Exhibition "Thaw and time after. Moscow Artists 1958-2008"

[Черномашенцев Владимир]

Сообщение от Vladimir

once heard as Volokhov commented on their work. I say that not many of the sixties as they can. For me this is one of the criteria. And in general there is a feeling that Volokhov still very undervalued.

    I can not understand the connection between the skill of the artist and his abilities commentator?
What is more important - a picture or comments? Often beautiful or not an idea, simple or complicated words hiding emptiness.
    Of course, I FM Dostoevsky and not even Lukyanenko, but those ideas and texts that I see from today's conceptualists - I can not think of genius. I can think of "on time" more and better. But I do not rvus in "artists." Also, I screwed out of garbage and nemusora much that is exposed on the conceptual exhibitions - but I do not rvus in "artists." You will not doubt my abilities to think and write long texts of a given quality? [How long will]

   And how people are given the title and academics, as the picture hit the high-Union and All-Russia Exhibition - I know very well. Half of Merit, half - of patronage and for the post. One of the best artist draws, the second sitting in the presidium and manages the local union. Talent is different, but the formal results of who will be better?
  
    Sure that any collector or gallery owner dreams about the same thing, the dream of every soldier. Soldier dreams of becoming a general (or dembelnutsya: D), a collector wants to open a new Van Gogh and enter with him into history. I'm afraid that if we seek new vangogov by the noise they made noise, or the current high price tags - the result will be negative. As many times history proves.