I bet they all understood and heard everything. All seven - three of those that voted for Orlova, and those four who chose Belyaeva, - act in their right mind and good memory. In the jury there was a time to discuss the situation. Behind the wall is already assembled and waiting for the audience, everything was ready for the ceremony, but the founder delayed the opening of the show, deliberately giving the jury a half hour to full-time discussion. A debate has not happened. Frenchman Jean-Hubert Martin began the discussion. He gently asked "not to push. Founder delicately withdrew. Other Russian month ago ran out of arguments, their warm affection or distaste for the scandalous nominee repeatedly exceeded the power of words. Only two - a German and an American - had firmly harvested opinion. They decided on the spot, while defiantly does not want to listen and speak. We sat and exchanged empty replicas, as in the queue to the dentist. But it knew that the solution depends on their choice of prizes. Why are these two recognized foreign curator voted Belyaeva? There's little doubt - they are experienced and prudent professional, do not make any hasty moves at random, and, of course, incorruptible and not subject to lobbying pressures. Those who know Russian art. I think that in this option (I would like to even say - call) a German and an American home is hidden intrigue Prize this year, and manifested a new attitude toward us and our art existing in the civilized world. I repeat - their choice was dumb, dumb. So I can build only on the assumption that the real motives and I beg your pardon, Valerie and Friedhelm, if I do not guess their way of thinking. So, I took the meaning of their messages read: "You, gentlemen, good, in Russia today - nobody. Losers. You are not representative of the spirit and character of this country. A Belyaev just reprezentativen. In Russia you do not understand, but through Belyaeva very even all becomes clear. This is a great, visual symptom. Yes, it is disgusting, from his sick revenge statements, from the paintings is the gold interior, this is a sweet-sour retrospective kitsch, it manifests resemble Fascist leaflets, his friends, mentors generally terrible people. But this is the new Russia. " - "How did you get that idea? - Would ask me, they want me pootkrovennichat. - And in general, that the policy of double standards? At home in Germany and the U.S. for anything would I bet this is not supported. - "Did not you yourself, Russian, taught us to think that better and brighter you seen the worst, lowest, and terrible, but to their very high and sophisticated offering to treat with suspicion and alienation?"
Indeed, several decades we have pillars in the minds of foreigners the idea that the modern (international understanding) Art in Russia - an exotic flower, which is included from outside and weakly bound to the local soil. It was born here and played like any citrus in greenhouses at Norilsk. Introduced the open air, and all - died. And now flesh and blood of local and public art employs powerful illustration of the political discourse. When the direct order, and when and on a whim. It is rustic, pryamolineynoplakatno, durnovkusno and mediocre form. However, it concealed the real vanguard of energy that can change the nature, civilization and man himself. Raise the achievement and ceremoniously lowered into the grave. Who is not only admired Stalinism! Komar and Melamid, Groys, TAR, Misiano and followed by most of the leading domestic critics and nonconformists. Yes, in the Soviet "underground" nests scattered single, yes, worked in exile, hundreds of Russian artists, but the real language of Russia's society in the Soviet period was Socialist Realism. Incidentally, this idea met with resistance. But it is called selling.
Another contribution of conceptualism in the history of Russia's art has become a description of social realism, by analogy with the artistic languages of primitive society. That is, as a form of communication of beliefs, rites and customs of savages. Not so important "plastic values" of such art, its innovativeness, personal view of the world, individual style, how typical, generic features, which it in itself accumulates. Picasso, the Surrealists, Levi-Strauss valued "wild" art of not less than modernism, and this passion laid the foundation of many collections and museums in the modern world. Museums' social realism does not exist. None snob with perverted tastes not occurred to savor the aesthetic features of this art. It is widely perceived as the ugliness and squalor. As an exemplary example of ugliness. But an increasing number of people in the civilized world, not only specialists are inclined to equate this disgrace to the concept of Russia ". Dostoevsky, Kandinsky - it was once. And the present Russianness, the current national identity of society, formatted the Soviet system, embodied in this disgrace. As the Germans - a concentration camp, so we - the horrors of socialist realism. And how much Germany would neither repent nor tried to convince the world in its transformation, with her forever label Auschwitz. Approximately the same is obtained now and in Russia with socialist realism. Therefore, our colleagues from the jury remained silent, smiled politely, looking at Gutova, Vrubel or Markovnikov. They say all good, but not necessarily, not typical, is not recognizable. But Belyaev - Wow! Present. Russian. Stalinist.
http://artchronika.ru/item.asp?id=153