I've had this Nick Cave's (oops, sorry!) Tom Waits' song playing in my head for about a week now:



One of my most favorite songs of his, but I don't listen to music much now.

All started with this line this time: "If I stay here I'll rust." Again and again.

Used to be such an Iowa song for me - "The sky is red, and the world is on fire, and the corn is taller than me."

Now it's a Kyiv song, too... "And the places that I'm dreaming of, do they dream only of me?"

***

WHISTLE DOWN THE WIND

I've grown up here now
All of my life
But I dreamed
Someday I'd go

Where blue eyed girls
And red guitars and
Naked rivers flow

I'm not all I thought I'd be
I always stayed around
I've been as far as Mercy and Grand
Frozen to the ground

I can't stay here and I'm scared to leave
(Just kiss me once and then)
I'll go to hell
I might as well
Be whistlin' down the wind

The bus is at the corner
The clock's on the wall
Broken-down windmill
Ain't no wind at all

I yelled and I cursed
If I stay here I'll rust
I'm stuck like a shipwreck
Out here in the dust

The Sky is red
And the world is on fire
And the corn is taller than me

The dog is tied
To a wagon of rain
And the road is as wet as the sea

And sometimes the music from a dance
Will carry across the plains
And the places that I'm dreaming of
Do they dream only of me?

There are places where they never sleep
And the circus never ends
So I will take the Marley Bone Coach
And whistle down the wind

To recover from the election, I spent part of Tuesday night looking at other people's photos, hopping from one relatively random photo site to another, really loving it.

And then I went and made myself yet another pseudo-blog - Neeka Smetana - photography blog - to make it easier for myself and others to admire my own photos.

I can't figure out where to fit the links and other functional info, but otherwise it's all done and you're welcome to have a look.

(Another election post may or may not appear at some point later this week.)

No more surprises in the second round, I suppose.

98.70% of the vote counted.

Yanukovych - 48.64% (12,229,505 votes)
Yulia - 45.77% (11,509,152 votes)

Yanukovych's margin of victory so far: 2.87%

Against all: 4.38%

Voter turnout: 69.15%

Those "against all" votes and the no-shows look really tasty, and it's tempting to focus on imagining how they could've been Yulia's votes, etc., but that sort of thinking is such a waste of time. Yulia should've tried harder in the past five years - tried harder in many different ways - and then she would've beaten Yanukovych easily. She would've been running against a completely different candidate even, and Yanukovych would've been history - if only she had tried harder and had been more consistent.

I re-read my last night's post and felt sick because of all the silly figures of speech we are all so fond of using. An abyss, typhus, whatever. Tiger Yulia, damn it.

But, here's one more: we live in a ghetto, and if Yanukovych becomes president, the ghetto will grow a bit more overpopulated than it is now. Our everyday lives will resemble the Feb. 5 Yanukovych concert a bit more. Many things will not change at all: it will remain as scary as it is now, for example, to find oneself sick and in a hospital.

It could've been different.

According to the Central Election Committee, Yulia is 3.5% behind Yanukovych so far (74.43% of the vote counted).

***

The map of the vote looks the way it always does - one half red and one half blue, as if we indeed need to split Ukraine into two and each have the president we prefer. But it's not that simple, of course.

***

The only surprise of the first round for me was that Yulia got only 6.5% in Luhansk region - despite having Natalya Korolevskaya run things over there.

***

The only surprise of the second round so far has been that two people I have huge respect for decided not to abstain from voting for Yulia after they spent some time at the Feb. 5 Yanukovych concert on Myhailivska Sq. As I wrote earlier, you had "to get real close & hear it to really understand" why it was such a shockingly awful experience - and I shouldn't be really surprised that it had the same effect on these reasonable and determined people as it had on me - and actually I'm not. It's just that I had thought that nothing could force them to change their minds and end up "choosing typhus over cholera" or "eating the less smelly chunk of shit" - but the abyss between Yulia's event on Sofiyivska and Yanukovych's bacchanalia on Mykhailivska turned out to be too blazing to ignore.

***

Here's a video of Yanukovych supporters marching past me while Volodymyr Hryshko, an opera star, is singing a 1964 song (Beauty Queen/"Королева красоты") for them, in Russian:



***

While I was writing this and editing the video, they've counted some more votes (83.95%), and the distance between Yulia and Yanukovych has shrunk to 2.59%.

Also, Zakarpattya has become the first region with all the votes counted: Yulia won with 51.66% (279,631 votes) there, while Yanukovych got 41.55% (224,917 votes).

In the city of Sevastopol, the second location with all the votes already counted, Yanukovych has 84,35% (178,201 votes), while Yulia's are 10.38% (21,940 votes).

February 5, 2010

Sofiyivska Sq - Yulia Tymoshenko's "Prayer for Ukraine" rally:




Mykhailivska Sq - Victor Yanukovych's pop music concert:











***

A few more quick notes and pics - on Twitter. (I feel as if I'm cheating on this blog over there - feel guilty about it...)

Too tired - and too depressed - to write more about it. (Yanukovych concert was such a nightmare.)

Under a spell:

Went over to the Left Bank to visit our extended family, took these two quick photos with my iPhone (and the lovely Hipstamatic app):





We take it for granted, but the contrast between the gloomy bellies of our apartment blocks - podyezdy/paradnyye - and the cozy apartments that you escape to is just crazy...

I cursed a lot when I saw that picture of a Moscow cop detaining Lyudmila Alexeyeva (82 and dressed as Snegurochka), following the New Year's Eve opposition rally.

This profile of Alexeyeva in the New York Times is a much more adequate response to what happened than cursing - a cool way of sending something of a "fuck you" postcard to the regime. (Thanks for the link to Matthew Bown of IZO.)

Below are some of my favorite passages:

You almost feel sorry for the police officer tasked with detaining Lyudmila M. Alexeyeva as she led an unsanctioned protest on New Year’s Eve. It is not just that at 82 years of age she appears as fragile as a porcelain teacup, or that she was dressed as a Snow Maiden, complete with sparkly hat and adorable fur muff.

That is part of it. The other part is that as a young woman, Ms. Alexeyeva sat through so many K.G.B. interrogations that she rolls her eyes rather than count them. She was developing a variety of strategies to distract, deflect and otherwise irritate the authorities before the police officer’s parents were out of grade school.

Upon hearing the details of Ms. Alexeyeva’s arrest, Paul Goldberg — who wrote with her “The Thaw Generation: Coming of Age in the Post-Stalin Era,” her memoir of life as a dissident — started to laugh. “They should actually print out pictures of Lyudmila Alexeyeva and hand them out to all the law enforcement authorities with a note saying ‘Do not arrest this person,’ ” said Mr. Goldberg, now an editor in Washington. “It is not fun to tangle with this person. She will make you feel like dirt, and she will not do it gratuitously. She will do it because you are dirt.”

[...]

Everyone knew the sentence for crimes against the state: seven years in a penal camp and five years in exile. On her way into K.G.B. headquarters, Ms. Alexeyeva would stop to buy a ham sandwich, an éclair and an orange. These were delicacies in the 1970s, even for the investigator, who was headed for a lunch of gray cutlets. Halfway through, Ms. Alexeyeva would unwrap her lunch and lay it out on the table.

“They reacted very nervously when they started to smell ham,” she said with a sweet smile. “Then I would start eating the orange, and the aroma would start dissipating through the room.” The effect was reliably hypnotic.

“That’s how I amused myself,” she said. “It was a way to play on his nerves.”

[...]

Kariye:

Eyüp Sultan:

Gülhane:

Yulia is closer than ever to becoming president - and our sissy boys are getting out of control. Or has it always been like this?

Here's what Yanukovych said (UKR) about Tymoshenko a few days ago in Kharkiv, as he refused to confront her in live TV debates:

They tell me it's pointless to argue with a woman - it's wrong, I don't agree with it. More than anything else, I regard her as prime minister, and she should take responsibility for her every word. And if she's a woman, then she must go to the kitchen and show off her whims there.

And here's what writer Oles Buzyna wrote about Tymoshenko in Rinat Akhmetov's Segodnya newspaper:

The way Yulia Vladimirovna aspires to become president is similar to how a woman twice divorced aspires to re-marry.

At our polling station, the turnout was 67.63% yesterday - about 1% higher than nationwide.

533 votes were cast, and 255 ballots (32.37%) were left untouched.

Of these 533 ballots, three (0.56%) were deemed invalid.

149 (27.95%) of my neighbors have voted for Tymoshenko;

106 (19.88%) - for Tihipko;

105 (19.69%) - for Yanukovych;

40 (7.50%) - for Yatsenyuk;

36 (6.75%) - for Yushchenko;

35 (6.56%) - for Hrytsenko;

24 (4.50%) - for Symonenko;

11 (2.06%) - for Lytvyn;

9 (1.68%) - against them all;

7 (1.31%) - for Tyahnybok;

2 (0.37%) - for Kostenko and Ratushnyak;

1 (0.18%) - for Bogoslovka, Brodsky, Moroz, Protyvsikh;

0 - for Pabat, Ryabokon, Suprun.

We're back home in Kyiv. Went out for drinks in the evening, picked up a copy of Kyiv Post, read this beautifully idiotic sophomoric editorial endorsement of Serhiy Tihipko.

Very amusing. Or not. Depends on what you expect from KP.

But definitely a good illustration of how crazy and pathetic things are here on the eve of the election, and how desperate we are.

Here's what they have to say about the candidate they seem to be endorsing:

[...] Like many of his opponents, he is also a product of the Soviet era as well as the corrupt post-Soviet era of ex-president Leonid Kuchma. He rubbed shoulders with greedy oligarchs, even helping them build one of Ukraine’s largest banks during the crony capitalist 1990s. He violated basic conflict of interest rules as the head of the National Bank of Ukraine while building up a personal banking fortune. Tigipko also has no clear team or power base in parliament to rely upon.

Most troubling, he is tainted by his role as campaign manager in the 2004 presidential election campaign of Yanukovych, the front-runner in the current election. To his credit, Tigipko resigned after the fraudulent second round. He now admits that vote fraud occurred, but insists that both sides were to blame and downplays the extent of falsification in favor of Yanukovych. Moreover, Tigipko has yet to come clean with what he knows about these horrible crimes and his possible involvement in them.

Will he help solve a long list of other major crimes that continue to haunt this country, such as the murder of opposition politicians and journalists, unfair privatizations, Yushchenko’s poisoning and dozens of others? This answer is also unclear. [...]

How lovely.

But -

[...] Despite these reservations, we find enough to like about Tigipko to endorse him. [...]

The rest of the editorial is about "hope" and "gamble" - and about the lesser evil, of course (yes, again):

[...] Tigipko is the lesser of the 18 evils in this vote, especially if he is capable of resolving differences among warring factions and convincing the nation’s politicians to put Ukraine’s interests ahead of their own.

Tihipko, let me remind you, "has no clear team or power base in parliament to rely upon," according to allegedly the same folks who wrote the optimistic concluding sentence above.

This disclaimer seems to be worth quoting, too - I find it very moving somehow:

[...] Before we go into our choice and reasoning, we want to make it clear that this endorsement solely represents the opinion of the editorial staff of the Kyiv Post. Our view is independent of publisher Mohammad Zahoor, who wants it made clear publicly that he is a foreign businessman who does not take sides with any politician in the presidential race. So any fault in logic is our own. [...]

And - there's not a single mention of Russia in this piece, which is kind of refreshing: I'm so tired of reading all the Russocentric commentary on Ukraine in the English-language media.

***

All I can say about Tihipko is that he should have run for president in 2004, instead of Yanukovych. In 2010, he is five years late.

And I've also heard that he is too sensitive about his receding hairline - but this is irrelevant, I know.

Amazing that the election is five days away and we're sitting here in Istanbul, enjoying the luxury of not having to look at their idiotic campaign ads every step we make and not having to listen to their crap on Savik Shuster's show every night.

We do receive the most essential news from back home regularly, though: today, we've learned that they are still not cleaning away the snow in Kyiv, and yesterday we saw enough links to this FT editorial to make us click on it today and read it.

Below is the final paragraph:

[...] So, whom to back in Sunday’s first round and next month’s run-off? Given the candidates’ shortcomings, voters must focus on what is important. The key now is political stability. Only a stable Ukraine can achieve economic reform and recovery. Ms Tymoshenko is the polar opposite of a stabilising force. Mr Yanukovich, for all his manifest faults, may prove the lesser evil. Pity Ukraine that it has come to this.

My reaction to the piece is a sigh and an "oh..." - and then this: No way am I going to vote for "the lesser evil" - or for Yanukovych in any other disguise. The lesser evil always turns into the bigger evil in Ukraine, and Yanukovych sucks in general. And Tymoshenko, for all her faults, isn't Petro Symonenko, either - the way Symonenko was in 1999, that is, when so many people voted for Kuchma as "the lesser evil"...

It's hard to avoid mixing some unmixable things when using such a cursory approach to Ukrainian politics as mine is now: Kyiv used to be cleaner under Kuchma; Gongadze disappeared under Kuchma; Yushchenko has failed to solve the Gongadze case; streets might be cleaner under someone else than the current folks, but none of them are going to do anything about the Gongadze case.

Back to square one: whatever.

And I'm now late for breakfast, too: screw them all.