In memory of Konstantin Makovsky
In Memory of Konstantin Makovskiy, "Apollo" No. 8 - 9, 1915
Apollo, No. 8 – 9, 1915
Memory of the Constantine Makovski
Vsevolod Dmitriev
Konstantin Makovsky says little to the generations that replaced the leaders The 1980s and 1990s. They do not know the days when the name of this artist was repeated all over Russia, when his “Boyar Feast”, his “Death of John the Terrible” by the best representatives of the then artistic criticism were ranked among the first-class examples of the Russian school of painting, when the whole world challenged each other’s honor to pose for Makovsky, when – finally – Tsar Alexander P called him “his own artist”.They are also unfamiliar with the other moods caused by this master: they do not know and do not understand the struggle against the virtuoso of the brush and the pampering of society.
These later generations must be astonished at both, both of which must seem to them excessive and historical. I don't think so.
I must say that Makovsky's artistic achievements now have to be "discovered" again - we are so thoroughly accustomed to passing by his canvases without looking, and, perhaps, the artist himself, with his works of recent years, increasingly sharply emphasized the irreconcilable discord between his ideals and the taste of new generations. But let us turn to the past, to Konstantin Egorovich Makovsky’s glorified – and in other parts quite rightly – past.At least to the "Balagans" (1869), to his early experience ingrand art. "Balagany" aroused the enthusiasm of contemporaries, sincerely admired them relatively recently A. Benois, and more recently, the other day ("Speech" 16 September). S.G.) this picture was called a successful fulfillment of the “mission of Menzel complexity”.
However, in this remarkable picture, the real Makovsky is almost not there; he only “sees” somewhere, especially in the foreground splinters in the originality of a stroke, sweeping and together fractional, in some exaggerated way. c in t and c o c and t. But all this is more likely to be guessed in the heavy-weight “mobile” school of “Balaganov”: the colors are diligently mixed in white – therefore monotonous earthlings, therefore with lead plaque (traces of the influence of Makovsky’s childhood studies with Zaryanko and Tropinin, as well as Perov’s passions, hobbies that even more strongly affected in the “Funeral”, 1872, or in the portrait of Ostrovsky – 1871).
But these “Moscow” influences are characteristically crossed in the development of Makovsky with a new despotic influence – Bryullov, which allowed his further work to be brought closer to Bryullov’s epigones – Semiradsky and V.P. Vereshchagin.Heavy, but strong in its simplicity, Perov’s letter he willingly replaced the “liquid” and charming by its colorful Brullovsky podmalyevkom (an example of such a bait – coat and fur collar on the portrait of the artist Popov in 1863, and finally, as the experience of synthesis of Perov and Bryullov – a portrait of the artist Petrov in 1871).
However, his keen and receptive talent did not stop there; one trip to Europe was enough for unexpected and new powers to appear in his brush. Let us pay attention to how the arapchonok was written in the group closest to the viewer on the right in The Transfer of the Sacred Carpet (1876). The task of writing a human face and clothes in a large scale (compared to the very small size and detailed exposition of the figures of the middle and background) is resolved decisively and magnificently - ochre and white, and two or three strokes of the brush. In any case, such an understanding "Finishment" of the picture we are unlikely to find in those years among Russian artists, and if we find it, not among the Bryullovian epigones.
Unfortunately, soon after the "Transfer of the Sacred Carpet" was followed by "Mermaids" (1879; unfortunately, we say, because they were a sad sign and a fatal deviation in the further development of the artist who showed himself to be so passionate temperament and so powerful colorful.It seems that the whole onslaught of stormy searches and sudden successes – like the sunshine in the crowds of Arabs, like the power of paint that makes you think of Delacroix, like a broad smear of white instead of a negro fez – was buried by artistic fatigue or even the sudden indifference of the master. And it is in such interruptions, in impetuous achievements and increasingly long periods of creative indifference that we see the further development of the artist.
Take the portrait of Kostomarov (1883) – where is this floweriness, so crushing our attention, so quickly tires us, these strokes with asphalt or bone around the eyes and lips – unnecessary attempts with the brush to recreate pencil technique? *)
Bypassing a number of paintings he painted after 1883, marking the flowering of the artist's talent (“Wedding Feast” – 85, “Bride’s Choice” – 86, “Death of John the Terrible” – 88, “Under the Crown” – 90) and many excellent portraits, let’s go to the “Kiss Rite” – 1895.
________________________________
*) These are I don't know. methods equally noticeable in Makovsky and Repin, by the way, undoubtedly mutually influenced each other: cf. at least Makovsky's "Male Head" (Museum of Imp. Alexander Sh) and “Study of Belarusian” Repin – both canvases obviously go back to the same initiator of such a project. "Retoucher" reception - Kramskoy.
_________________________________________
__________________________________________
I must say that in the forefront of our criticism, an extremely negative attitude towards the series was established. "boyar" paintings by Konstantin Makovsky, but negatively treated the main mannerly toward To the antique excesses of paintings, to the understanding of antiquity, to the reliability of characteristics, etc. And we're definitely not. Interested; we will try to address ourselves n and c This painting. “Kissing rite” hangs in the instructive neighborhood with Semiradsky (Museum of Imp. Alexander Sh). They're nearby. (following the hall) and grandiose Pompeii. We can still talk, though with a great stretch, about the continuity between Bryullov and Semiradsky, but it is absolutely absent between these two and Makovsky (except for the size of the paintings!). As Semiradsky unpleasantly colorful, too colorful, the same "Kissing rite" - level, stingy in its colorful range, perfectly sustained in the goldenness of the general tone, where there is no trace. Bryullov's "Bologna" coloring; on the contrary, it seems that we are seeing here an artist who has passed a good Venetian school.
Next: If we take a piece of it. “Kissing rite”, even the head of a hunchback peeking out from behind the boyar’s back, and contrast it with, for example, “Kostomarov”, written a little earlier, we will be amazed at how incomparably masterfully written the hunchback; there is no naive, under Kramskoy, paint painting, nor the excess of conscientious work, which distinguishes the diligent amateur from the master.But we repeat, all this is achieved by the artist only for a time; soon there will come another period when this infallible stroke, this restraint and the strength of the tone of the experienced master will pass into a series of fractional strokes, tinkering with the form, in the form, in the colorfulness that breaks color... But whether to blame Were we in these interruptions so cheerful, so all-accepting, so soft in its essence, the talent of Makovsky? No, I think that if we go deeper into the search for causes, we will see that the same causes distorted both the heroic gifts of our painting and the gifts of peace, alien to any struggle, seeking first of all adaptation to their modern conditions, as was Konstantin Makovsky.
One of Makovsky’s greatest virtues is called his estrangement from mobility, his small mobile leaven – but in fact, who among the first Wanderers was quite a Wanderer in the negative sense that we are used to putting into this word?
_______________________
** Makovsky's painting is a painting painted But in Bryullov there is always a dull taste of painted cardboard. In my opinion, this difference is important.
______________
_______________
Ideals of mobility – are not the most important of them already mentioned in the letters of Alexander Ivanov? Is Kramsky’s sermon so unacceptable these days? If by "Movementism" we mean the stagnation, the ignorance of the then artistic circles, then, in truth, we are still in the midst of a struggle against Russia. "movement."
One thing is certain: Konstantin Makovsky was decidedly indifferent to this struggle. His eclectic talent at the beginning was equally echoed by Kramsky, and Delacroix, and Perov, and Veronese, and Bryullov, and Makart, and finally settled on the favorite, which became everyday, familiar to both the author and the viewer of the letter of so famous people. "Makovsky's head."
It is difficult to analyze Makovsky’s achievements from the point of view of the historical development of Russian pictorial forms. True, it can be pointed out that he was, as it were, a continuation of Schwartz, gave further movement to our national policy. "Genro", perhaps, traces of his work live in the affairs of modern generations, perhaps. Bah! They would be different, or they wouldn’t be without them. I don't care. Makovsky...
Makovsky’s role in the history of Russian public art understanding is more indisputable and significant. If you pass it, you do not understand the artistic ideals of the 70s and 80s. These tastes Makovsky managed to feel with great sensitivity and forever fix in his best creations.