"Bulldozer Exhibition" - 35

[dedulya37]

Сообщение от Pavel

I think I'm just wasting my time, describing the simple things well-known in the west of each collector.

And I'm surprised at you, Paul. This weather! Forward! In the open air!

[Pavel]

For a long time!
I'm open-air courtyard.

[dedulya37]

Сообщение от Pavel

I'm open-air courtyard.

Unclear ... but familiar! : D

[sss]

Сообщение от ranzher

Is the threat to the regime those artists who have become spokespersons for the twelve exhibitors Bulldozer exhibition? Of course not! Even with the hint of a threat to the state would be erased them in powder. What made it decisively and with regard to those dissenters who were perceived as ideological enemies.
Meanwhile, it condoned mischief of these artists. They could write what they wanted and were free to sell their work ..

You are confusing sequence))
The trick lies in the fact that dissidents could also write whatever they wanted, up until not published their desires. Ideological enemies, they became only after publication.
So the artists, which condoned, leaving their basements on the public, the potential threat is even represented.

With regards to the statement "could easily sell their work, let me know where? In the bazaar? For such a "prodavanie" if it occurred outside the formal sites (hudfondy, hudsalony, etc., where these people entry was ordered), gave the term (especially if you figured currency).

Сообщение от ranzher

SINYAVSKY said that he had with the Soviet authorities purely stylistic differences. At the informal leader of the unofficial artists Oscar Rabin did not even have any.
Look at his paintings of those years. With a picturesque point of view - it is quite ordinary MOSH, closer to its left wing. No subversive innovation. For others it will be more abruptly. Take the same artists "severe style". They then, as time and a little afraid of little gifts of nomenclature CX.
State did not suit the plot O. Rabin.

Why maloodarennoy nomenclature CX care is given only on the purely artistic merits or demerits of painting? Does nomenclature was ideologically independent and free? As a representative of the state, it is equally interested and so as depicted, and so what is depicted.
And what to Sinyavsky ended his stylistic differences with the Soviet regime - is well known.
---

Сообщение от ranzher

... opportunities to exhibit in a public exhibition spaces, the meaning was ostensibly a demonstration to Belyaev wasteland.

Why "supposedly"?

Сообщение от ranzher

All participants were aware of the action of the realities of the time and that such demonstrations are not desired by the state to get ...

What kind of "desirable" in question, if the fact of the exhibition and was an end in itself? This, incidentally, wrote and humorist Vladimir Vorobyov: "Show proscribed, persecuted art publicly - that was the zest, the blow with a strong political protest.

Сообщение от ranzher

... and realized that the hard consequences will not come. In such a case from their side it was a well-planned provocation, where the most important role was assigned to the Western press.

Just do understand that harsh consequences could occur, and for less harmless disobedience, therefore, invited the foreign press, not only to highlight the event, but somehow protect themselves in the future.
What is the provocation - it is not clear. Moreover, the failure (in the exhibition) of the Moscow City Council did not follow.
---

If we are talking about what happened, how about the performance, then get him not artists, and the authorities, not knowing how to prevent that from the standpoint of the Constitution was not subject to the ban. Sunday ... Void ... paintings ... What ban? Dissent? What is it manifested? There was: it was unofficial, it was persecuted.

And if we talk about the artists, the exhibition on a vacant lot Belyaev - certainly act.

[SAH]

sss, fully in agreement with you.

[Samvel]

Сообщение от sss

If we are talking about what happened, how about the performance, then get him not artists, and the authorities, not knowing how to prevent that from the standpoint of the Constitution was not subject to the ban. Sunday ... Void ... paintings ... What ban? Dissent? What is it manifested? There was: it was unofficial, it was persecuted.

And if we talk about the artists, the exhibition on a vacant lot Belyaev - certainly act.

And not only act, but also caused fear of the regime, and a landmark of the new policy with the creative intelegentsiey. Already in 1975, came postonovlenie CPSU Central Committee and USSR Council Ministorov-on work with creative youth "who prepared the departments of the Central Committee of the Ministry of Culture, at the initiative of the KGB.
  The following year, the commission of the CPSU Central Committee arrived in Armenia to check the progress of this postanovlenieya, and the table is one of the instructors of the Central Committee, told me how they were all scared, after the bulldozer exhibition and this decision came to blow off steam (it's his vyrozhenie), and fundamentally improve the work in the creative unions. When I asked whether, in Yerevan to open the exhibition of young artists under the open sky, without a prior view of works, he said: "It is not only possible but necessary."
  1977. we osuschistvili. The exhibition lasted for 2 days, the KGB reported that during the two days came in a little square to look avant-garde paintings more 55tys. man, it was a real празник for artists and residents.
  Then, of course, of darkness again prevailed, but not so bezpardonno, both before and during the Bulldozer Exhibition.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Samvel

1977. we osuschistvili. The exhibition lasted for 2 days, the KGB reported that during the two days came in a little square to look avant-garde paintings more 55tys. man, it was a real празник for artists and citizens.

Imagine.
A figure-55 thousand in two days and showed the government interest in this art.

[Pavel]

SSS. Read many memories and you will see that the works were sold and very expensive just bought in the shops by foreigners. Diplomats, journalists, etc. Because of these purchases and flared discord between the parties, because natural surrounding, the participants were strong guys, but it was not in art but in politics, but many people do not understand, were not aware, I think. Prices then reached up to 10 thousand dollars, but the majority received nothing. Then in the west of these works are impaired naturally to natural levels and to return the money, these collections were sold in the Tretyakov Gallery. For Tretyakov hurt. Prices for these works were in Acuna corresponding period.

[color="# 666686"]Added after 2 minutes[/color]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky

imagine.
A digital-to-55 thousand in two days and showed the government interest in this art.

And this art? Not interesting but rather curiosity. At Glazunov passed around more but so what?

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Pavel

At Glazunov passed around more but so what?

You know the numbers?
How come watch Glazunov in the first two days?

[color="# 666686"]Added after 1 minute[/color]

Сообщение от Pavel

Then in the west of these worthless naturally to natural levels and to return the money, these collections were sold in the Tretyakov Gallery.

Where did you take it?
Give sources of his information.

[Pavel]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky

Do you know numbers?
How come watch Glazunov in the first two days?

[color="# 666686"]Added after 1 minute[/color]

Where did you take it?
Give sources of his information.

The number of visitors does not determine the quality of the artist, but only the level of communication and follow-up advertising, by the way free.

I have already said, of Acuña.