Sovrisk - alternative secondariness

[artcol]

here

I was born in Chita. Soon, our family moved to China. We lived in Manchuria. So my first artistic impressions - Chinese. Chinese landscape, thermos bottles, mats, the dragon, which represent the 50 people on New Year's holiday - Chinese kitsch. That's why I'm always open to something else. Then we lived a bit in Khabarovsk, and his father, a military lawyer, was transferred to Rostov-on-Don. We traveled through Moscow and a week staying in the capital. I was taken to the tomb, there still was Stalin, so I immediately saw the two leaders, in the Historical Museum and the Tretyakov Gallery. In the Tretyakov I really did not like. Rooms are small, the lighting is bad, all the dull, dark, dead. Living in China, I am very much looking movies: patriotic films about the great generals, about the great artists and composers. Because the static picture of me hid. After all, the Chinese all moving pictures. They are written differently, they have a moment of life, the length of events in time. And in the movies all the moves. In Russian the same painting XVIII-XIX centuries, I suppressed the deadly three-dimensional image in black and brown shadows, statics. The only thing that I liked while in the Tretyakov Gallery - a sculpture: every article can be circumvented because they seemed quite alive and moving.

     In his boyhood at the hands of times getting the magazine "America". They printed reproductions of paintings from American museums: Kandinsky, Klee, Chagall, - and American celebrities: Pollock, Mark Tobey. This roused the imagination. So I became a devotee of modern art, he painted the abstract watercolors. But then, after my mother's criticism, I burned them.

Читать дальше... 

     Somehow my mother we were in Leningrad, the Hermitage. And most importantly - have visited the top floor, where usually nobody goes: the Impressionists, Van Gogh, Matisse, Picasso. Suddenly I saw the original avant-garde - and they shocked me.

     Although the academicism I always felt and feel reverence. I am very grateful follower of the late Favorskogo great artist Dmitry Zylinski, whom I consider to be their teacher.

      Genetically relegate themselves to a group of GRL, the Society of Artists-Easel - they were socialist modernists. Between the fall of the avant-garde at the end of the Civil War and socialist realism was a great period of socialist modernism on the basis of neo. Were Moscow sotsmodernisty, mostly students Favorskogo and were Petrograd. They were the first truly Soviet artists differed from the later the Wanderers, who were sitting and waiting for who will win the civil war, therefore, whose portraits have to daub. The same Brodsky and Kerensky wrote, and Lenin. The Bolsheviks, who were most likely these artists malosimpatichny, but the Bolsheviks had won - and living it must ...

     

     Modern art - a product of cultural engineering CIA started 50th. It was created specifically against socialist realism, against the Soviet culture. After the war, Socialist Realism was very influential in Western Europe, Leger, for example, actually wrote the socialist-realist paintings: builders, workers, and picnics in nature - the art, open people's life, workers who fight for peace - it all happened. The Americans countered the natural expansion of Soviet humanistic culture, culture of the country-winner, the so-called New York school of abstract expressionists. These were imitators of the European avant-garde and modernist, in large numbers who came to America during the Second World War. For the most part they were imitators of the European Surrealists: Miró, Max Ernst ... Pop artist Robert Rauschenberg studied with former Bauhaus professor Josef Albers. Although Albers considered him a poor and mediocre student, virtually all of Rauschenberg - it bauhauzovskaya propaedeutics Albers: from used as independent works bauhauzovskih exercises for Option pop-art.

     It should be up to the 50th American art was very conservative and just old fashioned. On the American continent in the 20th-30th topped Mexico. Mexicans who were in fact the socialist realists, was invited to work in America, Ford and Rockefeller. Same Pollock was an assistant to Siqueiros.

     And now the provincial painting abstract expressionism, a local phenomenon, even for the U.S., the Americans fanned into a powerful cultural and political project. Conducted outreach exhibitions in Europe. At the same time from the closet of history took out the European avant-garde, which for many years in fact no longer existed. Prior to 1933 operated the Bauhaus, Albers in the 40th and Gropius taught in the U.S.. But this art is not concerned - design, architecture. We also have twenty years working VHUTEMAS, and some more avant-garde in the 60's taught in the Moscow Architectural Institute and the Art Institute.
   

     CONTEMPORARY ART, contemporary art - contemporary art is not us, it is not art, which makes contemporaries. This is a specific cultural invention which declared itself the heir vanguard. In Europe, all the advanced cultural policy fifties and sixties - a return, renewal of the avant-garde, neoavangard. For example, somewhere in Paris, found a German artist Vaulx, he studied at the Bauhaus, one of the latest releases. Gradually he lived in Paris, few people interesting, painted the picture, anticipate these most abstract expressionists. His paintings were better than American, were not so cheap, as the American abstract expressionism, with all due respect to his achievements.

     So the process of creating modern art was at first largely artificial. But he has received support from an advanced, anti-fascist intellectuals, because the avant-garde and modernism did not like Hitler, while psevdotraditsionnoe art became the official art of Nazi Germany. Hitler and Stalin at the same time, which is constantly trying to put on a par with Hitler announced the vanguard of the liquidators, while Vanguard has died a natural death: in Europe - after the First World War, and in Russia after the Civil War. And on this basis, the vanguard of declared anti-fascist and progressive, and any self-related tradition of art - the fascist. Although it is well known that many leading Nazis - for example, Goebbels - loved Expressionists, and Carl Schmitt, when his house was bombed, the only thing that saved - abstract paintings.

     A simple formula that all fall in line with the historical tradition of a fascist, and all anti-fascist avangardopodobnoe - works so far. Why the writer of the picture in keeping with the historical tradition of the artist for the enlightened Europeans and Americans today - a fascist, open or hidden. And what else? Vaughn wrote the artist a haystack - it means he "felkishe.
     

     So the aims of the founders of modern art have been defined. Perhaps they are still stored in the tribal memory of contemporary art. Looking from Russia, it is not very clear, just not visible. After all, modern art, we received a completed form, as a European art at the beginning of XVIII century, we have not worked on his creation. Why, for example, we do not understand the contents of the genre of still life, always carrying a message, culturally alien to the Russian people? Each still life laid true Counter-Reformation ideology - "Memento mori". You look at some flowers and fruit, and you realize that tomorrow they will wilt, fruit rot, and you yourself will die. That's what this art. But in Russia it is not very clear. Russia did not participate in the Reformation nor Counter-Reformation, so the Russian artist paints constantly out of place - put in a still life Budyonnovka cap, then sandals.

     So it is with contemporary art. Yet much has changed: gone "red decade" of France (1965-75), student and worker revolution and unrest throughout the world, the artists themselves transformed. Many of them are fairly radical social position. This is particularly felt in Latin America, where artists work with the poor and workers.

     On the other hand, there is a world system of modern art - huge international bureaucracy, museums, galleries, contemporary art center, etc. Huge and expensive system.

     You go to Bombay, and suddenly you see - the center of contemporary art. This center is in Moscow, and in almost every German town.

     Despite the external diversity of expression, media and the approaches contemporary art rather monotonous and conservative. It invested a lot of money and employing thousands of workers. The artist in this system - one of many. Regardless of the bureaucracy, out of a curator and critic, he - no. This "little Dutchman now sold some burgers, and then he was visited by a second Burgher and requested to sell the same. Now it is - a huge business, a huge industry, which can not be broken down. It is interested not only an artist but also the thousands of professionals of different profiles. The artist in this system - a pathetic lone craftsman.

     For Russia, the main problem is that modern art had to be entered as an art, so that it performs the same function, which performs the art in any society. This did not work, including the positions of people like Erofeev, who very arrogantly refers to a simple viewer for the viewer to an unsophisticated audience, who are unfamiliar with contemporary art, to a man who has yet to learn the art, with modern as well. For this viewer, even Malevich - negative riddle: the pier, and I do my best.

     And in order to write "Black Square" need more spiritual work. And it must really be a master, because "black box" - not just a square, it is a strong paintings. I do not do abstract painting, I consider myself an absolute realist. But for me it is the most important thing, my guiding star in the painting. And more than most of Malevich. Malevich himself not made of "Square" of recent findings.

 



Artwork by Vladimir Salnikov "Homeland Aviation" (2006).

     

     CONTEMPORARY ARTIST - it belongs to the institutions - to collectors, galleries, contemporary art centers, foundations, Biennale. Accordingly, the one taken in the turnover of bureaucrats and curators, becomes an artist of contemporary art.

     The modern artist can do anything - he can write, even naturalistic paintings. It is important to the context in which he gives them.

     Naked kings, fakirs complete. But in the traditional art enough of them.

    
 What is annoying in modern art - from it, may seem diverse - you can play music, write novels, to dig a pit, fly, still remains narrow, which is too orthodox tied to the experience of avant-garde. In the forefront, too, everything was - and performances, and "Letatlin, and fought, and danced, while in the van remained perspective. In modern art it is not. Like all the time mixing takes place the same balls in a lottery drum. Turned the drum. Leggy girl took out a ball - so, "performance", is now ten years performance will be considered the main art exhibit, funded, to glorify. Ten years later, another ball is removed from the drum guard.

     But modern art - this is living life big enough community. It is natural to have a good-bad, honest, thieves, there are rogues, but there are great artists. In order to separate the good from another installation, you certainly have some erudition. But it is acquired. How can you distinguish the good from the bad rock? Knowledge of Mozart and Rachmaninoff's not always help. Need a cultural experience. And, of course, need people to acquire it.

     There is a positive model of work - in Moscow is the State Center for Contemporary Art at the Zoological street. This clever and good policy, the NCCA is trying to adapt modern art to the viewer and the viewer in contemporary art. They drove a diverse collection of contemporary art throughout Russia, have made traveling exhibitions, discussions.

     But there are liberal idiots who are struggling with the church - perhaps because they think: believers sure to substitute the left cheek, in fact, they quarreled and contemporary art and society.

     Modern art must be embedded in a culture in public life, that it began to work as art, worked as the art of Russian realist, in the West in the late XIX century, the art of the Impressionists, in the XVII-XVIII centuries - Baroque. Check it decides to society the same problem. In reality, contemporary art - a simple and fairly clear. This is a misconception that it is heavily loaded. Comprehension of classical painting can be much harder for the average person.

     

     In my youth I was an ardent anti-Stalinist. When we lived in Georgia, my father was a prosecutor engaged in rehabilitation of victims of repression. But knowing that exposed the Iranian spy, and he - Professor chaeved and no spy was not - this one. But the whole context is important here - who does it, why it happened. If we carefully look at the almost three decades the Stalinist era, it is obvious that at any given moment, Stalin took a completely different position, playing different roles. But the perception prevails that Stalin 30 years was something like God of hosts, and all moving. This lack of understanding of the structure of power, how it has evolved from the chaos of the Civil War and beyond.

     I was a faithful follower of the Twentieth Congress, in the fourth grade trampled a portrait of Stalin and watered it with ink. Primitiveness, which professed anti-Stalinists, I'm like a child, was forgivable, but now, when there is a lot of data and can make sense of history, Stalin can not be summarily denied.

     Clearly, this history of the revolution and bloody revolution. And we like to consider the epoch at an angle of liberal democracy, which professes a "soft" violence.

     All of these processes, repression must specifically disassemble - how, what and why happened. When moving away from specifics, then immediately fall into archaism, and, ultimately, into the finished vulgarity.

     Stalin became a symbol of Russia. In the project "Name of Russia", he won his slowed down due to administrative resources. You can not protest against the views of the whole nation. Moreover, the sovereign power - the people of Russia. How can you consider yourself a democrat and deny the majority opinion? Indeed, for some time with the advent of liberal Russian people were naive, but not for long. It is on the political opinions that emanate from the Russian people, and we must navigate. Do not think that the thinking class has much more political insight or knowledge, this is not so. Bertolt Brecht once said that the bad taste of the masses much deeper than a good taste of the intelligentsia.

     A majority of our intellectuals prefer to simply accept, as is said today, others ready to discourse, but gives his own opinion. Form your own opinion - it's a colossal work. Otherwise it the intellectual conformism. But then I was not a intellectual, and herd animals. Or network.

     

     For many years we have struggled with modern art as the ideological enemy. On the one hand, it was justified. But, on the other hand, it was necessary to connect to it and pull it off. There have been many progressive-minded artists. And here in the spirit of Plekhanov brushed aside, they say, bourgeois decadence - and all ...

     The Russian Federation claims to great power status. But from the standpoint of modern art - a backwater, or even worse Finland Estonia.

     Even socialist realism, which was against the socialist modernism of the twenties and thirties weak phenomenon at the international level was still good art. Therefore, in defiance of him and created a contemporary art. And now there are no ideas that might inspire. Yes, we will follow democracy, we the students - if they say our leaders. We think of ourselves as the periphery, is actually the periphery. And we will, until we do not have their fresh ideas. Original phenomena were the Moscow Conceptual Art, "Sots" art and Actionism nineties. The last decade - the emptiness, the solid degradation. What can I say, if our state is unable to provide the nation with a fire extinguisher.

     As someone once said of Hemingway: "The average writer, but for him all the power of the United States of America.

     Modern art should be inscribed in the social context, should lose the character of the enemy's hands. It should cease to be art for the comprador youth. In Russia lacks normal people who go to exhibitions, participate in discussions. Russian contemporary art need other ideologues, and other leaders. In China, by the way, modern artists do not take the anti position. The wise leadership of the CPC, in contrast to the Soviet leaders did not go for confrontation. There is there quite legally, there is no culture war is not going inside. We also still ongoing cultural civil war.

     I believe that modern art could well be national. In the words of Mayakovsky, a machine gun - he is a machine gun, it is important who shoots out of it. Modern art could serve the people of Russia and be a normal art. The main condition - the correct and sane politician.