A visible conflict unfolded in February 2026 around leadership appointments in Moscow’s theatre institutions. After Konstantin Bogomolov was named acting rector of the Moscow Art Theatre School affiliated with the Chekhov Moscow Art Theatre, employees, alumni and public figures with sharply different political views quickly spoke out against the decision. According to the publication, an alumni letter circulated without signatures, and both pro-war and anti-war actors were among the critics.
The author writes that the appointment initially appeared secure: Bogomolov came to the school, held meetings, announced plans to recruit a class and even moved some personal belongings into the office. On February 11, 2026, however, he said he was voluntarily stepping down. A version soon emerged that opponents of his appointment within the system may have influenced the outcome.
The article says theatre insiders had long discussed a possible link between control of the school and a future strengthening of Bogomolov’s position at the Chekhov Moscow Art Theatre. Sources cited by the publication named the theatre’s artistic director, Konstantin Khabensky, among those who could oppose that advance. The author connects this to Khabensky’s stronger administrative standing and the lower level of distrust toward him among parts of the ruling establishment.
The publication describes the episode as an example of how public outrage in Russia’s cultural sphere affects decisions only when it gains allies inside the power system itself. In the case of the theatre school, this version holds, a broad coalition formed against Bogomolov’s appointment, allowing the Culture Ministry’s decision to be reversed.
Against that backdrop, Sergei Bezrukov received a new post at the Gorky Moscow Art Theatre. The author calls this the third attempt in recent years to pull the theatre out of a prolonged crisis. The institution had previously been led by Tatyana Doronina, then received a “patriotic landing force” headed by Eduard Boyakov, and later came under Vladimir Kekhman’s management.
In the author’s view, choosing Bezrukov fits the broader logic of state cultural policy: he is publicly loyal to the authorities, already runs the Moscow Provincial Theatre, and has now joined the group of managers overseeing two venues in the capital. More broadly, the publication concludes, the story reflects the complex network of influence surrounding Russia’s Culture Ministry, which must navigate between several competing centers of decision-making.