The
movie Forgive Me, Sergei raised a lot
of questions for me when I watched it.
For those who are familiar with Sergei Kourdakov’s life, you may have
heard or read there were parts of the movie that criticized Sergei’s book, The Persecutor. The movie ended up convincing the director,
and many viewers, that Sergei’s story was a lie. From what I understand, this wasn’t the
original intention of the movie, but it was the outcome. And the damage is done.
This
film motivated me to write A Rose for
Sergei. I wanted to offer a
different point of view and try to show you that maybe…just maybe, the movie
got some of Sergei’s story wrong. How
easy it is to talk negatively about someone who is no longer here. How easy it is to think that no one would
care if you did.
I
recently talked with an American woman who had lived in the Soviet Union in the
1980’s. When I was introduced, my host
mentioned I wrote a book about a Soviet defector. The conversation became very interesting at
that point. I asked the woman what was
the one thing that stood out the most
in her mind about having lived in Russia.
“The Russians controlled the outcome of everything,” was her candid
response, “Americans saw only what they wanted us to see.” I wasn’t intending to monopolize the
conversation, but her comment made me want to learn more. “I have a question,” I asked. “So, if a film maker made a movie in Russia,
would the outcome of that movie be controlled?”
Her answer was yes.
In the
movie Forgive Me, Sergei there are
scenes in Russia where people were directly asked about Sergei Kourdakov. In each case, the answer was the same, “No, I
don’t believe that happened. That never
happened.”
Why am I
not surprised by their answers?
As the producer of the documentary film, Forgive Me Sergei, who put my name, face and reputation on the line by moving forward with production after discovering discrepancy after discrepancy inside and outside of Russia -- and after raising most of the film's seed money from Evangelicals and Episcopalians in my hometown via enthusiastic talks about my exciting research and passion for the story, I can assure you that I cared VERY much what people would think about the outcome of the research shown in the film. In the year 2000, no one controlled me, the director, or the Russians we interviewed. And, sharing your Cold War mentality that the story was absolutely true and that the Russian government was omnipresent, I was suspicious nearly the entire time I was in Russia until a particular discrepancy proved to me that Sergei lied. The poor Russian lady in Vladivostok who wanted to sell me Nutrisystem . . . .I was so rude to her :-( No one could have been more conspiracy-minded than I was. - Caroline Walker
ReplyDeleteCaroline, I know years of research went into the making of your movie. I respect all the time and effort you put forth. I bought your movie and watched it several times. Your interviews with those in Canada, and the detective who investigated Sergei’s death in California, were very informative. Nevertheless, the parts filmed in Russia left me skeptical. I believe a documentary film should cover all sides of the story; therefore I wish you had continued your research and journey to Washington D.C. If you had talked with anyone in the intelligence field, the outcome of your movie might have been different. All personnel who came in contact with Sergei Kourdakov knew he had been thoroughly investigated by the U.S. Government. If he had been lying about his past, it would have been uncovered years ago.
Delete(Note: These comments are also posted on my November 12, 2015 blog entry. I did not want them to be missed in this comment section.)
Dear Kolleen,
ReplyDeleteYou write about a person "who had lived in the Soviet Union in the 1980’s". Caroline, while investigating for her (wonderful) documentary, went to the Russian Federation in the 1990. Different states (USSR - Russia), different political and economical models (socialism - democracy and market economy...) so you just cannot compare. I lived in Russia in 1990 and people there suffered from deep economical crisis, but they were absolutely free and could meet whenever they wanted and say whatever they wanted. So the Russian interviews from Forgive Me, Sergei, unfortunately (for Sergei) sound very true and their testimonies are sincere.
Thank you for your comment. I do agree with you that the testimonies from the Russians who were interviewed sound very true and sincere. And yes, we are talking about different times and states. Those interviewed, however, are from the time and state when life wasn’t so free. A reader in the intelligence field commented that even today “it would be bad for their health” (meaning the Russian interviewees) to discuss a KGB defector on film.
DeleteI know there are others with differing opinions, such as yours, but for me I’m still skeptical about the interviews. The testimony from Sergei’s “brother” in the documentary film really surprised me because Sergei had informed everyone in the U.S. that his brother was deceased. During the interview you can even hear a voice “off camera” say that maybe it’s the wrong Sergei. If this was Sergei’s brother, there was no mention that the two brothers hadn’t had any contact since Sergei was a young boy. As defectors had zero exposure in USSR media, this person would indeed know nothing about Sergei Kourdakov’s life.
There is a part in my book where Sergei tells me one of the perks of working for the KGB. It is one of the most telling chapters in A Rose for Sergei.