Proceedings of the All-Russian Congress of Artists in Petrograd

Apollo, January 1916 No. 1

Works of All-Russian Artists in Petrograd.

                                            December 1911 – January 1912

Four years have passed since the days of the Congress, a period so significant for our memory of it that we would hardly forget the unheard-of idea of Russian artists.      (c) (c) (c) and (c) (c)    association *Do not give a three-volume reminder.in folio  "Labor." Perhaps one thing is preserved in the memory that this Congress  “Not successful”, did not justify the hopes of some, confirmed the sullen prophecies  

Others said that many had only an annoying memory of him, as a useless argument, where several voices shouted at the same time, without listening to each other. Now, however, we have a record of all the reports and debates, and we can easily verify how true those initial impressions were.

Indeed, the tasks of the Congress were grandiose and unusual: it was supposed to "attract from the   I don't know.    That's right.   I don't know.   d d d d d d d d d d d d d d    toward       ooh    into   I don't know.    and bring them together at the convention  into   Dr.    I don't know.    p   I don't know.    I'm sorry.*Indeed, some new Hundred-Glav Cathedral was undertaken, which in a few days assumed to solve all the pressing issues of Russian artistic life. and   I don't know.  into    I don't know.   p    f and n                I don't know.    in   n    I don't know.    C and b. The real results of the Congress were numerous and varied.    We're in the middle.    to all kinds of ministries and institutions, where they were diligently submitted and where they were received.

What did not find necessary and timely to ask the participants of the Congress! And that in general education school, in addition to drawing, were required and modeling, and drawing, and illustration, and exercise in the preparation of decorative jewelry, and an extensive course on the world history of art. And that at art schools were established special technical stations-studios. And about the establishment of the Department of Historical and Religious Painting at the Academy of Arts...And finally,  (a petition, in my opinion, the most typical) for the organization of a new art magazine, with the justification of this last petition by the necessity of  "Strict and honest criticism", with a modest indication that such a  I'm sorry.   and   What's wrong with me?  Criticism is born if the editorial committee is given an annual subsidy of 20,000 rubles from the government.

Of the seven divisions of the Congress, the most modest  No, no.  ("Questions of Aesthetics and Art History"), which raised absolutely no petitions. Perhaps it was because it addressed issues less related to needs.   I don't.  and  Perhaps, because its leaders were the most alien to the  "Manilovism," which  (As A.N. Benois rightly noted in his speech “What the Academy of Arts could be at present”***The majority of the Congress was completed.

However, whether the Congress succeeded or failed, it is, after all, a matter of everyone’s taste, and besides, a matter of the past, and therefore affects few. Otherwise, if we look at the same Congress from the historical point of view; then its most important result, the Proceedings of the Congress, will seem to us highly valuable, even irreplaceable historically, especially in the context of the Congress.    I don't think so. Po Po  It is easy and hardly very erroneous to form an idea of the degree and composition of Russian artistic culture of our most recent past. And in fact, isn't that what it is?   I don't think so.   The most expensive and necessary meaning of such congresses? It is true that this Congress would have won incomparably in definiteness and significance if the main emphasis had fallen not on petitions and grandiose prospects in the future, but on the presentation of observations and works already under way.  That's why I'm not here.   (at least on a modest scale) in the past.   dw    At the Artists’ Congress, we can only dream of...

First of all,    c c c c c c c c in her    Congress: more or less definitely can be divided into  Are you?    very unequal in number groups. To a handful of artists – representatives of advanced and cultural trends of Russian art, to workers of applied art (here I include teachers), to people of art science and, finally, the last group was that crowded and dark artistic mass, which listened and applauded to all who spoke more or less hotly, and Repin, and Benoit, and Kn. To the Volkonsky, and to Railan, who appeared as if   That's right.  The Congress, which, by its striking instability, inconsistency, and often outright ignorance, gave the Congress its most memorable feature, which we would define quite accurately, when we called it the Congress.    I don't know.           I don't think so.

The congress began very characteristically - with the apotheosis of Repin, who was arranged by his provincial admirers who came from all over Russia***). In gratitude for that.   R'e n'    He bestowed upon the Congress several speeches of his, as always marvellous, delicately expressed, by surprise, from one subject to another, and with many autobiographical details; for example, we have learned that he once had  “The coat was so stained with paint that there was nowhere for the chicken to peck” (P, 4).  Or that he saw Nevsky Prospekt only nineteen years (P,89). Of course, he confirmed the correctness of all this in his custom by repeated references to Michelangelo and Dante, to Homer and Chaliapin, even to King David (1, HU). But I think that everyone knows the Repin method of exposition, and it is not a problem. The trouble was in what the venerable professor of painting considered appropriate in his first speech, about the way in which she was born.  The Congress, to throw a rude word in the face of one of our art groups at the same Congress: he called it "an unquestionably wild environment." And even worse was the fact that this extremely tactless attack was accepted by the participants of the Congress as something of itself understandable.

Of course, such insensitiveness is already   in   The Congress was to arouse passion on the part of the offended.  B and L and B and N (11,106) made a whole apology for "decadence," and concluded by saying:  The World of Art is a great revolution of Russian art, which ended with the victory of the new. However, this new extreme – similar to Repin’s extreme – has sparked many protests. But why wasn't there when Repin came out? Now it does not matter who was more right, Repin or Bilibin, but this case clearly indicates which side was then.   (c) On the side of the majority of the Congress.

Heated and together skillfully thought out speech  B-N-U-A (Sch.95) fascinated for a moment the naive and poorly versed in the subtleties of dialectics mass of the Congress, its   But the real fruit of this speech was only a manifestation.  "Skilled World" at the Congress. Benoit was given an address covered with 17 signatures! This address only emphasized the numerical insignificance of like-minded Benoit next to the general public.   massively   Convention.

Finally, some g. He, who had already undergone the boulevard receptions at the Congress, pointed out (Sh, 68) that “the shamelessness of the representatives of the new trend has crossed all boundaries.” This is the kind of report I read on   Oh, my God.   (c) and   Not only did he not cause protests, but on the contrary, from the time of his death, or, as the compilers of the "Proceedings" put it, "he was listened to with great interest."

So, the position of the Congress - in p    I had no choice but to calmly postpone.  Smiling in this more than naive way.  unite  Russian artists. However, despite the abundance of rough episodes, such as Repin's maxim, as a draft of the magazine, as Malyshev's or Verkhoturov's attacks, as Kravchenko's replica after the report kn. Volkonsky, that  "We cannot, starving, speak here of rhythms, theatre, music" (1, 12), like the tragicomic performances of Railian, who demanded a time limit for speeches (1, 119), so that first of all the report "with which each of us came, which is in everyone's heart."  "about the establishment of the All-Russian Union of Russian Artists on an economic basis", and he managed to manage   oh oh oh t  to this report (Gr. Suzor) and to appear when the debate has already begun, however, I repeat, despite these bleak impressions, we do not abandon our research.  "Labor," and here's why.

Congress   I don't know.   And not just one of them, but other things. And here in  n     From the greetings we find the following definition of the tasks and meaning of the Congress: “It came together when in the world of artists there was an incredible variety of differentiation, stratification, not only in the world of artists, but also in the world of artists.”   explained                No, no.    s s s s s and s    d and c and n and n and we... He gathered at a time when it seems as if the general course and pace in the progress of Russian art had been lost. And finally – when in the Russian public consciousness as if there is a more balanced attitude to new artistic experiences, and here it seems, bl and bl.  time              in and out of    No, no, no.    and    (e) and (e) (e) and (e) (e) (e). This was said at the Congress by a representative of a group entirely new, and at the first Moscow Congress, that is, eighteen years ago.   He is a representative of Russian art science, and he is a representative of Russian art science. These words, carefully but accurately outlined a genuinely historical task, which   well    It was decided by the Congress, then the participants of the Congress were drowned, dispersed in party strife, but their significance is all the more clear now – in historical distance. Against the joylessly heavy, typically and habitually Russian background of turmoil, fanatical partisanship and self-believing ignorance, a new voice began to be heard, a voice firm in the accuracy of its knowledge and the vastness of its horizons - and this is unheard of - this voice was in full contact with the youngest movements of Russian creativity.It was in the department devoted to the history and science of arts that new problems of artistic creativity found a worthy reception and an attentive listener. Not a single petition has been made here, but here, and     (e) and (e) and (e)   Attempts were made to carry out what was the reason for convening the Congress and what was really its               I don't know.   Well, no, no.   to find a common language for all Russian art, to unite Russian art on the basis of   in and out of    e in er and me     and          Oh, and I am.

And here's the thing. The ardent optimism and unrestrained faith in the near bright future, so common and so natural in new and young movements, have proved almost to a greater extent inherent in our artistic science. If Godlevsky in his speech  The Soul of Art (1,19) expressed a very vague knowledge of artistic science (for example, the named speaker puts Raphael and Murillo on the same board, considers Correggio a representative of artistic synthesis, and Rubens a representative of analysis) prophesies that “we feel how great hopes are born and strengthened, how a powerful religious and artistic movement awakens”; if   I don't care.  (1.40) concludes by  in his rather confused speech the certainty that  “in our great age, art gives something great. I foresee the flowering of art in our country.  K and N and K and Y    Says (1.60) that  “Today is the day of such freedom as is possible only in the beginning of the great era,” it also urges us to greater faith in ourselves and the Ainalov: “the powerful and broad seizure and that special determination and audacity, that truly ardent and tender love for the new revelations of the Russian artist speak of the greatness of the future!” (1,6)

So, if, on the one hand, the Congress widely unfolded before us the painful and habitual picture of our Russian obscurantism, on the other hand, it gave us an unexpected and joyful observation. Words  “Introductions” (1,S) that  “in the unification of disparate artistic forces lies the whole meaning of the last All-Russian Congress,” no longer seem to us to be emphatically empty, unwarranted words. Indeed,  I don't think so.    It happened, or rather,  But not where we are accustomed to waiting for it, not among those whom we are accustomed to listen to and listen to at the Congress, and the noise and strife of which has obscured from us what has become clearly visible to us only now.  I don't think so.    And indeed, among the most living forces of the Congress, among those forces to which the future glory of our art really belongs, in the midst of an absolutely perfect world.   on   in Russian life - representatives of art science and young trends of Russian painting. Here, as it turns out, they managed to make the first precious steps towards mutual understanding and trust, here the first stones were laid for the future, already truly united and labor Congress of Artists. And what? This is enough to agree with the final word.  “Introductions” and believe that the Proceedings of this Art Congress will not pass without a trace in the history of Russian art.

                  Vs.Dm.