Museum in the swamp

[Евгений]

Announcing the establishment of the State Museum in Moscow, the world's contemporary art at the NCCA Minister of Culture Mr. Alexander Avdeev, probably felt like Santa Claus. He did fabulous gift to the Russians and had the right to count on the tears of gratitude and applause, cries of delight. But the special effects did not work. Artists and critics welcomed the news and sour, with skepticism and indifference.

- Realized it, ept,! We had at least twenty years ago such a museum open. Then, and altruists are willing to put lives on the implementation of this idea, and generous donors, collectors. Artists and our foreign routinely donated their works. And the West, at that time still an ally and friend, eagerly rushed to help. Think of the ease with which Peter was then the Museum Ludwig. Today, nothing like this. Moreover, the very theme of the new museum, grimy in discussions and pretty boring, spoiled. Increasingly referred to the futility of such a museum in an era when the main territory of art became the Internet, mobile communications, as well as streets, fences and discos.

But it's not just that. Configuration of artistic life in Russia does not imply the existence of such a museum. At the dawn of the avant-garde contemporary art museum (or something similar in meaning and function), we have existed, but was later closed. Forever. In his absence has increased by genre-specific characteristics of the species "nemuzeynoe" art that does not controvert with museum rules, approaches and conventions, but in general they do not recognize. Or rather, do not know. How, for example, in the circumstances of the museum to preserve and exhibit izgazhennye-eaten coat Irina Nakhova, stinking rags with biological waste Herman Vinogradov, aggressive microbes, greedily eating everything in sight in the objects of Sergei Africa? These artists without a second thought about the fate of the museum's creation, and installation of fire and water with Tarasova, with the liquid mud at the Champs Gutova with a leaky oil and electric shocks from Trushevsky? All this filth is not something that the museum shelves - the garbage does not deserve. It is dangerous to life. And harmful in terms of moral education. Some think so almost all of our museum workers. The face of this mindless artistic material, they continue to classify manic and collect art according to routine academic triad painting, sculpture, graphics. At that time, as many of our critics, scientists still close the contemporary art of pointillism and Tachisme. Here are some of these experts and wanted to rob Peter Avdeev and his deputy Paul Khoroshilov, who said as the first expansion of the theme that the ministry immediately ready to buy the creation of brothers Jake and Dinos Chapman and Damien Hirst.

My first thought - "Avdeev and Khoroshilov do not know what they say." - Can not be taken into account, because the ministerial people are not merely talking to the wind. They are preparing for presentations and study materials. Consequently, the leaders of our culture acquainted with sliced cows and sharks, as well as with bare pedofilicheskimi mutants and monsters of the British avant-garde provocateurs. But if so, and we are not dealing with a slip of the tongue, but with a deliberate decision, it must be admitted that Mr. Avdeev has exceptional importance of the decision - not much, not enough - an adjustment to Russia's officialdom obscheideologicheskogo course aimed at today's construction of a conservative utopia under title "Holy Russia."

True, in fundamentalist states such as Iran, there are museums of modern art. With collections of Western avant-garde, from Duchamp and Warhol. They got ayyatolam from the former shah's regime. They suffer. Reluctantly teeth. But certainly not swell the Chapman brothers' creations. And we in Russia from the former times almost nothing except inherited permeated every pore of society stereotype of hostility to the modern creativity. In faith, that there we have it work as a pathetic copy of the foreign and avant-garde, is if Russia - not the West, then without the modern art of our society calmly cost. Health will be. Remember the thesis that the "anti" is the real identity of our art of the twentieth century. This theory is shared by the light of today's Russia's head of critical thought. On the current ideological conjuncture in Russia can be judged not only by fire "horugvenostsev" burning in front of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior under the mournful lowing of psalms book of secular authors, and not only on the prosecutor's office claims the ultra-right nationalist-patriotic "People's Cathedral, whose activists call for the imposition of church censorship for theatrical productions and exhibitions. Here, for example, a formal science-how in the field of cultural policy. The newly appointed director of the Tretyakov Gallery Irina Lebedeva in one of the first interview that is now going to consult with priests on the composition of future exhibitions of contemporary art.

- "Tell me, Father, how pleasing to God Dmitry Tsvetkov installation for the exhibition" is not a toy. "Russian artist, baptized, so, if you please, spravochka, but in the product represented American dolls Barbie and Ken?

- God forbid you, ma'am, this shameful display Orthodox! Let urgent changes to the dolls.

It is possible that at the Tretyakov Gallery will soon open the first Orthodox Consultation on the admission of works of art for public display. And suddenly this charity background chuck Lebedeva Paul Khoroshilov announces the purchase of Chapman!

External logic and not limit antikonyunkturnost this statement sent to the idea's opponents in the mainstream searches selfish reasons and motives of the ministerial decision. Some critics have suggested the possible collusion of officials with the owners of galleries Vladimir Ovcharenko and Gary Tatintsyanom, who attended the presentation of the project and which, of course, volunteered to become intermediaries in the procurement. Anything can happen. But no matter how corrupt purposes does not substantiate this new window into the civilized world, most importantly, that the stated desire to hack. De facto and between the lines and gentlemen Avdeev Khoroshilov gave us to understand that they believe the situation in Russia with art and artistic development of the society, intolerable, impossible, requiring a breakthrough and change. And not in the direction of finding separate from all the way "spiritual take-off, and toward integration with its neighbors and partners.

For, indeed, it is appropriate to say "Thank God!".

At the same time, the draft of the new museum had been made to clarify the right to limit the level of his official position. The museum will be built and, perhaps, even a very spacious. But where? Not a vacant lot across from the Kremlin on the Marsh area, not at the site of the demolished hotel "Russia" is not in the closed factory "Red October", at last, near the Central House of Artists, Tretyakov Gallery, which would be very logical, but for the stables and warehouses in the Moscow Zoo tiny alley that not everyone will find a Muscovite. I would say that with all other input is a purely ideological decision. Put away from the center, so that from the Kremlin and the main thoroughfares of the capital would not be seen. In Goat swamp. Everyone, including Mr. Avdeev, it is clear that the zoological street never (at least for safety reasons) not vedut tuples Medvedev, Putin, Obama or Sarkozy. That is, the new museum, our Russia "Pompidou Center", as it was called at the presentation of future owners, managers, NCCA, will never bear the name of the President, receives his auspices, for the simple reason that the President have never visited. And the mayor of Moscow - also did not visit. And all the other senior leaders, who in their own countries are accustomed to highlight and promote their contemporary art, too, will not be able to reach it. But, God be with them, with supervisors. At the Zoological Park Street can not be any tourist bus. No place. And, actually, why the tourists to watch Chapman? Let them go to the Kremlin, the Tretyakov Gallery.

So, for whom, for what and why, then, created this museum?

I think, to clear professional conscience and freedom from cultural inferiority complex, that is to treat those diseases which are now in our country suffer from very few people. These problems are experienced, above all, representatives of the generation which experienced the full measure of his ideological press the Soviet regime, which survived the associated humiliation and deprivation, and was really happy to get rid of. Museum of Contemporary Art is in the range of those things and institutions, which gentlemen Avdeev and Khoroshilov were deprived, that they, as representatives of the Soviet esteblishmenta, perhaps even been forced to condemn and not to attend. A secret interest and considers it necessary and useful. And now, contrary to the general ideological trends of recent years, these executives, as amended and brought up trends Perestroika, finally got the key authority in his field, allow themselves the luxury to announce the creation of a museum of modern art as a belated realization of their inner, personal desires. Anyway, a huge thanks to them for that. And what really get out of this venture depends not on Avdeev and Khoroshilova, and, above all, from us to you.
--------------------------------------
Andrei Erofeev ..

for "ArtChronika"
From the site A. Erofeev http://www.aerofeev.ru/content/view/245/56/