and Polyphemus?

Quite right, count. The United States look like that Cyclops with both two eyes been burned out, who in rage is looking for the treacherous “Nobody”¹, touching modern “sheep”. Just today “the treacherous Nobody” is called Bin-Laden. And what does mean the appearance of that article of “Danaë’s” restoration in “Chas Pick” #151(880) by October 14, 1997 in the context of your theory?

It would be better if I translate some paragraphs of this article for you:

“Today’s world is full of cruelty and violence. In the end of 20^th century more and more works of art become the victims of maniacs. Rembrandt is the leader in a field of such crimes. His paintings attract madmen with a peculiar force”.

Holmes, doesn’t it seem to you that the author who knows nothing of my theory gives proves of it though from another point of view?

Excuse me, count, that I interrupt your line of reasoning, but why very Rembrandt attracts madmen with a peculiar force?

I have an idea about it, but to understand it you should understand what role had painting played before cinema and television appeared.

Do you want to say, that painting was like cinema and television in the modern times?

Quite right, but… for the highest society. The modern science proved that musical and visual images go to unconscious levels of psyche passing over the consciousness. It is also known that one gets 95% of information through his vision (and 5% are left to audio, gustatory and other images). Hence painting played a colossal role in forming the worldview at the epoch before cinema and television. Since the majority of paintings of west European painters, at least before the middle of the 19^th century, were on the biblical subjects, the biblical worldview of the Western “elite” was formed through painting. Paintings of west European painters firstly became taken to Russia during the reforms of Peter the Great, but especially great number of them was brought under Catherine II. For instance just in 1772 150 canvases of famous Flanders and Hollanders were bought at once and there were many Rembrandt’s paintings as well. Thanks to the peculiar style of painting his picture even in that time caused an unusually great influence on spectator’s psyche. Most probably he indeed was the first “impressionist”[37], from the viewpoint that his paintings as well as paintings of Cézanne or Monet weren’t acceptable to one’s eye from too near. People even said, that when one of his customers had tried to watch the details of a painting, Rembrandt told: “Don’t touch the canvas with your nose. Paints smell bad”. But that time the entrance to museums like Louvre, your National Gallery or our Hermitage was closed for the common people. To my view, in those times one “worked” on unconscious levels of psyche of the “elite” to make it loyal to the biblical worldview. But the one deal is to visit the church, make bows, and quite another deal is to read and recomprehend the Bible. And it seems that such great role in that “work” was given to Rembrandt’s painting, that nowadays in the Netherlands one called the highest building in Amsterdam[38] “the Rembrandt’s Tower” and “The Night Watch”[39].

If my comparisons of painting and television hadn’t caused an aversion of you, Holmes, I would like to return to your question about the context of my version of “Danaë’s restoration. However I should read another extract from the above-mentioned “Chas Pick”:

“But nevertheless many people say that today “Danaë” is just a ruin, though beautiful; that there is only a shade of great Rembrandt. In one paper it was even called a cripple, though still sensual and nice. Eugene Gerasimov himself, who had managed the restoration for many years, agreed that it isn’t Rembrandt we used to know. Those who remember the before-the-tragedy painting need to overcome a psychological barrier. But future generations will take “Danaë” in some another way. People have become ever used to Venus Milossian without her hands or to Nica Samothracian without her head.”

Have I answered to your question, Mr. Holmes?

I need to turn over it in my mind, count. Thinking so, you can discharge Herostratus and even anybody. By your extraordinary version you’ve nonplussed me. Though I’m not able to object to you thoroughly, I have an intuitive disagreement. In other words, I’m a child of the classical West culture; and that, which you try to lead me to by your argumentation, looks like accusing a certainly innocent of a hardened evil.

I understand you, Holmes. The point is the words “certainly innocent”. An intuition is without controversy a powerful thing, but there is something subjective in it, so it often misleads when it’s ruled by a subjectivism. What can we say of Herostratus? – He had burned one of the seven Great Wonders – Artemis’s temple in Ephesus – and the Wonder was irretrievably lost. But since we investigating something and have touched Herostratus, we are to find out his motives. Those, for whom this name tells something, knows that he was extremely vain and decided to immortalize his name by destroying the temple. But we know it only from ancient historians’ statements. And, by the way, one of them, Plutarch, was the supreme zhrets, indeed znakhar he was, of the Oracle of Delphi. So we have started and returned to the Delphi’s Oracle ones again.

Moreover, looking on the European culture, one can find that it’s far not so harmless, as one accustomed to it can think. The ecological crisis is in full view. And there are a lot of other things. Have you noticed the associative relation between “sensual appeal – cripples – armless Venus – Nica without head” in this fragment?

???