Thank you, Alexander! I will definitely pass on your greetings to Boris Petrovich. And I hope all your wishes come true!
But back to our grounds.
It is interesting how different look and act on the eyes monochrome and color reliefs. From the very first glance, once hanging on the wall of the work falls into our field of vision, monochrome landscape reads the eye as a sculptural form, and polychrome - a picturesque spot, on closer inspection has a volume. That is, it appears that the eye perceives color first, and then the shape of the object (in my sense is always the case, even though I do not know what psychologists say about it).
Probably why I am so attracted to monochrome reliefs: nothing prevents follow the logic of a linear pattern, the volume and enjoy the game of shadows, to observe the behavior of the material - the surface topography is porous and friable, the dense and smooth as glazed ceramics.
However, dyed or polychrome these studies can not be named. Rather, it is tinted reliefs.
Here's the strange thing: as you know, all the ancient and medieval sculpture and had a rather vivid coloring. All those beautiful friezes, statues and sarcophagi, all committed by the ancient forms, which are strongly associated in our minds with a strong and proud splendor of marble, were scrappy as popular prints. I think that the sculpture was originally started to paint in order to achieve maximum similarity with reality, read - the original prototype. And since all the earlier sculptures had ritual significance, then the need for its coloring is quite obvious. From this we can infer that the work, conceived and executed in a clean stone appeared when people first realized the intrinsic value of art. Art for art's sake. Art as a means of expression. That's where the centuries-old began the search for new forms which have meant that as a "modern art" we have today.
|