In a development that drew cautious attention from cultural observers, the Russian Ministry of Culture sent a formal letter to the Ministry of Justice asking for an assessment of writer Anna Starobinets’s professional activities. The move followed a spirited push from supporters of the People’s Call movement, who argued in late September that the writer’s body of work reflected an anti-Russian sentiment. Activists claimed that by continuing to publish and engage with audiences abroad, the author could be seen as out of step with national cultural priorities and the current public discourse on national identity. The ministry’s decision appeared to be a procedural step, designed to review her public output within the existing oversight framework, rather than a direct accusation. Observers note that such measures are uncommon but not unheard of in a climate where cultural figures face scrutiny when their movements or statements are perceived to diverge from the government’s messaging. The correspondence underscores the government’s interest in watching high-profile literary figures and other artists as part of ongoing governance in this sensitive area.
Activists from the People’s Call movement had urged the authorities to deprive Starobinets of royalties in Russia, arguing that the writer’s stance and choices warranted such a response. They pointed to her relocation to Georgia after the start of Russia’s military operation and contended that this signaled disengagement from national cultural priorities. The demand rose to the forefront at the end of September, when social activists pressed for policy actions meant to discourage what they described as anti-Russian sentiment within the literary world. Supporters of the call argued that royalties tied to domestic circulation were a lever to reinforce state-aligned values in culture. Critics, however, warned of a chilling effect that could restrict creative work and curb artistic mobility. The episode highlights the ongoing tension between creative freedom and perceived loyalty to the state that continues to shape Russia’s cultural landscape.
It was announced that the ministry of culture decided to forward the matter to the Ministry of Justice for evaluation of Starobinets’s activities under the foreign agents framework. Officials indicated that the inquiry would examine public statements, international engagements, and associations that might have implications under the foreign agents law. Observers emphasized that the process would rely on existing regulatory channels and focus on how a writer’s professional activity could intersect with national security concerns. The development reflects a broader pattern in which cultural figures are assessed for alignment with state expectations in the area of information and cultural influence, especially as authorities tighten oversight over activities deemed to affect public order and national cohesion.
Parallel to these developments, public discussion extended to the performing arts. In Volgograd, a show by comedian Guram Demidov was canceled after complaints by activists from the Forty Sorokov organization, with earlier notices of a cancellation in Samara. Sources suggested the cancellations were tied to campaigns arguing that a joke about Jesus Christ and the prices of wine at a well-known department store crossed lines of religious sensitivity and social tolerance. The comedian faced accusations of publicly mocking the Lord Jesus Christ and insulting people of Russian nationality. Organizers cited safety and audience concerns, while supporters argued that the incidents highlighted a climate of self-censorship that could stifle creative expression in regional venues.
Earlier reports indicated that the Federal Tax Service again blocked the accounts of the Little Big frontman. The episode added another layer to the controversy, illustrating how financial actions by state agencies intersect with the careers of public figures who navigate a charged public arena. Analysts noted that such measures can influence how audiences and media respond to controversial statements and performances. The sequence shows how art, law, and public sentiment intersect in contemporary Russia, shaping careers and public discourse. It also underscores the pressure points in a climate where culture, law, and politics collide repeatedly.