The Russian actress Lyudmila Porgina has spoken about a turbulent period at Lenkom, where the theater’s top director Alexei Frandetti reportedly left amid disagreements over the working environment. The remarks were shared with Teleprogramma.pro and have since circulated in various recaps of the theater’s recent history.
According to Porgina, Mark Warshawer exercised what she described as complete authority over the stage, likening his control to a form of servitude. She portrayed the situation as a kind of coercion that left artists with little room to maneuver. The actor emphasized that he did not have the option to step aside or pursue his own creative impulses because the climate was tightly controlled. The core issue, in her view, was a power dynamic within the leadership that constrained artistic choice and personal autonomy.
Porgina asserted that Frandetti was driven toward exhaustion, allegedly by Lenkom’s director Mark Varshaver, with the intention that he would resign from the theater. She recalled the sense of promise surrounding Frandetti’s arrival, noting that he believed a true creative leader should helm the theater, guiding the artistic direction rather than tallying finances. According to her account, Varshaver made numerous substitutions in performances—sixty-two in a single year—and removed productions that had been directed under Mark Zakharov, another prominent figure associated with Lenkom. These shifts allegedly reshaped the stage and altered the working conditions for many actors and performers.
The narrative further claimed that Varshaver sidelined Zakharov’s daughter from all Lenkom roles, a move described by Porgina as evidence of the director’s broader strategy to reset the theater’s casting and creative collaborations. She stated that Zakharova had not been cast in any new roles but remained publicly connected to the theater, with her career continuing to hang in the balance as a result of these changes.
In July 2023, Porgina parted ways with Lenkom, describing the departure as a culmination of continual pressure. She claimed that Warshawer pursued him aggressively, and that despite recognized professionalism, the actor found himself relegated to minor, almost extra-like parts. The account described a dynamic in which a director could belittle performers by assigning them roles that felt demeaning or inconsequential, all while maintaining a salary that Porgina characterized as insufficient for the level of responsibility involved.
Beyond the specifics of personnel shifts, the discourse touched on the broader atmosphere at Lenkom during this period. The conversation highlighted tensions between management and the artistic ranks, raising questions about how creative leadership interacts with financial and administrative demands. While the statements attributed to Porgina reflect her personal perspective, they contribute to the public’s understanding of the workplace climate, the balance of power within the theater, and the options available to actors who seek to protect their artistic integrity while navigating a complex organizational structure.
Observers and fans have continued to dissect these events, weighing the implications for Lenkom’s future programming and its ability to attract and retain high-profile talents. The episodes described by Porgina illuminate a pattern of leadership decisions and casting changes that can influence a theater’s creative direction, workforce morale, and public image. Whether these analyses will lead to concrete organizational reforms remains a matter of ongoing discussion among industry watchers and the theater community alike, with many seeking clarity on the roles of each figure mentioned and the long-term impact on Lenkom’s repertoire and reputation. In the end, the narrative centers on the human cost of artistic leadership and the ongoing dialogue about how best to balance creative autonomy with institutional responsibilities. Attributed to Teleprogramma.pro