In the USSR in the 30s inexperienced and often poorly educated audience, unaccustomed to the soul, so to speak, work, offered artless formula all that clear - bad and not worth breaking my head over this.
We are now reaping the fruit - any example, painting beyond simple nature of assimilation mass audience is not clear.
Whether the case has arisen on the basis of clear literary mass public art classicism, romanticism, the Wanderers, the symbolism - all adults on the ideas of poets and philosophers, writers and critics.
But the vanguard came from the depths of the painting itself, it is, of course, understand that the public is more complicated.
That painting can describe - to get there, aesthetic treatise or essay, as there is already something being said.
But the avant-garde is a beautiful article, auxiliary impervious to some text, I think.
True, the avant-garde artists themselves justified in their writings their directions in theory, but so complex and require a new theme and terminology appropriate - and also challenging and new.
Hence, it is clear, and the reluctance to read it all - nor Malevich or Kandinsky or Filonov.
And it is written for more than the artists themselves to the public.
A lack of understanding of modern painting porazhdaet situation where the viewer and the creator of one time speak different languages, we often have the opportunity to watch and on the forum.
So is it worth forum turned into an educational program?
Participants can come here, proudly exhibited in their subjects masterpieces of world art as "pictures that did not like" to catch up first at home, read some books?
What we get as a result of the forum, if we
a) To immediately lectures for beginners or
b) respond to nerve like this theme?
Nothing good, I think.
|