Цитата:
Сообщение от Gala
After all, what is the painting! There can be a lover of social realism or not be them, but the painting can not remain indifferent, and there was no longer "works" statement respected fross of despair and boredom "from the contemplation of kilometers of fields, rivers, huts ...
|
Dear Gala, if you do not cut the phrase Fross, at the beginning of which stood "in spite of the undisputed masters of individual skill, then it is not plotting to" work "against the good realistic painting of the Soviet period to which the Stozharau. I would like also to note that all these works Stozharov, based on dating, written in a period of thaw, when the canon of Stalinist social realism (from 1936 to 1954) was already significantly "eroded", has become less rigid, allowing the formalist indulgences. This is "not the" socialist realism. If the period of Stalin's personality managed to save only genius, but in the second half of the 50's - early 60's to look not so boring just emerged from talented artists, and, consequently, the specific mass of "boredom and despair" in the painting, which said Fross, significantly decreased.
Not in order of "clinging to the words", but still:-stamp the phrase "You can like or dislike socialist realism" it is desirable to use more caution. In socialist realism was a lot of nuances that this non-deployed the phrase "either ... or" do not count. Here it is necessary to clarify what work we have in mind and in what context: the ideological order, or "silent art", which many socialist realists were writing for themselves and their colleagues as vents from "imminent harm". In this gap really is a lot of good! Once again - nothing personal to the Gala - a general call ..