Vladimir Devyatov, a celebrated Russian folk artist, addressed a growing debate among colleagues who left the country, saying that any possible return would require public repentance. He spoke about the issue in a recent interview, highlighting how the path back for cultural figures is shaped by perceived loyalty to the homeland and by responsibility to Russia’s artistic community.
“If they want to return, you have to repent,” he said. “But I do not see what there is to repent for in their actions. How can you be a national artist of Russia and then call the country muck?” The pointed remark captured the tension between dissent and national pride, illustrating how public statements about homeland can define an artist’s standing within Russia.
He added that many artists who left Russia began to insult their homeland, a stance he regards as unacceptable even when there are other views. The discussion raised questions about how far artistic freedom can go before it strains national identity.
Devyatov also stated that Russian cultural figures abroad often face significant hurdles to success. He noted that the local market is not always ready to accept them, with rare exceptions proving to be difficult to find in practice. The point underscored the difficulties of establishing artistic credibility outside the home country.
On March 20, Vitaly Milonov, a Duma deputy, proposed tightening the employment conditions for artists who leave Russia during 2022 to 2025. The proposal reflects a political stance that links cultural participation to national loyalty and economic policy.
Earlier, composer Alexander Zatsepin condemned the artists who left Russia after the military operation in Ukraine. He told Russians who decided to depart permanently that they should remain in Russia to help grow the country’s musical life through their work and collaboration at home.
Milonov had previously described Ukraine supporters as behaving in a self-defeating way, a sharp remark that triggered intense public debate about loyalty and artistic responsibility. The exchange highlights how cultural figures can become flashpoints in broader political conversations during times of regional conflict and social strain.