Vs.Dmitriev Clumsy Students

Apollo                                                                   April – May 1917 No. 4 – 5

 

                                                LAUGHTER  Pupils

? About several Russian paintings from the collection  V.B. Hwoshchinsky

 

                                                 Vsevolod Dmitriev

 

     Often we can subtract an opinion, and it is presented as something firmly established that    Oh, yeah, i.e.  It is possible to investigate events and things which are not less than one or two centuries distant from us. Perhaps this is the case in other scientific disciplines, but in Russian art history we see the opposite.  Old Russian creativity, pushed away from us  far beyond the required level of learning, yet has recently been the subject of such a public interest,   "fashion," now.  Arena, so grateful.  for all sorts of exaggerations, party accounts and overexposures, such as have never been,  I don't think it will.  Well, at least futurism.

     I think Russian art.  It is more fair and lawful to apply the opposite measure:  The closer a period is to us in time, the easier it is for us to be objective and accurate, the easier it is for us to be.  Looking forward to a truly scientific study. We are the ones who are in charge, the ones who are in charge, the ones who are in charge.  We can collect  enough  rich material to give a thorough and conscientious study. But  when we have collected enough abundant material that it is possible with a calm conscience to do this or  conclusion  At least about the Arzamas school of Stupin, about the advantages and disadvantages of Durnov, about the skill of P. Vasilevsky?  And so, in relation to our  The more distant ancestors have to say that we have only  one right    p.  - it's good faith.  description  our immediate impressions.

      Indeed,  We're still too much.  Little do we know of our more distant  ancestors  to be fair; we are too little  on  They have come to us so that they may be fully understood and interpreted.  They're weird to us.  We look at them with cold eyes.  foreigner, but with reason we compel  herself  love  They have a sense of their value, not visible to the eye, we compel them to reason.  It’s about exaggeration...why?  Isn't it the only time we have ours?  n and her   It is an extremely limited and scant, indisputable right to trust only ours.    Why not?  And isn't the only one imaginable right now?  Truth is a true description  direct impression?  And  Let the reader carefully review all the pictures attached to this article, let him forget everything he has ever read.  one or the other   master of the most interesting Roman collection  V.B. Khvoshchinsky, let him trust  Only the eyes and eyes of the eye, and then  Critically compare the results of his immediate impressions with my

     And the bottom line is this:  Learning exercises – sometimes not without attractiveness, sometimes not  deprived  "snatching", some claim to virtuoso stroke and brilliance, but in most - timid, dull, even stupid.   Here in one dreary-gray mess mixed diligent student and inspired  The precepts of the Italian genius, and the wretched teachings of the virtuous  Nazarenes, and crumbs from the beautiful  the speculations of Poussin, and the absurd speculations of our home-grown Raphaels, and his own  hard-working  "learning"  over the models... Here.  beforehand  us  journeyman  European teachers, and based on their experience  any  Conclusions about Russian art in general – we are absolutely wrong.

 

     Submitted  pagewise  "Apollo" meeting covers  epochal  Russian painting. We  We hardly find it among the pictures.  curious examples  The transformation of national creativity, when  Russian masters  Voluntarily or forcedly changed the iconic style to overseas writing.  Oh.  epoch  Our information is vague; rather, even  It is believed that there was no fracture, but it happened.  Some kind of devastation, all extinction.  The old skills, to replace the  to him, through some  time-lapse  revealed  A decidedly new skill, with new techniques and new  picturesque  language.   Painting attributed  Vasilevsky, artist of the first decades   XVIII   centuries,  In fact, it does not carry any elements of any struggle; it is conscientious.  experience  amateur copyist, but not a work  iconographer, for the sake of the new   ideal  breaking  his long and difficult years  training. Another case - a portrait of Peter Sh  (Anthropov)  Here are all the signs of a great  craftsman  his  "hand." Perhaps the artist wanted to perform his portrait as it was later.  Shchukin  (see the portrait of Paul), the same light and clear brushstrokes, the same soft and light modeling, but he could not succeed, since the suggestions of the ancient age-old school, as annoying.  the memory of a long illness, constrained movements  his  brushes. And so, drawing the bags.  under the eyes, overlaying  shadow  eyebrow  on the forehead and cheeks, Anthropov  unwillingly  resurrect   The ancient and forgotten spirit of beautiful painting,  with its wild and stubborn furrows,  wrinkles  and  across the shadows  faces.  But I repeat.  -   this  The ancient spirit blows only from the work of Antropov; in the works    at least Levitsky or Durnov  "innovation"  already  celebrate  decisive victory.

     So, this meeting is not  (a) the sq o    of spirit, by which our iconography was strong, but also no new onslaught of inspiration is yet heard in it, which, after all,   It was rapidly integrated into the national creativity along with the movement.  National conceit, reassessment  own  strength  self-dazzle  and  "Pride" are traits, we know.  equally  and ancient iconography, and traveling; and here and there, however,  thanks  proud  self-satisfaction  Even the mouths of the timid opened; these negative qualities  They were the most reliable guide.  toward  and the greatness of the people, and the  creative harvest. Such.  A self-confidence that opens a timid mouth,  we don't find  in this meeting;  On the contrary, here we see the undivided domination of rational considerations, reasonable considerations.  certificates, careful  concealment

     The works of even such glorious masters as Levitsky, Kiprensky, Bryullov seem to be  all nods to this or that authority of painting; their skill is  The daring and trickery of an unintelligent student who can not guess that the most beautiful daring is to have    oc   taste. Is a delicate and brilliant portrait of Bryullov -  slippery  A "cunning slave" who knows no greater pleasure than to compete with masters?

     I guess just  Venetianov  whole assembly  We will not hesitate to deny a certain amount of narcissism and quiet narrow-mindedness, but, on the other hand,  There is still a question for an objective researcher.  Are Venetianov’s solitary endeavors in direct  linkage   "the revolt of the slaves," who suddenly demanded freedom, with a movement that really broke with all obligatory authorities, which really went down.  Towards narcissism and limitation?

     So,  The Khvoshchinsky collection is definitely limited to one of the most wingless epochs of the Russian Empire.  painting, when our masters, stunned and enslaved by the skill of European teachers, are still too small-blooded, vain and pale to dare anything other than copies, slavish imitations and obedient  "Studio."

 

     In the study of private  most  The question of attributions is a complex and curious one; but in this case it would divert us so much from the simple subject of our   We decided to pass it and leave, without any changes or amendments, the inscriptions to the paintings made by their owner. In fact, in our article we offer the reader.    I'm not sure.    exclusively  eye;  Thus, our conclusion should not depend on any signature.  On the other hand, we must necessarily confine ourselves to developing the theme in terms of general and inconclusive features, since otherwise we would be confused in our doubts.

     However, without prejudging the question of the conclusions to which a more comprehensive study of the collection of V.B. Khvoshchinsky would lead us.  (This is a very important contribution to the treasure house.)  art and has a number of valuable works (for example, "Haymaking")  Venetsianova, "Naked Boy"  Ivanova, colored pencil of Orlovsky and many others, I suppose.  It is not superfluous to cite here a few criticisms of P.I. Neradovsky, who in some cases confirmed and clarified our doubts, and in others – exposed our doubts.  Criticism and what I personally thought was credible:

     "Belonging to Two Old Men"  ("Prodigal Son")  Venetsianova is more than doubtful and absolutely not confirmed. However, this work at the time was defined by the bar. N.N. Wrangel as belonging to Venetsianov, and the said connoisseur said that  Judging by the painting, this is an early work of Venetsianov, resembling his painting.  “Winter” at the Rumyantsev Museum (see para.  A.G. Venetianov in private collections; but, first of all,  "Winter"  It bears all the typical features of Borovikovsky’s brush, to whom it has always been attributed, and most likely belongs, and, secondly, to which it belongs.  between  "Winter" and   “The Prodigal Son” has as few convergences as between  The Prodigal Son and any of Venetsianov’s authentic works. - Painting attributed  Silv. Shchedrin, belongs to  A German artist, perhaps Kügelchen. – Painting attributed to the artist of the time Anna Ioannovna  Pyotr Vasilevsky, most likely, can be considered a copy of a Russian student from a foreign master.- N. Argunov could not write his self-portrait in the XIX  st.  18-20 year old boy, since he was born in 1771; besides, why this portrait is painted  N. Argunov, we are completely unclear. -  “Portrait of a boy”, attributed to Levitsky, it is necessary to definitely rename the “schools of Levitsky”, the portrait of Strugovshchikova can not even be attributed to  "school"  Levitsky  (This portrait, perhaps, corresponds to the spirit of Rokotov’s brush, but not Levitsky’s techniques). The so-called Shchukin portrait of Paul is  in fact nothing but a copy of the work of Voil; such copies  As you know, there are many imitations of the popular portrait of Voil in our collections.  Similarly subscribed Anthropov -  Portrait  Petra!! -  gives us a copy.  (It is very possible that it was made by Anthropov)  on  portrait  Rokotova -  “The girl sings the calf”, of course, is not Venetsianov, but the belonging of this thing to Venetsianov’s workshop can be considered proven, since, first of all, Ostroukhov’s collection contains an excellent piece by our glorious master.  "Girl with calf," where we see  implementation of this topic with minor deviations, and further - by A.N. Kolenkin  (Royal Village) available  Another variant, where the entire composition of the sketch is repeated exactly, is only somewhat in a different turn and in a different interpretation, which can easily be explained if we assume here the work of two students simultaneously performing the task given to them by their common teacher, Venetsianov. -  Portrait of the sculptor Vitali  We tend to recognize rather for a copy of the Tropinin portrait in the collection of P.I. Kharitonenko.  in Moscow. - Belonging.  "Michael Desnitsky."  Borovikovsky is clear, but it is not superfluous, in our opinion, to indicate that  front  We are one of the late works of the artist, close to his works on religious themes, made in the same somewhat sweet and artificial color and, obviously, not from nature, but from memories of his former excellent realistic portraits of the same Mikhail Desnitsky. - Janenka's work is very typical for  This artist, but we are very doubtful that this watercolor really captures  features of a puppeteer, not an unknown face  (which is easy to verify by comparing our watercolor at least with the portrait of K. Bryullov).  - Finally, the Bryullovsk portrait is nothing but a detailed repetition of the portrait of A.N. Strugovshchikov, located in the Tretyakov Gallery.

 

     The essential feature of each individual assembly is that peculiar and unified picture which  we call   both   I'm not sure.  For it, this general impression, imposes its despotic seal upon the  canvas  He guides us, guides us, and guides us.  This unique single picture is especially important.  and  In some cases, small private gatherings are dangerous. Perhaps it was this feature that prompted some to talk about the deadliest interaction of paintings in large state museums and, on the contrary, about the life-giving influence on the paintings of their being in public.  collections of limited or small sizes.  Indeed, the grandeur and historical scope of state museums seem to obfuscate all the personal and temporal features of this or that work of painting.  But this damage is rewarded a hundred times with another - the true fullness, the beat of a special and mysterious life.   and so on and so on.   art life.

     Not that we see in  gathering  private, bearing the imprint of personal taste; in such collections the historical perspective is always distorted, always understood.  unexpectedly, in a new way, and often, of course,  This surprise and novelty attracts. But here, I repeat,  and the treacherous danger of such meetings: the tempting temptation to believe   to an unexpected image, to understand the random originality of the general picture of such a meeting, as a new and correct word in the evaluation  The historical perspective of this era. That is why it is especially important when studying a particular collection of paintings.  highlight  a single picture of the collection, so that it does not lead us to a false step,  We do not understand the random interactions and interrelations of certain works as their real relationships.

 So, in the present case, of course, our bleak conclusion is that here only  Not at all.   and to and,   inspired  the overall picture of the meeting.  Of course, one cannot insist on such an opinion.  historical  The truth, without subjecting it to scrutiny based on other evidence. Indeed,  in the collection of V.B. Khvoshchinsky  collected paintings of masters, in most cases, many and long studied, but, however,  here  almost  Examples of the results of this teaching;  On the contrary, we are shown only the most  "Study"; this is not a collection of rare  The success of a master, and  on the contrary,   I don't know.   The degree of skill of artists of low inspiration, even in their  "lucky."

 

     It would be possible to work such as the Venetian  "Haymaking" like  "Self-portrait."  Argunova Junior or Stupinsky  "Boy with a leaf", to snatch from the meeting, to emphasize their dreamy sophistication, their captivating caution and loving maturity and thereby brighten up the dull.  winglessness of the entire collection;  Based on these rare oases, try  construct  joyful, more tempting and more  flattering to our patriotic feeling, but we will not do so.

     Moreover, it would be unclear and timidly presented here portrait plans Borovikovsky, Tropinin, Kapkov and others to end with a reference to the spicy  force  flamboyant  Smolyanok.  or  rainbow  Countess Samoilova, and the naive tricks of Vasilevsky, Shebuev or Shchedrin to justify  giant  eh   A. Ivanova, or, finally, how  bottom-up  precious  A pearl that covers and fills with great  It makes sense to remember and show any of the best watercolors of the same Ivanov, but we will not do this.

     Why, by the skillful selection of the individual, most joyful and vivid achievements of the Russian school of this period, should one deceive one’s own eye, it is not clear to us that  "Smolyanka" - a rare takeoff  Inspiration among a tiresome string of cold and fearless  craftsmen, which are the best of watercolors  Ivanova - only impulsive insights, which can be argued without end and    n   which  You can say as much as you can say.   Huh?  Why paint incorrect and iridescent possibilities, why deliberately introduce fog and uncertainty to where everything has already frozen and settled down in the dark?  Clear boundaries, where everything can be realized calmly and with completeness and completeness?  We know the immutable law of historical continuity and we know the exceptional role of the environment in artistic affairs.  Let us study with the possible impartiality of our great-grandparents and    The one who raised Levitsky, Bryullov, Venetsianov and Ivanov.

     In this respect, the collection of V.B. Khvoshchinsky is extremely revealing - it does not break our impressions, its selection unfolds before us a depressing experience.  The spectacle of the inspirations of the humble, the courageous, the subservient. One picture of this collection is closely intertwined with another; moving from one painting to another.  toward  another  We only reinforce the same impression, and perhaps in a different congregation.  "Portrait of a Boy"  Levitsky would have been understood by us quite differently, more acutely and more enthusiastically, but here we are first of all struck by the artisan equanimity of the picture, the methods of writing.  They are too hard-headed and too rude to talk about.  inspiration.

     And so with every picture; we incredulously and persistently seek  These are the traits that bring this work closer to the general impression we already have of the collection, and we find these features everywhere.  In the portrait of Varnek's work  We emphasize, first of all,  timid conscientiousness of the undergraduate, who has not yet fully understood the oil technique, in the work of Kapkov is a naive claim  To keep up with the then Roman fashion. Portrait of Borovikovsky  ("Desnitsky")  On the contrary, in this portrait we would like to emphasize the hopeless monotony of Borovikovsky’s works, his direct and sad connection with the general pretentious amateurism and craftsmanship.  "strokes"  of that era;  Moreover, Borovikovsky seems almost the inspirer and hotbed in Russia of these monstrous  "strokes"  brushwork  Instead of skill, these hardened patterns instead of culture, which filled all the walls of the estates and estates of our then patrons.

     Of course, such judgments are extreme; of course, they are caused by the peculiarities of the general unified picture, a peculiar curvature of our general impression, a curvature inevitable in every private assembly, but we ourselves are aware of this, and therefore we are not afraid of the whole.  We have agreed to believe only in the eye and, well, are compelled to express joyless judgments.

 

     Russian art was saved from many disappointments and humiliations by its singling out from the common European art.  art history. European historians hardly studied our art, and Russian historians wrote about Russian creativity in separate works, and the measure used here was much smaller than that which measured world art.

     Such gentle protection and mercy were possible and even necessary, but now who will need our mercy? Isn't that how we are now?  grown up and stand strong  on their feet to reflect everything  Mockery and every punch?

     So let us forget the fashion and the time when, having met with one of our masters a short proximity to the strict style of Ingres, we already enthusiastically proclaimed about the Russian rival to the great French master; having caught in another the wrong reflections of Gainsborough, we had already dreamed of   He's also an ardent portrait painter. Everything in our work we perceived as if through a magnifying glass, all raised on stilts and from little people composed Titans. Is it not for this reason that Western historians looked at our art through diminutive glasses? In fact, will we not do without glass at all, will we not sooner find something worthy of real attention and respect?

     However, the method of comparison and comparison is very  It is seductive, as persuasive in the simplest, quickest and most indisputable way, and we will not abandon it now.  We had masters who  slaughterhouse  We have equated and likened Poussin, Velázquez, Manet, etc., and now we venture to add one more to these glorious comparisons: I don't think so.     and   I don't know.

     This comparison is by no means arbitrary; on the contrary, it is intrusively begging... The artist named in the catalogue  Venetianov's meeting, wrote  "The Prodigal Son", which depicts the venerable elder with a somewhat bare forehead, with a gray, short beard, with quiet tenderness, who laid his hand on the shoulder of his mournfully bowed son. And Rembrandt.  At one time he took up the same subject, and his tender elder lays his hands on his kneeling son.  Did Venetianov come ill-fated  grandiose  Dutch, or is this a coincidence?  Don't you care?  We have two similar works on the same subject, but – oh my God! -   To what cruel conclusions should we draw a comparison of the two  Rivals!  Remember the strange and captivating life of Rebrandt's work, his great  Its incredibleness, its monstrous clumps of colors, its high inspired tradition, a tradition that firmly links this picture with the beautiful achievements of the geniuses of Italy, France, Spain - and then we go to the Venetian image of a good-natured model,  Then he puts his fingers on his chest, as a sign of tenderness.  with a thick hand, to the diligent  and stupid protocol  Not to mention the power of talent, where that high culture, that magnificent continuity  Through the centuries, that great and inspired rise above  "life", which could arise as a precious result of the stressful  work as a bright rest after a black working day, as a sudden madness after the ant, painstaking feat of many generations.  Sure, nothing.  There is no such thing here and could not be; in Venetianov we can only trace the rudiments of artistic development.  culture, only conscientious labor and the naive sobriety of the savage. But sometimes we were pointed to the era in which the Venetsianovs and Borovikovskys  They are like the best masters, like  on  "Golden Age"  Russian  inspiration. For whom and why did this arise?  ridiculous?

     However, if we all the time, without fear of repetition, talk about dullness, about dullness, about joyless timidity.  of the masters we know, if we call them  "clumsy pupils," but whole  epoch  of our art, which  They're imagining, vehemently branded. n   I don't know.    and slavish, then  Of course, that's why we do it.  so that this sad  period  We can contrast times more inspired and free.  which, in part,  That's what we mentioned.  But not only that, not just the memory of eras.  The more winged pushes us to the extreme and to emphasize the damage of these masters, but also ... national pride. Every time we understand the tasks and requirements of honor differently. It may have been quite necessary and worthy, not long ago, to deceive oneself and others and to pretend.  joyful  Wherever we were truly indifferent, we admired too much.  That which was truly mediocre.  Perhaps, until recently, it was a merit to the homeland to show national art.  in front of the astonished spectators in the colors of joyful and excessive  in this respect in the footsteps  ours  patriotic ancestors who, as you know, saw in imitators  Guido Reni - rivals to this master, in copies with Van Dyck - victory over him.

     Now, however, our national pride imperatively demands something else: a calm and clear awareness of our weakness where we are obviously and really weak.  Just as firm and resolutely defended where our work is worthy of the greatest attention.  Finally, let us refuse to regard Russian art as isolated from the general movement.  global  We recognize him as a full member of world life, and we shall assume all the obligations and all the  p.a. in accordance with such recognition. Let us then have to give up many sweet self-deceptions, for there are many  Does our art stand the same standard that we have learned?  measure  Western Europe, but with what will prevail.  We have the right to demand such a skill, and we know that   t    and   b b d d d e t   -  attention and evaluation    In general.   .         

              .