The art of the Soviet period

[Игорь Гурьев]

The art of the Soviet period

Sometimes the art of the Soviet period, mistakenly identified with socialist realism.
This, of course, the wrong approach, our approach is not postmodern.

Socialist Realism was the official doctrine of the Soviet Union, he proposed "a realistic depiction of reality in its revolutionary development."
Such a definition is easier to make some novels ("Virgin Soil Upturned", for example) - they show a "revolutionary development" reality.
In the painting to show the "development" of something hard enough - because at least one-stage as the main qualities of this art form.
Well, "The Defense of Petrograd" Deineka.
It is socialist realism? At first glance, like so: peasants have to defend Petrograd from the hero of World War Yudenich.
But the picture of this was written before the rise of the term "socialist realism."
Image of Soviet leaders - is, of course, socialist realism, as they developed a revolutionary reality.
In reality, the main task of socialist realism was the task of propaganda: to show "success" of the USSR, to exalt the "heroes of labor," show "heroic work" and "heroism" of the military struggle, the episodes of the revolution and civil war, and exalt every bosses and so on.
In landscape painting Socialist Realism was considered an image of industrial plants, hydroelectric plants, the Lenin Mausoleum, tractors in the field and so on.
Thinking about what percentage of the more or less prominent Soviet artists fit into the concept of "socialist realism" and sometimes you get up in a deadlock.
That is to take at least the same Kukryniksov. They have several "thematic" paintings ("Tanya", "End", "Escape from Novgorod fascists"), which is quite a socialist realism. However, in his landscape painting, they continued the tradition of the "Union of Russian Artists" and, in general, any socialist realism in their lyrical landscape was not.
That is pure, wholly socialist realist call, perhaps, and one can not. That "sotsrealitichnogo" to "Walk in Abramtsevo" B. Johansson, author of "Communist Interrogation"?
The fact that all the socialist realist artists was another side - that is understandable.
Two of these studies (Johanson and Kukryniksy) we still enough: thematic paintings were written to order, and landscapes - "for himself."
There are, however, more complex cases. For example, Sergei Gerasimov, Arkady seams.
Gerasimov - basically a master of landscape painting, impressionism is tremulous, very impressive. There he and "Lenin delegates" - the picture propaganda, quite suitable for the canons of socialist realism. But "Kutuzov at Borodino" - this is a common pattern in the style of the late 19th century, and Socialist Realism is nothing there.
It is the same with the formation. Frankly propagandistic paintings had a one-two and a handful (maybe except that "They are going to the polls"). Layers does not embellish the life of the Russian countryside, but do not criticize. He just found the stories that would suit him and his bosses.
Some artists have started before the revolution (Baksheev, for example) do not undergone any evolution in the direction of socialist realism.
Byalynitsky-Birula wrote "Lenin Hills" - this fits the propaganda. But he wrote, this manor house, just like all the rest of its manor house, in the same style!
Artists "severe style" with a social realism, around the end of 1950, it is left him, focusing everyone on the subject.
In short, socialist realism - is quantitatively not even much of Soviet Art, and qualitatively - there and say nothing.
While, for example, the same "Interrogation of Communists" is written just great!

[artcol]

Сообщение от Igor Guryev

art of the Soviet period

Sometimes the art of the Soviet period, mistakenly identified with socialist realism.
This, of course, the wrong approach, our approach is not postmodern.

Socialist Realism was the official doctrine of the Soviet Union, he proposed "a realistic depiction of reality in its revolutionary development."
Such a definition is easier to make some novels ("Virgin Soil Upturned", for example) - they show a "revolutionary development" reality.
In the painting to show the "development" of something hard enough - because at least one-stage as the main qualities of this art form.
Well, "The Defense of Petrograd" Deineka.
It is socialist realism? At first glance, like so: peasants have to defend Petrograd from the hero of World War Yudenich.
But the picture of this was written before the rise of the term "socialist realism."
Image of Soviet leaders - is, of course, socialist realism, as they developed a revolutionary reality.
In reality, the main task of socialist realism was the task of propaganda: to show "success" of the USSR, to exalt the "heroes of labor," show "heroic work" and "heroism" of the military struggle, the episodes of the revolution and civil war, and exalt every bosses and so on.
In landscape painting Socialist Realism was considered an image of industrial plants, hydroelectric plants, the Lenin Mausoleum, tractors in the field and so on.
Thinking about what percentage of the more or less prominent Soviet artists fit into the concept of "socialist realism" and sometimes you get up in a deadlock.
That is to take at least the same Kukryniksov. They have several "thematic" paintings ("Tanya", "End", "Escape from Novgorod fascists"), which is quite a socialist realism. However, in his landscape painting, they continued the tradition of the "Union of Russian Artists" and, in general, any socialist realism in their lyrical landscape was not.
That is pure, wholly socialist realist call, perhaps, and one can not. That "sotsrealitichnogo" to "Walk in Abramtsevo" B. Johansson, author of "Communist Interrogation"?
The fact that all the socialist realist artists was another side - that is understandable.
Two of these studies (Johanson and Kukryniksy) we still enough: thematic paintings were written to order, and landscapes - "for himself."
There are, however, more complex cases. For example, Sergei Gerasimov, Arkady seams.
Gerasimov - basically a master of landscape painting, impressionism is tremulous, very impressive. There he and "Lenin delegates" - the picture propaganda, quite suitable for the canons of socialist realism. But "Kutuzov at Borodino" - this is a common pattern in the style of the late 19th century, and Socialist Realism is nothing there.
It is the same with the formation. Frankly propagandistic paintings had a one-two and a handful (maybe except that "They are going to the polls"). Layers does not embellish the life of the Russian countryside, but do not criticize. He just found the stories that would suit him and his bosses.
Some artists have started before the revolution (Baksheev, for example) do not undergone any evolution in the direction of socialist realism.
Byalynitsky-Birula wrote "Lenin Hills" - this fits the propaganda. But he wrote, this manor house, just like all the rest of its manor house, in the same style!
Artists "severe style" with a social realism, around the end of 1950, it is left him, focusing everyone on the subject.
In short, socialist realism - is quantitatively not even much of Soviet Art, and qualitatively - there and say nothing.
While, for example, the same "Interrogation of Communists" is written just fine!

Igor Guryev, all of the aforementioned artists (except Deineka) - is as BE legacy of royal power and starorussachestva They Soviet as BE, by definition, not in substance. Stalinists, nationalists, in short.
A Soviet project began as an international-Leninist. After Stalin's death, along with a return to Leninist norms just appeared called This style and something else.

In general, the main question is: to find an original, created as part of the two approaches. Moreover, to find something original in the Stalinist-national me every unlikely.

[I-V]

Reading Wikipedia <! - ~ 6 ~ ->

Deciding to understand all this at least in general terms, I slipped I to Wikipedia. So:

"The realism and aesthetic position that the task of art is the most accurate and objective fixation reality. In the field of artistic activity value of realism is very complicated and contradictory. Its boundaries are volatile and uncertain, it is stylistically multifaceted and mnogovarianten."
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Реализм_ (painting )

In short it is clear that nothing is clear. For everyone (especially the artist) the reality is always subjective to talk about fixing the objective reality in relation to art is practically very difficult.
Another thing, when there are standardized canons reflecting reality. Understandably, during the Soviet era any "fix reality" does not correspond to the ideal (ie ideological) image was considered sedition. Ie The only permissible in art was invented reality, nonexistent. On the creation of a pseudo worked entire institutions, carefully monitor its installing the consciousness of society. Not surprisingly, the term socialist realism emerged, despite the fact that the reality in the direction of nothing.

We read on Wikipedia:

Читать дальше... 

"Under the realism in the narrow sense of positivism understand the direction in art of the 2nd half of XIX century."
 
To start let's look like we will interpret the term wiki positivism (does not matter that we are talking about the 2nd half of the XIX century, when in fact worked Wanderers, where they prayed in the USSR) . So:

"Positivism (Fr. positivisme, from Lat. Positivus - positive) -" a philosophy and methodology of science in the direction defined by a single source of truth, the actual knowledge of empirical research and denies the cognitive value of philosophical inquiry. "
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Позитивизм

Well, as applied to art it is clear that the main thing is, shall we say, the image of reality "as it is". At that same artist, depicting reality in the USSR "as it is", could count? The fact that his pat on the back for hard work in the field of realism? Correctly, in accordance with what he regarded as valid, then he got. Empirically (with brush and canvas in hand) perceiving their surroundings, an artist with what face? With the way that somehow does not match its empirical study of the reality once and for all established a pseudo norm, he will perforce have to match.
 
It turns out that a work of art (the author has decided to meet) was not the result of an experienced understanding the world (which is a necessary condition for realism), but rather the result of comprehension on my experience, that a different reality than top-down, does not exist. Everything is determined in advance, questions are not the outside world, on the contrary, are adjusted to have a ready answer.

Read on: "The term" realism "was first used by the French critic Jean Champfleury in 50s. XIX century to refer to art, opposed to romanticism and academicism."

Fine, read about:

"Academism (Fr. academisme) - in the direction of European painting XVII-XIX centuries. Academism up on following the outward forms of classical art. Followers of this style is characterized as reasoning over the form of the ancient art of the ancient world and the Renaissance."
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Академизм
 
Are very important words: "Academism up on following the outward forms of classical art. Followers of this style is characterized as reasoning over the form of the ancient art of the ancient world and the Renaissance."

It is no secret that the actual academics adored ancient art, and (horror of horrors!) Considered themselves almost straight by his heirs. But following the external forms do not bring them to the point of high art of ancient Greece. Rather, alienates as authentic ancient art is primarily related to the life and not imitative.

Clearly, this realism, based on fair understanding of the world, is the opposite, as if based on the art of the ancient world academicism. But the opposite of a academicism Socialist Realism? As realism (even social) must reject the idea of ​​"arguments over the form of art," as for the realism can only "reasoning of the outside world" (and the point here is not limited to it (the world) forms).

But it was not there! Socialist realism was extremely close academicism is the fact that as he "grew up on adherence to external forms of classical art," Socialist Realism rose follow the outward forms of realistic art. No true, deep connection with this realism does not have. But there is a link with academic, particularly clearly seen in the examples of the false-minded works. The reason for this lies in the similarity of the approach, not afraid of the word parasite in different art forms. In the case with academic - in antiquity and the Renaissance, in the case of social realism - the realism. As a consequence, there is a blatant lack of open, quivering breath in this and that direction.

Left to read about romanticism.

So: "Romanticism (Fr. romantisme) - the phenomenon of European culture in XVIII-XIX centuries, is a reaction to the Enlightenment and stimulated them to scientific and technical progress, the ideological and artistic movement in European and American culture of the late XVIII century - first half XIX century.

Characterized by the statement of self-worth spiritual and creative life of the person, the image of the strong (often rebellious) passions and characters, spirituality and healing nature. Extended to various spheres of human activity.

In the XVIII century romantic named all the strange, fantastic, picturesque and existing books, but not in reality. At the beginning of XIX century romanticism became the symbol of a new direction that is opposite [1] classicism and the Enlightenment. "
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Романтизм

Fine, therefore romanticism - a kind of reaction to a spiritual mind "dehydration." You can, in my opinion, to let and fuzzy, but the parallel with the harsh style. Is not it obvious it was a reaction to the stifling hand of socialist realism? However, this seems to have talked and talked more than once.
 
But was it possible for artists to turn to the severe style social realism at 180 degrees? Such a course of threatened departure from the orbit of Soviet art and therefore a kind of half-hearted in making artistic decisions masters severe style is often evident. Yet the attempt to escape from the falsity of social realism so attractive that the art of severe style (in his best specimens) reaches the level of true art, which, in my opinion, has never happened (and could not) happen with socialist realism.

[Сергей Мельников]

Recommend getting a 3-volume edition of VS
Manin "Russian painting XX century", publ Aurora.
Live life in Soviet art, Vitaly Serafimovich everything is classified, then, it seems nowhere.

Added after 11 minutes
And here's an interesting look inside the process - http://www.hrono.ru/slovo/2003_04/zai04_03.html

[Игорь Гурьев]

Сообщение от Sergey Melnikov, 2367201

I recommend to buy 3-volume edition of VS
Manin "Russian painting of the XX century",

Yeah.
Do you know how much it costs and how much does he weigh?

[Сергей Мельников]

But is not "investing in art"?
I bought two for a fact, as soon as it came out.

[манна]

Сообщение от Igor Guryev, 2366331"

In short, socialist realism - is quantitatively not even much of Soviet Art, and qualitatively - there and say nothing.

Сообщение от Igor Guryev; 2366331 '

That is pure, wholly socialist realist call, perhaps, and one can not. That "sotsrealitichnogo" to "Walk in Abramtsevo" B. Johansson, author of "Communist Interrogation"?

And yet, I think you are somewhat understates the share of "propaganda" of art from official zhudozhnikov in the USSR.

Take the same Johanson
Wiki titles speak for themselves (though not only "interrogation Communists" ..)

• Union Station in 1919 "
• «The Soviet court», UNU (1928)
• «Rabfak goes (vuzovtsy)" (1928)
• «Interrogation of Communists" (1933)
• «The old Ural plant" ("Ural Demidov," 1937)
• «Lenin's Speech at the 3rd Congress of the Young Communist League" (1950)
• For a happy youth vote Soviet youth!
• Sleeping on the job - in the hands of the enemies of the working class

That is not

Сообщение от Igor Guryev, 2366331"

frankly propagandistic paintings had a one-two and a handful

Сообщение от Sergey Melnikov, 2367201"

I recommend to buy 3-volume edition of VS Manin "Russian painting XX century", publ Aurora.

A good book ...
For those who

Сообщение от Igor Guryev, 2367711"

know how much it costs and how much it weighs

You can browse the internet in all three volumes (on Amazon quite exorbitant price-20 000 rubles)
http://www.vitmanin.narod.ru/rusjiv20.htm
But it's so ...
How to Samvel >

Сообщение от Samvel; 2360151"

is well-versed in one area leads to ignorance in a different area and you no exception.

 I am not competent to ... because it's not mine