Ag-ha! A dabbler, Moishe - clever! Amateur first-Moshe, it is not useful, waited until the older will vote! So, let's continue.
A. Repetition - Practice makes perfect. "Kharlamov" - definitely not Kharlamov. And talking about.
Two. "Tales". Most likely - not a legend, and certainly not in 1865. (At this
time, Fyodor Ilyich sat tight in Tbilisi, with the Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich, Viceroy of the Caucasus). What the city is depicted? What kind of characters? Signature - a work not earlier than the last third of 1870 (after his departure for Vienna).
Three. "Brad." The authorship is doubtful, although the water - a good, competent. Bredovs - much less, candy, artificial, and in shape, and color. Even when he wrote, mounted landscapes, still seemed theatrical backdrops painted to Schiller, "thieves" ...
4. Bakalovich-pere - probably true, but Bakalovich-fils makes credit-e-epko rep scratching ...
Five. A.O.Orlovsky, "The Watch". Not "The Watch" and "The ambush", and in general - no typological or stylistically to the work of Orlovsky did not like. And - later. Academic art not before the middle of the XIX. But the picture - the author does not zadurok.
6. "Semiradsky." Then just two questions: why "Semiradsky" and
why "Hephaestus." Stoker, blacksmith, blacksmith - maybe, but not Hephaestus once. And do not Semiradsky - also never.
A suivre (in the sense - to be continued).
|