One of the best contemporary Russian artists. (EA)
-------------------------------------------------- ------------
Born in Moscow on February 10, 1949 in the family officer. With 10 years in parallel with the general Krasnopresnenskuju attended art school. 1966-72 gg. - A student at Moscow Architectural Institute.
Читать дальше...
After the end of his work in designing organizations combined with busy schedules, and then painting (from the late 70's). 1979-1988 gg. - Architect and designer of the monumental Combine Hudfonda USSR. Since 1976 he began to exhibit work in the basement of the Little Georgia, where the fall of 1985 they were spotted by the New York dealers and collectors. Since 1987, the paintings have been widely exhibited in the U.S., Western Europe and the USSR (Russia). All during this time were held more than 20 personal exhibitions. In 1995, suspended his father. Since the late 90's played with installations, photography and video art. Participated in the International Biennale in Moscow (2002, 2004) and Nizhny Novgorod (2002). Winner of "Silver Camera" as the "Architecture" (2002) and "Faces" (2004). In the late 80's. began to write prose. Novels and short stories published in magazines "Twinkle", "October", "Banner", "Literary Review", "New World", etc. In 1997 the novel "Uncle Adik, a literary prize awarded to the magazine" Banner ". Collection of prose: "The things which are not" EKSMO 2002, "Innocence" OGI 2002, "Rome. Conversation "Time 2005. Novel "The history of the disease" in the short-list of Andrei Bely Prize in 2002. In 1993, he began to speak as a journalist and essayist. Publications in the newspapers today, "General Newspaper", "MN", "Alien", "BBC News," magazines "Foreign Literature", "Art Cinema", "Banner", "New World", "Results", "Twinkle", "Neprikosnovennyi reserve", etc. In 1999, published by UFO released a compilation of articles "Russian new and Semitrailers and used", which also got shortlisted for the Andrei Bely Prize in 2000. In 2007, Simon Faibisovich resumed his father. Lives and works in Moscow.
Artworks S. Faibisovich repeatedly participated in art fairs in Chicago, Cologne, Basel. Are found in museum collections in France, Germany, Canada, Poland, Russia, United States, as well as in private collections in Germany, Italy, Canada, United States, Russia, France and Switzerland.
-------------------------------------------
From the interview (aprel.2008g.) There is some connection between the fantastic prices on the latest auctions for your old pictures and a return to studies in painting?
No, of course. It all venture in 2005, when the stiff was complete. Got the idea - I talked to Volodya Ovcharenko, he said that he would support the technology: needed stretchers, printing on large canvases. I decided on this two years ago, but the auction was in the autumn - the first.
What you last winter, was shown at the exhibition Kulikovo "I believe" - made by mobile phone "as a mosaic" - the beginning of this series?
This was an interim version, simply prints, printed on canvas - fine, no people. And then I went back to the people - and realized that one should write.
Do you really picture using a mobile phone writing?
For such a little chamber opportunities, pixels, so there is a creative impulse. He tries to compose, but I have caught them. Turns mosaic with the schizoid dividing into fragments, and the larger size - so it is obvious. It is very organic to the concept of our life today, where everything is topsy-turvy, and all the sticks. And at the same time resembles the Soviet mosaic. There are many allusions - and a psychological portrait, and impressionism, and Warhol, and the Wanderers, and a dashing Socialist Realism. Again, an element of delusion - but convincing.
and virtuosity is - all the fun it was made.
And what I say: everything is in place - I've never been so famously did not write, even play with this daring.
There is a traditional myth about the poor unfortunate artist, who honestly express themselves, and after death comes glory, and the pictures are unbelievable money ...
So my situation after the death. I died as an artist in poverty in 1995. I just live to the next life and the success of this posthumous think.
Actually, as far as changing the success of money?
The question I have already decided 20 years ago. I did a long time to sell paintings: do, show your friends and put on the wall. And then there are buyers, literally from the hands snatching away. I persuaded myself then that it does not matter and will have no effect on me. Actually, my love affair with America and ended when my galeristka Phyllis Kind said: "Do the same thing" - and I continued to write, that I wonder. Sales at auction are pleasant, inspiring, this is equivalent to the demand, but the fact that as I do, they do not. I have so much time spent in the ass, all his life spitting against the wind, one against all, and what - now begin to adjust? I returned 12 years later, came to life not in order to calculate that how much it costs. Pretty brazen challenge not to look for a niche, but create it.
It is evident that you like to write, why do you have deprived yourself for so many years of pleasure?
And there was no fun. That first fight, struggling ... and then you already know everything interesting. I Eric Bulatov complained, he said: "So, a professional".
You're only the big picture do?
For me it was very important and still allow the viewer to enter into the work. Therefore, my paintings always lose when playing in the books, catalogs ...
Your computer is better obtained.
Perhaps, there is the glow of the screen ...
And who bought it, you know?
Not all. "Family Portrait", diptych - Roman Abramovich bought.
There is your wife, child on the pot. And if he will commission a portrait of his family - write?
I never did anything to order. I force myself to write a commercial I can not. Just when you give quality things, that in itself is perceived as a desire to sell.
You're all already doing - writing books and paintings, painted, photographed ...
Cinema - the only one not to sing. My original intent - finding out the relationship with life when you realize that your being separated from her, with her battle. I take what I was stung on my mobile trying to fix this moment, the moment of human emotional integration. It's important that what happens in two steps: in the stories do not have to go anywhere - just Open your eyes.
Эти 12 пользователя(ей) сказали Спасибо Евгений за это полезное сообщение:
Works from the collections of the museum of modern art ART4.RU
1.Poet Lev Rubinstein (from "The Moscow Subway")
1987, 160h270
2.Passazhirka (from "The shuttle bus")
1984, 150h110
3.Podruzhki
1989, 160h271
4.Intelligentnye people
1990, 106,5 x200
5.Est housing - there is ... (from "The Train")
1990, 140h236
6.Bogomolka. From a series of trolley
2007, 210h130
Эти 8 пользователя(ей) сказали Спасибо Евгений за это полезное сообщение:
Actually, creativity Faibisovich I was not inspiring. His paintings are painfully reminiscent of computer processing of images made with filters "in a single click. But about contemporary art, (including, perhaps, of his), he wrote quite correctly. Bring it under for 12 years, but, as you can see, the situation during this period little changed.
Читать дальше...
Simon Faibisovich
"ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF DATE OF ART"
1. Cheshire Cat Smile
Transformation.
The process of aesthetic development of the world, conceived as a sense of vision and eyes as his authorities, who for thousands of years the foundation of artistic creation, today decays. It is absurd and indecent even call the current so-called current artfunktsionirovanie visual or plastic art. It takes place in forms and places very remote from the alma obscene and in this sense, the leader among all the arts. Transformations are carried out by post-modernism, seem more revolutionary and avant-garde than all the achievements of avant-garde. Appeared completely changed the remit of the proposed artist, method of operation and recruit him and other interested parties who wish to realize themselves in artmire. Refusal artist's right to personal feeling, aesthetic experience and utterance broke in every conceivable place of traditional cycle of artistic psychosomatics: the eye - the brain - the hand - eye ... No honors buried painting and general painting, sculpture and general plastic. Also given in brackets the actual outcome for all manifestations associated with traditional notions of professionalism and quality in general. On the contrary, sharply increased the status of gesture and language of work (text, context, discussion of the text, discussion of context, the linkage of texts and contexts, and so forth). This fact predetermined, inter alia, the convergence of languages, the arts and criticism, which allowed criticism to enter the actual art space, directly take on the organization of the artistic process and the activities of the artist.
Once again on the identity. We, as always, is in a special, peculiar situation: for decades the local art was of a pronounced character of the reservation. He showed himself in a panic and enclosure from the "corrupting influence of bourgeois art, and painstakingly building up its own space, and in the upbringing of the culture of past centuries - to" all the best, "created in the world before the accession of the Bolsheviks.
Today, we clear up the mess that failure in time, prolonged immersion in timelessness: the producer and consumer of beauty, and a mediator between them come into the twenty-first century, is cooking in cauldrons of cultural processes going on in the civilized world in the twentieth century. We have them just not a relationship, and therefore is so strong bias towards explanation of the relationship with the art of the past, including the preceding centuries. In this way - the two major current trends, although they are diametrically directed:
1) searching and digging up roots, prostration to the spring, the massive return of prodigal sons;
2) the desire to break with all that was to start all over again, to become Ivan, oblivious of his kinship (often in the Oedipus version).
That is today's nostalgia for all sorts of golden ages, on the one hand, and nihilism, richly flavored with the Oedipus complex, on the other - soprirodny. This organic matter personally, I have mixed feelings, being both a source and pessimism, and some optimism.
In isolation. World art of the twentieth century led the avant-garde artist in isolation from the rearguard of the bourgeois audience, claiming the right of the creator of the obviously vseponimanie and vsechuvstvovanie and recognizes a consumer deliberate failure, backwardness and failure to live up to the artist. It was designated a split in the elite art and kitsch. The first was to appeal to vseponimaniyu experts and "real" connoisseurs and treat all others, the second - to nichegoneponimaniyu "ordinary" bourgeois. About the same time arose the "Salon" art. This kind of "new" art, adapted to the existing aesthetic, ethical and other notions - the vanguard of the second freshness. It was intended for people "taste" (since the actual specifics of that at the time when it is beyond the scope of existing notions, including taste, aesthetic).
It is crucial to note that the whole of the twentieth century the actual art (or rather, art, declared by such "actual" criticism) has been left and ask them shocking challenges were consistently negativistic wing, as designed to irritate and tease a safe, positive "right" man in the street. So gradually the situation developed when the "actual", "modern" has become associated exclusively with the nihilistic, negative nominations. Innovation, caught in a mismatch such applications, or the sin of continuity, or other violations of the rules of the game (often changing during the game), to expose, the legislative procedures for the withdrawal beyond the "actual" and their authors were forced either to drift in the direction of the saloon and kitsch, or falling into the gap between the actual and the art showroom - so that the status of outsiders had long existed, for example, Giorgio Marandi and to some extent, Francis Bacon (the latter was lucky to belong to sexual minorities). Well, the names of many other artists, stuck in this gap, few people and say little, because they did not lead get out.
Simultaneously, the actual art all consistently refused to emotional and sensory parameters and leverage (all the more confident the ball right to criticize, and the artist left fewer and fewer opportunities to be seen differently than arousing their attention, but to bring it to the emotionally-sensory level was becoming more difficult: such they have either not available or was in an atrophied condition - consequence Historically the selection criteria in the profession), and kitsch as forces destroyed his field appeals to the intellect. However, this did not prevent critics unanimously denounce the "marginal phenomenon": the left they were accused of bourgeois and misoneism, and the right - in the absence of clarity and sensitivity. Attempts to connect the relevance of whatever was positive qualities, attempts to organize in the art meeting space, a living thought and feeling nesurrogatnym became increasingly insistent pursued across this space, and various arbors and adapters - the traditional meeting place and vzaimooplodotvoreniya thoughts and feelings - are ruined.
It is hard not to notice that the closure of the elitist art on negationist constructions, the current range which is very broad - from pure intellectualism to the pure bullying, increasing its inhumane component and leads to a deep cynicism, and the closure of popular culture on the satisfaction of the simplest ways to query vneintellektualnymi teaches "mass" to respond all reflex, like Pavlov's dog.
Yet this state of affairs would have to agree, or at least tolerate, if in life and it was - the elite and the crowd. Of theories, emanating from the alignment of as a given, really lacks - wolves and sheep, shepherds and sheep, and so forth, and those who are internally prepared to identify themselves with the elite, there is no problem to include the rest of the crowd.
But what to do with any real normal, nezakompleksovannymi while culturally biased people who have to have the same eyes and that it is precisely because of its properties have neither need nor internal reason to classify themselves either to the "elite" or the "mass ? Declare and their marginal and therefore stop paying attention to them and refer to them? About this happens: somehow arranged so that these people are outcasts, not only in manufacturing but also in consumption of artistic products.
In this respect, the nineteenth century was, it seems, still pogumanney and ponormalney. Fine Arts then began to actively end up out of collections on display (including by making collections in the exhibition). There was public, and the artist became a public figure, the object of attention not only to customers (as before) or criticism (like today), but also the widest, while at least minimally prepared audience.
Although not get too carried away by nostalgia and remember, for example, that Soviet culture inherited from the XIX century and the other is not only and not so much technology communications, as stereotypes of perception: it is aesthetic views and preferences of the entire XX century left us at the XIX - " Stranger, "" Swan Lake "and the portico, beyond which danced little swans.
Nor should we forget that the nineteenth century paved the way for the victory of a new artistic hand. And if the relationship of avant-garde artistic consciousness and totalitarian social systems, born of the revolution, to some extent understood, the role in this process of Sigmund Freud is strongly undervalued. Not only that, as a result of Freudian revolution to replace the "conscious" of impressionism and cubism, opened the new visual parameters of the real world and the pictorial and plastic possibilities of the transfer, abstraction and Surrealism came, operated the subconscious and appealed to him, and then post-modernism , canceled altogether reality. It is also the fact that there have been undermined confidence and interest in the very possibility of a conscious (and conceptual, and sensory) comprehension of something as a producer and vosprinimatelem and, thus, was substantially weakened the link between them. This facilitated the maintenance of art in isolation from the consumer, as well as excessive swelling of predetermined shapes mediator, interpreter of the subconscious, a therapist from the aesthetic - the critic.
It would be risky and even reckless to assert that Soviet citizens were more fortunate because he fed entirely indigestible Marxist-Leninist aesthetics rather than appetizing Freudian-Jungian, but it is not funny, it thus seems to have managed to avoid something actually corrupting.
Curse. If the dominant artistic life of the West was the confrontation of modern art Quichua and salons, we have it monitored except in the underground cellar. Only here was displayed quite a difference between artists who were engaged in chewing and digestion of grazing land (surrounded by the real socialism) in order to transform it into an art object (recall our definition of modern art) and art belong to the people "(as represented by the Soviet intelligentsia and bourgeois diplomats ). However, the underground, though a micro model of civilized art situation, was located outside the actual (unreported) the cultural situation, that is, as art, lived a little outside the culture.
At the same time on the cultural surface were heated debates about the Glazunov and Shilov, Glazunov, and Moschus, left and right MOSH MOSH, etc. If you wish, and here it was possible to perceive the confrontation kitsch-saloon and "contemporary art", albeit in a paradoxical form ( which, however, natural for the anti-world). Kicevo-function salon customer service - only the state, not private bourgeois - perform a custom mouthpiece. And the equivalent of "actual" was "present", "true" art. For some, this role played Glazunov kitsch, for others - levomoshovskoe salon imitation - a different kind of stylization, or country roads versions of fashionable trends of Western art.
Our "real" art corresponded Gdańsk "topical" and on the essential level: a synonym of both was the concept of "modern". Just because we lived in timelessness, arts and artistic consciousness, which lived some local realities, sought support in the eternity - cleans everything that could, on short-term pollution.
Naturally, in a world where time - money, the only stuyaschim proclaimed art that can sensitively capture the challenges of time and respond to it. Our left critic of the romantic sincerely believed that he had one point of view on life enough, and comfortably settled in, picking up his favorite authors. A critique of the Western-pragmatics in a situation of fierce competition and the destruction of more or less stable criteria required art, accurate and responsive to its guiding installation.
As the occurrence of our art "during" it also started to grow processes of actualization. Not least, this happens through the rapid growth of the role of gesture - he's, by definition, the most rapid, direct and expressive tool for adequate response. In this respect, he wins even a word. What can we say about the lack of competitiveness in the new situation of any traditional forms of artistic expression - "completely discredited strategy of individual creativity." Perhaps the only remains as it is today accepted a nostalgic sigh about it. And yet, farewell to the Soviet period, noted in the same nostalgic vein that as it may seem ridiculous, "in Council" there is a place where dwelt the art, perhaps more free than today. Art after all is free, when not dependent on ideology and money. From ideology does not depend on when the artist is inwardly free, and the money - when a lot of them or when they do not need much: stay in internal exile freed from ideological dependence, and life in the Soviet Union - from the material.
Migration. There are many classification systems arts. Let us cast away the hierarchical - such as Hegel, or: Of all the arts is important for us ...", - the creators of which either act on behalf of the truth, or are guided by a revolutionary expediency, greed, etc. Other systems are divided into art, for example, visual and verbal, with the membership muses on the plastic and dynamic, etc. In this classification, the sense of today's processes with the former plastic and visual arts can be defined as an attempt to change the space habitat. If in working order, enter the division of arts (perhaps such a classification exists, simply unknown author) on productivity, trade, on the one hand, and the ephemeral, sign - on the other, the former izoplastika trying to jump from one into the other. Artistic representation learned to get along without the author's first product, then do without the products.
The beginning of the first phase laid, as we know, Marcel Duchamp, in 1917 putting in a urinal as art exhibits, and so far advanced the world mostly through his criticism commits all of its administration: the emergence of an exhibit of factory products allowed to start a permanent flow of water from the bath where splashing artist. (The author is not an enemy nor a "Ready Made", or installation. It is, on the one hand, of the objective processes, but on the other - on efforts to influence them and use them in their struggle for power.)
For samples of high-quality consumer goods, followed by low-quality samples, then their fragments and bits and pieces, then - a diverse litter. If, before the Duchamp piece of art, no doubt, was what made the artist, now for the first time a problem of identification: that is a work of art? what is it? Searched answer was that a work of art is what comes to the exhibition, on display. Thus arose the patent syndrome: who would guess that an exhibit the first, he and the chief fellow.
In the 60's of the British group "Fluxus" is registered in the various forms of artistic agency demonstrations (Share-holding), and thus marked a new neeksponibelny and vnematerialny, a way of artistic representation (in the 70 team Andrew Monastyrskoye "collective action" was to impose Share-holding and on our soil). Critics again a little thought - and as a result of the art is that the fall in the catalog.
All of this logical chain comes from the fact that more and more advanced product is indistinguishable from household items, other objects and manifestations of environmental changes and ways of living in it, as well as various functions of the social, natural and administration, etc., so it can be reliably singled out and identified as a work of art only by making it in a special context. First, such a context, it was declared a show, well, and when it was nothing to show - directory. By virtue of the dialed it did not take too long to declare the art only that which falls into the catalog. There is even a special "art catalog, where the viewer is far removed from the artistic process, and the process of acquiring the features of the priesthood.
In this permanent revolution, several interrelated aspects and consequences. In addition to the marked progress of the classification, ie the transition of artistic activity in the category of non-tradables, unproductive, it is essential that the work of art there is no longer as a result of professional activities, but as a result of selection, expertise, references: falling into the directory - so, the arts, not horrible - means, not art. Consequently the true creators (demiurges) a new culture are those who are directories.
In addition, are well-defined artistic penetration into adjacent arts and culture in general and, conversely, to borrow. If the "Fluxus" put into circulation an artistic demonstration, a former pilot Wehrmacht Josef Beuys at approximately the same years, their manifestos and public actions he is actively trying to influence the social environment (today widely regarded as the founder of the movement of "green") and its installations, intrudes into the architecture - deals with problems of organization of space. The same "Fluxus", and behind her, Ilya Kabakov, and after him "medgermenevty" enter into the artistic appeal kvazinauchny discourse - boxes with cells in which something is stored, labels, tags, tables and graphs, flasks, retorts, zaspirtovyvanie, drying up and so on laboratory-thesis-arhivariusnuyu gyrations. In boysovskih installations too much on the chemical laboratories and at the same time from the warehouse of billets and finished products: it is carefully and skillfully worked to increase the gap between what the artist had to report and that the spectator could perceive no general and specialized training to meet the specific artist and his specific product. Drafted vneemotsionalny language vneesteticheskogo's message.
The paradoxical logic of this process, giving the status of his genius and the status of the great proponents of its activists, increasingly lowering the social role and cultural status of the artist in general. It was becoming increasingly difficult to not only read's message, but also size up the specifics of artistic work as distinct from nehudozhnicheskoy, its uniqueness, phenomenology. That is, simultaneously and in parallel was sealed and modern art in the sense of fewer opportunities for the uninitiated to grasp the essence of the process and its results (an increase of the priesthood), and decompression in the sense of blurring the borders with blundering until the undifferentiated same uninitiated, who is who and what is what and where is that.
All his life, partly through the shocking, partly through the loss of intelligibility and the rejection of their own language, "modern" (the actual left) art challenged the first "ordinary person", ie a wide audience, and after, and narrow - a cultural biases (including ready pay for it) - moving away from them. However, achieving the desired, ie, almost complete freedom and independence from the consumer, it is found (what a surprise), loss of interest in itself to such an extent that his cherished elite began to smell the relevance of marginality, and the gap between art and the man in the street was so loud that catches Challenges already did not reach its destination. In this situation "urgent" conscious possession of a new idea - to attract attention at any cost. Center of gravity of the fight for representation and identification was carried from the most hermetic in the most open space: with the directories on the media - especially electronic - as well as directly into the element of rumors and gossip. That is now the chief art was not even the one that gets in special sections of periodicals and special TV-radio programs, and what gets in the chronicle of news and information - and began an active search for appropriate forms of expression. The achievements of our local artistic forces (just logged into a global process) at this stage of irrefutable. The most attractive form for them for obvious reasons, was a radical gesture - the escalation of pure outrageous (with one hand, the rich tradition of artistic scandal dates back to the decadence on the other hand, the rich tradition of Russo-Soviet domestic boorishness). In public nudity, reupload them obscene words, biting people, sinking his pants, public natural origin, sex, and perversion were the most prevalent and critical acclaimed artistic goods - a key way of meeting the desires of the local "relevance" of art once owned by the people.
At this stage we can state the full output of the artist for the boundary of its former habitat and complete obespredmechivanie results of its activities. It is not even hanging in the air smiling Cheshire cat, because there is no longer any certainty that: a) smile cat, and b) it is generally smile b) on the seat of the Cheshire cat in general, anything left.
2. Pessimistic optimism
And once again about identity. Of course, the real situation is not so stiff, especially in the West, where the general lines generally carried out with difficulty. There still alive powerful institution private collectors operate modern art galleries - intermediaries between the artist and the buyer, who live mainly from the sale of works. And in order for the other institutions of the final death suitable for collectors of modern art - it is their own death, and how they can fight for survival. A powerful institution of criticism is heterogeneous and, along with the "killers" include professionals, honestly and clearly reviewed exhibit activity that is supportive in the community interest in news of artistic life through the creation of the contact information at an adequate level.
Our artistic situation, apparently recalling several western, in essence, a simulated or reproduced in exaggerated form. In the early 90's artrynok really naklyunulsya, but have not yet hatched got a bunch of specific features, which wrecked and dove.
Institute of collectors began to emerge, mostly not from individuals, but on the basis of impersonal corporate (banks, trading houses, etc.), with the assistance of professional experts for the selection of works. Accordingly, the collection began to be created not from the individual works of individual authors, liked the collector, and "directional" and Skopje. The quality of work and ideology of the collections reflect more the tastes and installation consultants than the preferences of collectors. At first, a predetermined alignment rather stormy procurement (especially if we take into account the easy money, floated at the time of this contingent of collectors), which looked particularly impressive against the backdrop of the then stagnant western artrynka (related including the economic recession). Moscow on the whole world had the reputation of a place to buy art, and even some quite solid western gallery was taken here on the sale of its well-known artists.
At the same time came a lot of local modern art galleries, but the owners of galleries were mostly not business as "they", and artists and critics. This fact has provided a high degree of extravagance exposition of life: instead of the routine of regular exhibitions of gallery artists, that is the representation of names, the emphasis was placed on the representation of processes and phenomena that are most relevant at the moment, but the whole gallery-life was riddled with force fields coaching. Thus, there is very high, almost total dependence of the galleries of momentary fashion, attitudes of criticism and curatorial whims and is very low - on the preferences of the buyer.
Well, the critic's head did not take its primary task - professional and conscientious reviewing exhibitions, ie the reduction of the artist with the audience and potential buyer. On the contrary, threw herself stealing them as far away from each other, demoralize both and, taking all the space between them, and to offer to both ourselves as the most attractive object artzhizni.
The killer among us in accordance with the spirit of the time, became the most fashionable kind of professional criticism - clearly dominant over the others. That criticism killer began to identify the artistic strategy of periodicals, representing the interested reader to the actual artistic life.
Left critic-killer in Western culture - it is not orderly forest: there artists destroyed silence critics, rather than criticism. Rather, it serves as a sort of computer virus, norovyaschego erase any existing or emerging programs, any positive and productive tasks. But, first, in their structured and pluralistic culture and consciousness, the jobs will play and there are new programs, and secondly, as in everything else, then there is a certain mock, ponaroshkovost, so, for example, artists are proud of disparaging criticism of giants does not less than positive: both - advertising: you can hang on the wall.
We have, firstly, there is no leading lights, so there is nothing to be proud of, and secondly, there is no structured and plurality. Instead, the actual space artzhizni, as we have all opened, arranged quite municipal - as totalitarian, as closely and as stuffy air. In these conditions (who, if not us, it is known) tales tend to become true stories, and murder for fun are total loss seriously.
In general, it was easy enough to push as a change in financial situation, that these parts artrynok quickly came to collapse. Once passed it is time to easy money and it is time to fast, corporations, collecting and underground collection of contemporary art not with the eyes and ears, having heard that they have collected "wrong", in the pursuit of fast money with ease (in the absence of any was personal attachments), renounced his proposal and started a number of ways to market their collections, thereby devaluing them. They've heard that the art - it is a good investment, but apparently nobody told them that contemporary art is to become a reliable capital, should lie, that is, cease to be modern, not least it is a long stay in serious collection creates its price.
Accordingly, the gallery has two or three years ago, relied on the formation of the internal market and the support of Russian art in the national capital as the main conditions of a decent player in the global market today, with rare exceptions, do not even try to live by the sale of contemporary art in the domestic market (due to lack of the latter), that is, in essence, ceased to be the galleries, leaving himself one name.
And killerskaya criticism, having achieved its full dominance in artmire, while the general was pointless army. TV shows, highlighting the artistic life, are closed, as well as monopolized killerskoy criticism strip art periodicals, and new editions are trying to stay away from these guys and girls, and though late in the day, but until themselves beginning to understand that, voluptuously dezavuiruya "wrong" ( ie, commodity), contemporary art, they cut the branch on which sat. As it turns out that if there are no good artists and bad criticism, and certainly not needed.
So, with a high degree of approximation can now be talking about our lack of real and Institute of sale, and a real institution for collecting, tracking and real institution really missing processes - again, a smile of a cat instead of the animal itself, again a gesture rather than a tangible object.
If ... When in the beginning of the article dealt with a certain optimism associated with the preoccupations of the local cultural consciousness in the nineteenth rather than in the twentieth century, had in mind, on the one hand, the presence of interlayer (albeit small) sufficiently educated and interested audience, do not become yet no in consumer kitsch nor consumers elitist (to the same immune to the ideological zamorochek). On the other hand, the modern-minded artists who are at the same time have a professional skill, do not hesitate to express the plastic (or more - a visual language) and do not feel the need to change the nature of their profession - seeking only to expand the traditional understanding of its challenges and opportunities. That is, the presence of representatives of the profession of evolutionary rather than revolutionary consciousness.
If such a spectator allowed to meet with, for example, painters, like Erik Bulatov, Oleg Vassiliev, Valery Kashlyakov, who knows, maybe it would be possible to break the monopoly of Glazunov soul "lovers of beauty."
And if a new social order claimed, for example, Alexander Brodsky and Ilya Utkin, Boris Orlov, Vladimir Govorkova and other "obemschikov and masters of space organization, rather than surrender Moscow Tsereteli, we already would have had much more reason to be proud of their capital .
But the authorities paid tribute to the time, only changing through ideologichnogo painter to thoroughly pragmatic muralist, not violating the faithfulness to the total Quichua. And art critic could not invent better than to change the reservation to the Soviet consciousness with Russia's provincial tradition in its various manifestations, one of which - the desire to be holier than the Pope.
Two sides of one coin. Curiously, it is no accident that left the actual art, and the right of state-patriotic kitsch, in many respects similar. First, the installation of social parasites: they can not exist outside of direct or indirect seats on the budget and do not see themselves differently. First of taxpayer money distorts the aesthetic environment of their habitat, second, the very freedom, turn away from a private buyer, that is, deliberately passed up the opportunity samookupaniya, now stuffed in prizhivaly the state treasury.
Purely ideological fundamentally "spiritual" state and essentially "unspiritual" actual art - also close relatives. First, because vnehudozhestvennosti their facilities. Secondly, the arts, a challenge to all except their own negationist manifestations, can be considered as a phenomenon of pure "spirituality", which only the reverse side of the same coin.
Besides, dezavuiruya all qualitative manifestations, "killing and burying good artists, killerskaya criticism objectively serviced and kichevikov, convert them plagiatstvo, grafomanstvo and poor quality of the inherent properties of modern art. Is that postmodernism claims that all make-believe, and have "these" all in all seriousness, but through the speculative space, and this opposition is easy vzaimoobratima.
The situation is compounded by the fact that Russia - a country with traditionally very strong verbal and very weak visual culture. Undeveloped aesthetic vision of "common man" of course, the more that "art belongs to the people" never engaged in its development, but also the criticism in this sense, too, for the most part "of the simple". And if we add to this, encouraged by her caste notions of hierarchical priority of verbal, will not seem surprising her sincere belief that no criticism should scrutinize and scrutinize the work of the artist and the artist should listen and grasp the meaning of criticism.
Rejecting any system of coordinates (and the aesthetic and ethical), struggling with the culture of the visual message and perception, criticism of "clean" all that could be perceived as an unbiased spectator of a real alternative to bare, cocoa, masturbating, etc., Kings, on the one hand, and Glazunov, Klykov, Tsereteli - on the other. In this case the latter are outside the field of irrigation, which is quite eloquently confirms all of the above.
Shock wave. The role and place of coaching and criticism in today's artmire (especially the place here) is unprecedented not only in comparison with the previous worlds, but with parallel - for example, with the situation in the literature. Literary criticism in its manifestations, even the most drastic (not to the same non-dominant) is still doomed to track an actual literary process and does not deny the fact of its existence. Criticism can talk about myself as a kind of literature (like, not without reason) or even as a main kind of literature, but it does not pretend to completely ignore the authors working in other genres, and readers of these genres, to identify with their activities the whole literary process, to replace it. In artmire happened just that, and the artist, at best, relegated to the role of the critic-proof of the correctness of the curator, and audience - in general any (incident not so long ago, the announcement by Western critics, chief critic of the spectator - highly intelligent and deeply sophisticated form of bullying him, is not the first transformation of the viewer a comic character demiurgic productions of "actual" art).
So the idea of the attenuation of the artistic life of its traditional borders is not a product of the author's imagination, inflamed resentment and bias. The proof of the absence here of any artistic process has been for several years, the basic content of the work, such as the Center for Contemporary Art (the flagship of the local "relevance") led by Viktor Misiano (the most prestigious overseas the local critic and curator). Actually, during these few years, everything happened. After all, to bring the corpse, you must first commit murder - on the matter and formed the main efforts of the flagship. It is here established reputation Anatoly Osmolovsky and Alexander Brener - unsurpassed gesture, do not know any other artistic skill, the brilliant illustrators critics claim that there is "nothing else". Later they were joined by "new" Kulik. These three have been declared victor of the local artmira - The main and only artist. Grateful Oleg Kulik transformed the three great artists in the top five by adding to it Misiano Marat Gelman - the main founders of the principal and the only artist (perhaps sincerely nedoponimaya, what is the true hierarchy, that is how it looks in the eyes of the creators).
In the energy these artists can not refuse - we will not refuse, and endowment. And even more illustrative way, who now choose, for example, talented provincials for prosperity in the capitals. For example, Kulik old-did songs from the plexiglass, developed the concept of "transparency" and very successfully performed ekspozitsionerom, having achieved this recognition and fame. The element of provocation is always present, but at some point, the artist realized that losing the field of modern art to those involved in pure provocation, that is pure gesture, and (as importantly - to win) rushed to catch up and distill: run around naked on all fours (in appearance, claimed as a dog), and biting; engage in unnatural unnatural manner relation (the goat) and present at trade shows and publications documenting these relationships; assert its claims to chair the President of Russia from the party (he reviled) animals, and so and so forth
Not in Israel, which has achieved literary recognition of the poet Brener first came to Moscow, began to foul in public and masturbating, and then came up with the parasitic corporatization: Prigov shouted in his speech, Yeltsin summoned poboksirovat with him on Calvary, a bouquet of roses, as if he had brought a gift, othlestyval cheeks visiting curators at the opening of the local show (say, the same studied abroad), choked a little less "reckless" than himself, kritikessu Lyudmila Lunin, and so on and so forth
It is worth to note that the heroes of the new wave is not just an active gesture, but often with the properties of the shock wave - the ability to destroy, bruise and demoralize. Or, if you use radioanalogiyami stagnant pores, they are great masters turn off other sources of waves, and (often just that way) to switch all the attention on himself. I think this is their original contribution to contemporary art and very valuable - in the achievement of the objectives Misiano.
As you can see, all sorts of boundaries while being destroyed so that the habitats of cultural and physical aggression are often identical and the artist ceases to be different from the ordinary hooligan. In the case of Kulik characteristic that this kind of operation the last time he performs the role of foreplay or the framing of the renewed (only reoriented to Abroad) plastic work: only placed in such a frame, its products (by the way, sometimes very successful) are finally attracting the attention of the benevolent elite criticism of the buyer.
And yet it moves? Yet artistic life there. There is also the art market - for example, in December 1996 the first big art fair opens in Manege, and in March 1997, the first alternative is to open in the House of the artist.
Manegnaya produced a weird impression of "the youth" ten-fifteen years ago. As if once again earned a timeless machine. However, the proportions have changed: now "socialist realism" huddled in the corners, also found there and kitsch that comes with the Little Georgian, and prevailed over them "left MOSH. That is, in this version of the venerable Moscow curators whale salon won elephant kitsch. Two or three non-profit and quite convincing personal exposure could not change the fundamental alignment.
The House of the artist is expected to arrange a fair of contemporary art. I wonder what product she suggested. Because I know today's "hot" art galleries (at the current division of galleries and commercial means that the first more inclined to submit new phenomena and to create new image, while the latter - to trade and taste things that are good), only "Yakut Gallery" has consistently upheld right to existence and qualitative objective (in the physical sense) art.
With regard to long-term visitors all sorts of the local art exhibitions, the problem of distinguishing primary and secondary art solved by them, as far as I know, mostly at the sensory level: the sense that all this is somewhere you have already seen, it was a true indicator kitsch-salon disaster. A primary was there, where there is a sense of the meeting or play - involuntary lively interest.
In today's exposition of life not only deliberately kitsch salons, but often "relevant" hangouts soon produce the first than the second impression. And, I think, not only because of the nature of many prescription products, projects and strategies (as if they were all taken from a cookbook). Maybe also because of their atmosphere is no risk: the challenge is puffy and willingness to play - no. And how can we say has not yet been said, without risking to say "wrong", explained one get for it on the head, etc.?
Its part of the road. After a detailed conversation about suppliers, advertisers and vendors of artistic production is appropriate conversation about the consumer: Who are the judges (including those who judge her purse)? And if a certain optimism in assessing the "client" has been expressed, it should give the word and pessimism - painfully Dick "client". Even before the blessed to the artist of the nineteenth century, during his bondage to the customer, the customer was still sufficiently advanced to understand that artists are different: Hals not been offered jobs, having in mind the brush, size and theme of Rubens, and Vermeer - Snyders .
As for us at the end of the twentieth century at one end of the stick - complete contempt for the steep art to the consumer, but on the other - ignorance and tyranny of the customer, we can say the feudal syndrome (back to basics - so to complete the program). Today's nouveau riche, perhaps, and not averse to inherit Tretyakov, Morozov, and Tsvetaeva, but the will of fate is doomed to reproduce historical subjects themselves at an adequate cultural level.
A similar pattern of behavior and demonstrates the new government, for example in the face of Moscow's mayor. Apparently, the sincere desire to please the Muscovites because of the glorious anniversary of their beloved city, he vigorously adorns Moscow for its taste. Yuri Mikhailovich, apparently, it seems that as a result of it, Zurab heroic efforts of the dust is just as though sprinkled with live water, the heroic spirit of the people will rise, but so far in real life is out of the water, then out of the ground like mushrooms after rain grow freaks and monsters.
As a disinterested spectator, including cultural, it is also, along with an upbeat potency carries a pessimistic and inertia: its conviction that art belongs and must belong to him, just and produces various forms of art belong to the people "(including number and intelligent). But art does not belong and should not belong to any nation, as well as no nation should belong to the art. Just as it should be in partnership, mutually beneficial and mutually respectful relations, each side must take to meet another part of its path.
* I define the actual art as a kind of artistic effort, through which the art or object of art is that prior to the application of these efforts is not very good (not considered).
Early work.
1.Benzovoz Shell 1982 oil on canvas.
2.B queue for the wine, 1987, oil on canvas. (Sold at auction 205,250 EUR)
3. Life bottles 1984 canvas, oil.
4.Na Platform 1988 oil on canvas.
Gorbachev 5.Portret Gorbachova № 2 1987 oil on canvas.
6. Waiting for sausage 1989 canvas.
7. Soldiers (series at the station) 1989 oil on canvas. (Sold at auction for 311000evr)
8.Proschanie 1985 oil on canvas.
9. Family portrait in the room 1982, oil on canvas. (Sold at auction for 180,500 EUR)
10. Black Sea, once more look at 1986, oil on canvas. (Sold at auction 300500evr).
Эти 5 пользователя(ей) сказали Спасибо Евгений за это полезное сообщение:
Actually, creativity Faibisovich I was not inspiring. His paintings are painfully reminiscent of computer processing of images made with filters "in one click»
With this statement does not agree. No recalls. In the pictures Faibisovich is something that can not be in the best photographs, the ambiguity of meaning, if not impossible to picture light, energy, embedding into the picture when you create now comes out of it for us and the audience. Must be a master to "paused a moment"'s creative, attractive, memorable. Not everybody can make a reportage shot a work of art. Faibisovich-master, of course.
Эти 6 пользователя(ей) сказали Спасибо таша за это полезное сообщение:
Pictorial techniques chosen by the artist in accordance with the objectives which it sets itself, or in a match that dictate these tasks. In other words, selectable by the artist technique causes the final result and was originally motivated by the artist, and can not be only good packaging for the product or marketing ploy of the artist. It's strange, when the artist complicates what can be done easily, ie not understand why pictures, then process the image in Photoshop, and then transfer it to the canvas with oil. Does not it easier and more honest it would be to print one image size you want (and do many other artists). And then get some kind of falsification of the creative process.
This applies not only to Faibisovich, but also to many other artists. I even dare say that this problem is the fine art of our days. And the problem is that the emergence of a large number of technical features to the "artists" just for profanirovaniya creative process.
Эти 7 пользователя(ей) сказали Спасибо Тютчев за это полезное сообщение:
Early work.
1.Benzovoz Shell 1982 oil on canvas.
2.B queue for the wine, 1987, oil on canvas.
3. Life bottles 1984 canvas, oil.
4.Na Platform 1988 oil on canvas.
Gorbachev 5.Portret Gorbachova № 2 1987 oil on canvas.
6. Waiting for sausage 1989 canvas.
7. Soldiers (series at the station) 1989 oil on canvas.
8.Proschanie 1985 canvas, maslo.jpg
9. Family portrait in the room 1982, oil on canvas.
10. Black Sea, once more look at 1986, oil on canvas.
Per kilometer can be seen that this coloring by photographs. Painfully fotoobektivnye proportions. And at the ninth as much time on his hands drawn, especially the peasant overalls. Apparently no one got sfotat in a delicate spot. Although if the author himself is not hiding, then an art, but rather from the "mixed media".
Этот пользователь сказал Спасибо Posav за это полезное сообщение:
13.09.2009, 08:00
Artist Simon Faibisovich
Линейный вид
Похожие темы