Art KaleidoscopeInteresting and relevant information about art. Discuss general art issues and any topics not covered in other forums. It’s only about art — love, politics, sports, hobbies etc. are discussed in “Chatter”.
The second article ZAGRAEVSKY all is certainly not read well, was not interested. Loss art nothing. likely to read an article by political , similar to the speech of the deputy. Yet learned that ZAGRAEVSKY not very good dkmaet of the Turks . If you take the art , the same can be said about the west, the same questions to ask. Call at least one artist, composer , producer , etc. , I mean post-Soviet era as ZAGRAEVSKY said . Too anyone. There are no people create art , we can say the failure of 30 years , and yet no end in sight .
Этот пользователь сказал Спасибо Самвел за это полезное сообщение:
Samvel, born in this "post-Soviet times" only to have nothing, they are still young, wait, and they will create works of art, music, movies will be removed.
Этот пользователь сказал Спасибо Кирилл Сызранский за это полезное сообщение:
Samvel, in the 2nd article, beginning with No. 2, just about all art is.
Цитата:
So, perhaps, Russia remains an art? The Great Russian Art - in the broadest sense, which includes literature, theater and cinema, and architecture, painting and graphics, and sculpture?
.......
Hence, the dominance of merchant's bad taste and kitsch souvenir, along with social stratification, poverty, crime and other features of the "third world" in the Russian Federation has the objective perspective of the historical celebration.
Of course, the brilliant creators of Russia was, is and will be. But the geniuses in accordance with probability theory born in the United Arab Emirates, and Zimbabwe. And where they then go? In the best case - leaving the "first world" or re-classified as to earn a living art in the "third world" can only court scoundrels. In the worst case - the geniuses just eaten. Luckily, most recently in a figurative sense.
That this is the fundamental difference between "First World" from "third". There's the art of living, and here - was dying. Dying itself - without any harassment from the state, without high-profile crimes, no noisy scandals, without purposeful destruction of culture "small people" (as once in Turkey), without crushing bulldozers pictures (as was once the Soviet Union), without Quitting fingers musicians (like once in China), without throwing the poets in the mixer (like once in Argentina) ...
In the "third world" art of dying process is absolutely objective, and persecution, paradoxically, its just slow down. Back then, the "first world" raises a wave of protest, starting some action for the protection of persecuted artists ... And when all sewn-hush, hush so as a whim, then defend like a nobody.
And in the end does not know the civilized (and even more uncivilized) world of a single artist or an architect or a writer from Turkey, China, Nigeria or Iraq.
And let someone calls those who believe in a better future for their country, idealists and dreamers - in fact, this belief is quite pragmatic, since it is easier to endure any hardship . "
very nice! ( And rightly so !)
Faith (read: "motivation" ) is the (last ) placebo our time .. More than anything (good ) is not left ... (IMHO)
Olga Ozolina, a link to the article ( I ) does not open
Maybe it makes sense to put the entire article ?
After reading the commentary interested in becoming , since , in my opinion , the Russian art market is a very special phenomenon , which is available to influence the established laws of which can be easily modified ( introducing confusion and embarrassment ), but which exists in some sense parallel to the global art market (due to historical and political circumstances ) is not flowing , and interfering with it.
Nat, I've opened a reference, but if you do not, then put the whole article:
Цитата:
Sergei ZAGRAEVSKY,
Honored Art Worker of Russia
Problems and prospects of Russian market of contemporary art
1.
In order to describe the situation, which in the past ten or fifteen years has developed in the Russian market of contemporary art, will hold a short excursion into the recent past.
It is no exaggeration to say that in the late 1980s began a "golden decade of Russian art." In Soviet times, public interest in contemporary creativity fueled by prohibitions on "modernism" and some social issues. And when the era of "glasnost" bans were lifted, then the interest multiplied by the euphoria of freedom of creativity and access to information instantly led to the audience rushed to the showrooms, and collectors - in artists' studios. And do not just look at the pictures, and buying. And the museum immediately took the opportunity to supplement their collections once the "forbidden fruit". Both artists 'informal people', which in Soviet times, were able to survive persecution and to declare itself against censorship, suddenly overnight, were recognized and in demand. In short, the artistic life was up, blossomed, rattled ... Adjectives can pick up a lot.
Читать дальше...
Out of this "golden decade" shortly after 1998. When struck memorable 'August crisis, "still warm hopes that the fall of the market temporarily, as soon as the collectors and art enthusiasts will once again free money, they will invest in their paintings and sculptures are not only long dead, but living artists ... Those hopes were in vain. Contemporary art market since not only did not rise, but continues to steadily fall.
How he fell - just impossible, because a little bit of objective data on sales of fine art of our contemporaries (as well as antiques) as there was no and no. The vast majority of transactions carried out as a "rough" and is carried out. But it is clear that the total amount of the market compared to the "golden decade" fell many times.
You can build up a rating of general current state of basic trends in art: the best feeling hits, the second place - cinema - the third theater, the fourth - the classical music ... But the bottom firmly settled Arts and Literature. Writers, perhaps even worse than artists because paintings and sculptures can be more or less to sell at least for a song, and from unused texts generally do not know what to do except to publish on the Internet and hope for a miracle ...
And where there is no public interest - the "outside" of the resonance of the artistic life - there is no resonance and the "internal", ie the artistic life in its more or less active forms - exhibitions, lectures, discussions, meetings, press coverage ... All It's like there, but no more than "kind of like." If, for example, the vast majority of public exhibitions only comes in on opening day, and a member of this audience is almost exclusively from friends and relatives of the participants and organizers? Or if the vast majority of reports about these shows - "custom"? Or if the interesting lectures of prominent art historians to concern all topics go to five or ten students? Is it possible to call a full-fledged art scene?
As a result, the artistic life into a chaotic movement of individuals - and artists, frantically running around the galleries, hoping to sell something, and gallery owners, for the same purpose frantically running around among collectors, and collectors who are trying in this muddy stream to form a more or less worthy collection. And the artists in the country - tens of thousands, gallery owners - thousands of serious collectors - dozens, let alone worthy of collections - one, two, and the handful ...
In the "golden decade" many took solace in the hope that "the foreigners will help us": that Western collectors in droves will travel to Russia to buy works of art. But those hopes were not realized. Let's just say abroad we can, and would have helped, but only prevented the BRICS ...
For those who are not traces the vicissitudes of global politics, adding: BRICS - is used throughout the world stands for "Brazil, Russia, China, India, South Africa," and it means that these countries are about the same level of socio-economic development. In other words, Russia is in the minds of the West took its place among the so-called "third world". Accordingly, at Western auctions was quoted and contemporary Russian art. Nature do not be fooled: the level of world interest in the art of any country depends on the interest in the country itself. And who, by and large, interested in "third world"? Only a narrow circle of specialists.
And these experts are still in the "golden decade" visited Russia, looked around, assessed the prospects, understand it right (then, they are experts), bought some paintings for their collections and went home. More to do here was nothing.
So it happened that in our time relationship of the Russian art market in Western as well as inside the artistic life of the country, form the notorious loners. Some artists, doing enormous efforts, make their way into the international market and periodically appear in the auction quotes, sometimes even managing to get for their work is quite good money. Can a little trade in the West and some Russian gallerist. But compared with the art market the most advanced countries - is a drop in the ocean.
Characteristically, the reverse process - "import" the work of contemporary Western artists in Russia for sale - is virtually nonexistent. After this, can seriously talk about inclusion of the Russian art market in the world?
Generally speaking, the "golden decade" can be called a "decade of dashed hopes." High hopes in those years were placed on the creative unions - and as a center of artistic life, and how organizations can solve social problems the participants of the art market.
Such functions are relatively creative unions successfully completed during the Soviet era, when the Soviet state applied to art as an ideological weapon and the money to support the allocated lot. Of course, this support use only "their" (those who are to some extent been able to come to terms with the Soviet system), but gradually these "friends" only in the fine arts had accumulated tens of thousands. And the property from the Union of Soviet Artists (MHS) was appropriate, that is huge - exhibition halls, art house, art factories, hospitals, vehicle maintenance, collections, workshops ... plus government purchases of works with almost any exhibition (and outside exhibitions).
All this allowed the members of the MHS to think less about "daily bread" and more - about creativity and creative dialogue with their colleagues and the public. And those who for various reasons, was not accepted into the union, indifferent could not be protested and debated ... All this in the Soviet period created quite a fair sense of bustling cultural life.
And after the Soviet collapse estate heirs MHS - Union of Russian Artists Union of Moscow, St. Petersburg, union of former Soviet republics, now independent states - even if separated, still remained very solid. And it remains solid thus far, in spite of all sales, loss and abuse by the leadership of unions. But the ideological barriers are no more, the number of members of these unions is growing, so that these organizations stand firmly on their feet and do not intend to die ...
What's the problem, why creative unions in modern conditions have not been able to effectively perform its core functions - to be centers of artistic life and to social protection for its members?
Because, as he wrote Okudzhava, "gingerbread sweet is never enough for everyone." Property from the unions are fewer and fewer members - more and more, and there is a characteristic of their leadership motivation: if the good things of life (especially money from the rental property) to divide between all members of the union, then each will get very little, - so not be better to divide them between "us"?
That was in these organizations access to material goods is not due to creative achievement, and intra-career. Someone makes it with the help of relatives and friends, someone he shows business acumen ... But in any case to the artistic life of this has to name only the unions is not the miners, and artists ...
And the "ordinary" members of these unions in the best case is participating in "mass graves" - group (more precisely, mass) shows with thousands of participants and, accordingly, with thousands of works in several rows on the walls of large halls where the visitors rarely drop.
Characteristically, in the post-Soviet period, no new creative union was not created. Why, if the creative issues such unions are unable to solve, and the new property they were never gives? Is it any wonder that the bill "On Creative Workers and Creative Unions" (This is just one of many variants of the name) is not the first ten years, has stalled in state institutions?
Almost the same problem and another organization, which exists even in the Soviet era, and from the XVIII century - the Russian Academy of Arts. Yes, by and large, and in any large association applying for participation in the artistic life of the country. Creative achievements and public recognition everywhere replaced by nepotism and social careers. This suggests unhappy generalization in the country live art, and artistic associations.
2.
Why is art in Russia is now so live?
To answer this question, we turn our attention to the huge increase in recent years, the interest and the public and collectors to Socialist Realism. Precise: not a "social-art" (surge of interest in which has taken place in the "golden decade"), namely the textbook socialist realism.
And it's not that people globally have changed flavors: as fast over the past few years, this could not happen. It's not just the fact that in Soviet times there was "overproduction" of this trend in art, and in today's market a lot of his proposal: social realism in the art market and lacked a decade ago. The main reason for this is seen as follows: social realism for most viewers and buyers of works of art was a kind of "anchor" that allows to cling to the "soil" - a reliable, clear, calm, familiar, proven, and still bring positive reminiscence of childhood and adolescence.
This phenomenon - of the same series, they always have a greater interest in antiques when compared to modern art. This is logical: in the antiques market is more or less verified, the artists are more or less known, the trend is more or less proschityvaemy, information on real sales is present at least some ...
But in the modern art turns out that viewers "catch" is not for nothing. More or less educated public (but not educated on the exhibition in general no longer walk) understands that the "academic" criteria for evaluating works of the formal transfer of the skill of the reality of composition, choice of subjects, etc. gone. Today it is almost every viewer (and especially the buyer) is familiar with abstract art, conceptualism, and numerous other "isms." Even on the most familiar and understandable for the vast majority of people "ism" - realism - a proposal very, very large, and to distinguish the genuine realist art from the many imitations of it is very difficult.
In principle, the viewer is ready to believe art critics. But when the art scene degenerates into a chaotic movement of individuals, in art criticism there is the same randomness. Critics write only about "their". "Aliens" in full compliance with modern information technology, they do not even curse, not to make them "public relations" - just ignore it. And "its" is awkward not to praise, and sometimes they pay the money - and how else to make a living?
And so it turns out that art criticism, which in theory is one of the most important parts of such a serious science, such as art history, in practice, degenerates into journalism at its worst, "ordered" form. We should not be considered art lovers for fools, when they run up the eyes of the abundance of laudatory epithets at any "critical" article about any artist, they know that "Every sandpiper praises its quagmire," and no confidence to see not suffer.
Deplorable result: in our time for the audience at all any criteria other than "like - not like" do not exist, and the acquisition of works of art the only objective measure is its price. The choice of paintings and sculptures (items, unique by definition) is akin to the choice of bulk commodities such as televisions or refrigerators, with the only difference (not in favor of the art market), that "producers" of pictures many times more than the Consumer Electronics Manufacturers .
And according to the general laws of economics, with a significant excess of supply over demand for commodity prices are steadily declining. This worsens the situation even more on the art market.
It would seem that this price drop serious and professional collectors have to use and cheap to buy works of art, so that later on they make good money. This, in turn, should revive the market. In theory. But in practice it is different: any, even low-cost purchase is a waste of money if the artist a few years later, few remember (and this often happens). So, for investment in contemporary art should be sure that this or that product at all worth buying. All the consultants critics say different, but only for its taste, not every serious collector will rely ... So not it be easier and safer if not for him to invest in relatively stable and proven market of antiques?
Plus a general deterioration of the investment climate in Russia. Plus negative long-term forecast: if the country does not stop "sitting on the oil needle" (and stop it while it is not going), it will worsen the situation not only in all areas of production, not only in science but in culture ... In short, against Russia art market operates global geopolitical situation.
In principle, the viewer (respectively, and the buyer) would be interested in the sharpness debate around creating art "intellectual tension." In Soviet times, the tension is kept constant conflicts between the "conformism" and "non-conformism" in these conflicts has been actively involved state (of course, on the "conformist"), there was a serious, violent struggle and that struggle with sinking hearts followed not only the citizens of the USSR, but the entire world.
Cruelty and excesses (like the destruction of paintings with the help of bulldozers) to the fall of Soviet power, the glory of God, come to an end. But as they say, was splashed with water, baby: along with the extreme left of the ideological exigencies of any general ideological sharpness, and with it a little bit interesting discussions. And no wonder: the Soviet ideological legacy was even less "hardy" than the industrial, scientific, and it was possible to operate for very long.
Attempts to create a conceptual acuity for some time been made in the form of shocking - hooligan performances, exhibitions, etc. scandalous But that modern audiences can not be surprised: as they say, is not seen. Attempts to produce more shocking is pity than concern.
In principle, the viewer is ready to "go to person". Indeed, the identity of the artist in our time is almost essential in the evaluation of his work (which is consistent with post-modern "application-based" nature of modern art). But what is now the possibility of an artist to express himself well as a person? Or the infamous shocking, or "PR", especially in the media. But, as we just talked about, shocking is no surprise. And the media is obtained by "vicious circle": they are willing to work for free only with a "media person" that is, those who have "promoted". "Media people" in modern art can be counted on the fingers, but what else? Just pay the money to journalists. But where to get them to "lie" the art market?
There are many other reasons why the sad situation in contemporary Russian art market. But even the ones we have listed here, as we see, are quite objective and directly related to the global geopolitical situation in Russia and the world.
3.
What to do if problems of modern art market Russia as global? Who and how can make a difference?
In principle, it could change the Russian government suddenly decides to repeat when the Soviet way of "state sponsorship". But in this case and in Russian society and the world will inevitably suspect that the state through the arts're going to impose a certain ideology. And who will distribute the hypothetical "state aid"? Again, a kind of "their"?
And it turns out that in this case, the state will spend a lot of money, but instead of gratitude, will receive negative publicity and accusations of creating another "feeder close." And any government, of course, rightly ask: "It is necessary to us?"
In principle, the situation may not change state, and public art. Imagine yourself as a utopia: all major participants of the art market combine to create a single management mechanism, which starts systematically and purposefully engaged in public involvement in the halls (and therefore funding for the art market). Involved the joint efforts of a professional PR agency, going to scientific conferences, to develop suitable techniques, distributed guidelines, all members of the artistic process and faithfully carry out their boycott of those who does not ...
But, unfortunately, this is utopia. The trend of recent years shows that, however bad the situation on the art market may be, creative organizations, art galleries and artists prefer not to join, and relate to the household of "fine shop" on the notorious principle of "Die you today, and tomorrow I ". We have already said that the modern art scene - random movement of individuals.
A loner in any case unable to affect the overall situation on the art market.
What remains? Wait a global change in the geopolitical situation for the better? Not all of it is like to wait for the weather by the sea?
No, not all the same, because in the world of art in any country in any era waiting for "better times" does not mean inaction, and the more hopeless.
This artist is different from an entrepreneur that works not to earn money. Of course, the money he can not think, but the actual act of creation with the potential earnings is not related: the motives are absolutely different.
Therefore, any deterioration in the art market is also its unique rehabilitation, those who came to the "iconic shop" for easy money, go away, but the real artists are. The same applies to the gallery owners, art critics and, to collectors. And viewers of idle onlookers turned into thoughtful judges.
And we must always remember that no matter what happens on the art market in the country and the world, the art still does not die, but died in the course of many millennia of existence of human civilization with a much larger shocks.
So, all that is created, sooner or later will be in demand - albeit not in the form of modern art, and antiques. This is the albeit weak, but the consolation for all the participants of the art market, especially for the creators of works of art - artists. In these circumstances, there is the additional problem of creators - not only create but also to preserve all that is created in order not to disappear from the memory of posterity "for technical reasons."
But when it comes to the scale of human life - not thousands of years, but at least the next several decades, and not about the whole world, and about Russia and not about "art for art's sake", and the art of market conditions?
Put it this way: how would the foreseeable future, Russia may develop, whatever her perceived in other countries, it is still the tradition of a great culture is so strong that they cross over several decades is impossible. And all the vicissitudes of the art market in any case does not mean the decline, and especially the death of Russian art.
So, in one form or another, the art market in Russia will be, and should seek their place in it. Of course, this can be done alone, but much more efficient to do together - in the company of like-minded people, united by understanding the essence of art, choose the style of a unified marketing strategy ...
Time of the Soviet and post-Soviet art unions with many thousands of participants has gone, and replaced them must come the "specialized" associations made in the West, to the 1930s - and in Russia. Associations established not on political or economic, but on the creative principles. Association, not looking for favors government and "his" audience. Relatively speaking, the modernists - separately, the academics - separately, conceptualists - separately, the followers of a local "Art School" - separately, and so on. A spectator selects the mere fact that his taste. And investors and sponsors will also be easier to make a choice.
"Fellowship of the Wanderers," "World of Art", "Jack of Diamonds", "OST" ... But you never know the history of Russian art knows such associations?
Only in these conditions it is possible to build more or less balanced and logical pricing. After all, compare the creative level (respectively, and the price of the product) artists totally different styles and not always a virtue, even leading art historians, and even without such a comparison, auctions are transformed into a celebration vkusovschiny. But compare the work of "maitres" and secondary, and even more young artists in a creative "school" (and even more so within a creative union) is quite real.
And some of the styles will be more in demand and therefore will cost more - abstract art, realism, or any another "ism" - is really only a question of public taste, and better tool than the market price for its expression can not come up.
And if the art union will argue among themselves about the basic principles of art and the place of art in society, and just about any style and a better artist, but what is worse (and they will certainly argue, as argued at the end XIX, and in the early twentieth century), it appears the notorious severity of the discussions. Undoubtedly, it will draw viewers - and therefore increase the effective demand for works of art.
Another option out of the grave situation prevailing in the Russian art market, I personally do not see it. Who sees - even offer your own version. We will discuss and thereby increase public interest in the world of fine art.
And there, staring, and general geopolitical situation will change in favor of Russia and, therefore, in favor of her great culture. Tiutchev wrote: "In Russia one can only believe." And let someone calls those who believe in a better future for their country, idealists and dreamers - in fact, this belief is quite pragmatic, since it is easier to endure any hardship.
Этот пользователь сказал Спасибо Ольга Озолина за это полезное сообщение:
23.06.2011, 00:12
>
>??
>
Комбинированный вид
Похожие темы