Alla Povelikhina, Nikolai Khardzhiev, George Costakis, Boris Ender
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Experiment /3KcnepHMeHT 6 (2000), 33-37 VASILII RAKITIN ALLA POVELIKHINA, NIKOLAI KHARDZHIEV, GEORGE COSTAKIS, BORIS ENDER Eight years ago, in 1991, the Zentrum fiir Kunst und Medientechnologie in Karlsruhe organized a very interesting exhibition devoted to "Matiushin and the Leningrad Avant ..Qarde." The exhibition included works from museum collections as well as from major private collections. While it featured the works of Tatlin, Filonov, Malevich and his followers, all significant in their own right, nonetheless the historical and cultural background of the exhibition hindered the perception of Organic culture itself as an integral artistic phenomenon. The arrrent exhibition in Cologne has presented Organic culture as a particular artistic phenomenon of the twentieth century, and for that reason t4e exhibition must be considered an historic event in many different meanings of theword. ' Curator Alia Povelikhina from the Black River region of metaphysical St. Petersburg inspired us for many years with the idea that "there exist not only Kazimir Malevich, Suprematism, Vladimir Tatlin, Pavel Filonov and the masters of analytical art, but also Mikhail Matiushin and Organic culture.'' In the end we all surrendered. So there does exist not only original theory, but great art. We had already grown accustomed to seeing the names from this circle in the catalogs of major exhibitions of Russian art. It is also customary to find their works in the exhibitions of European art of the twentieth century. The large survey of Russian art in the "Europa-Europa" exhibition held at the Kunsthalle in Bonn, for example, revealed to European viewers the exceptional artistic personality of Elena Guro. Now we no longer dispute the classification of Organic culture, moreover, as both a school and a vector with direction, a movement in the most literal sense ofthe term. The works of Elena Guro and Mikhail Matiushin are not a set of required devices, but a signal light. The light turns green on the path toward the unknown, toward the unexplored world of nature, which is understood as absolute non-objectivity. This non objectivity is quite alive, however, and perceptible. Art helps us to understand the new in nature, which is the new in plastic form. A new unity arises between plasticity, feeling and nature. · 1 I.·~ 34 Experiment I 3KcnepnMeHT In a still unpublished letter to Matiushin, Malevich attempted to define the originality of Guro's work: "Guro belongs neither to Futurism, nor to Naturalism. Intimately speaking, her words are steps of the soul, caresses of endless love for the living and dead .... " Organic culture entered the history of the Russian avant -garde very naturally. Now it may seem that such was always the case, but that is not completely true or not true at all. During the 1920s, of course, everyone in Leningrad who had anything to do with art heard something about Matiushin and his studio, if only stories about how they painted with closed eyes and mystified others in various ways. They singled out Boris Ender in particular, considering him one of the most talented artists of the 1920s. In 1927 Punin included Ender's works in a remarkable exhibition of Soviet art in Japan. In a sense the exhibition echoed the fantastic life of the father of Russian Futurism, David Burliuk, in Japan at the beginning of the 1920s. In Japan he managed to awaken a love for Futurism and other Modernist "isms." But outside of Japan who might take an interest in a Russian exhibition in Japan? No one, not in Paris, not in Cologne, New York or Mpscow. Those cities viewed the remarkable art exhibitions from abroad primarily as achievements of Soviet power in the sphere of culture. The degree of disconnection one generally senses in the artistic life of · Moscow and Leningrad during the 1920s is striking. It is as if we are talking about two different countries rather than two capital cities. Although he could buy a ticket for a night train and by morning be drinking coffee in Peter's town, it appears that not a single well-known critic from Moscow attended the exhibition which surveyed Petro grad artists of all tendencies from 1918-1923. Somewhat later, it is true, members of the committee which prepared the Russian section for the Venice Biennale of 1924 saw a number ofBoris Ender's works from the Petrograd exhibition. But how concerned with esthetic issues could they have been in such a situation? The Muscovites placed their bets on Petr Konchalovsky, a leading artist of the "Jack of Diamonds," and won. At that time Post -Cezannism was more interesting to the Italian public, critics and collectors than the avant -garde. Konchalovsky sold very well. Malevich' s works-square, circle and cross-were brought to Venice but not exhibited, since they were believed to be of no interest to anyone. The Enders and Matiushin were fortunate. Their works remained at the exhibition. In Moscow they tried later to forget about all that, as if about a bad illness. It was incomprehensible and unnecessary art. Therefore, when Alia Povelikhina began to reveal the history and explain the fate of the Matiushin school, she began practically from nothing. With · · assistance from the archives and from recollections of students about the Teacher and the school, step by step she recovered what had been forgotten. Meanwhile, in Moscow, where they knew practically nothing about Organic .