Italy Too Sweet. Russian Landscape Painters Travelling Central Europe. the Case of Savrasov and Shishkin
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
kunsttexte.de/ostblick 3/2016 - 1 >an ZachariáF Italy too sweet. !ussian landsca e ainters tra)ellin, central $uro e. =he case o" 6a)raso) and 6hishkin I. Introduction It seems that nowadays, just as in the ast, any re- to e0ual3 but e0ually dif"icult to de art "rom. =here- search area related to !ussia and its art is contamin- "ore, !ussian ainters "ollowed the ath su,,ested by ated with the issue o" the #East or %est& binary writers long into the 19th century.4 scheme that has been resent in notions o" !ussia at !ussian landsca e ainting was "ormed through a least since 'yotr Chaadaye)*s 'hiloso hical +etters.1 com licated dialo,ue between the !ussian academic %ith res ect to the rather modest develo ment o" tradition 9the 6t. 'etersburg 4cademy and the 7o- !ussian landsca e ainting, enca sulated rou,hly scow 6chool o" 'ainting, 6culpture and 4rchitecture<, within the two decades "rom 1850 to 1870, I will ur- ,radual learning about Euro ean art roduction and sue the following related questions: Is it permissible to the develo ing !ussian tradition resulting in the work consider landsca e ainting in the scheme o" #East- o" the 'eredvizhniki and their circle. =he aim o" this ern& or #!ussian& versus #%estern& or #Euro ean&2 study is to com are !ussian landsca e ainting o" and %hat was the role o" travel and migration o" the 1850s to the 1870s with the e0uivalent art produc- artists and works o" art in the ,enesis o" the ima,e o" tion o" Central and %estern Euro e with which !ussi- the Russian landsca e in the fine arts. an artists came into contact both while traveling and In landsca e ainting the issue o" the binary in their home country. scheme takes the "orm o" the 0uestion: 3id !ussian In this a er I want to "ocus on artists who had artists merely transfer well-known artistic rocedures direct contact with the landsca e ainting o" the Aer- into the !ussian subject alette or did they create man-speaking countries, 6witBerland and @rance and new methods "or ortraying the !ussian landsca e became ainters with ,reat influence on the !ussian based on its own endo,enous stimuli2 4s !ussian "ine arts scene. 6avraso) and 6hishkin res ectively landsca e ainting is rooted in a shared tradition de- will be the "ocus o" the study; they were artists who rived "rom academic training, which was relatively uni- enriched Russian landsca e painting with a number o" "orm "rom !ussia across Euro e to the 564, 7exico new motifs, many o" which had already been and 6outh 4merica, there could be no more si,nific- sketched by writers o" 'ushkin and =yutche)*s ,ener- ant dif"erences than this shared tradition ermitted. ation, who had been the "irst to lace consistent em- Nevertheless, even such nuances are im ortant, as hasis on !ussian nature.5 @ollowing 6hishkin*s jour- aintings by the !ussian artists Ivan 6hishkin 91832: ney through Central Euro e will be the most romin- 1898) or 4lexei 6avraso) 91830:1897) have become a ent art o" the study, "or it was there that his re uta- model "or what !ussian landsca es should look like. tion as a ainter ,rew as a result o" contact with the =hese artists layed the same role in the history o" contem orary centers o" landsca e painting. ima,ining the !ussian natural environment as Claude In the 19th century !ussian landsca e ainting +orrain or >acob van !uisdael in its %est Euro ean be,an to work on numerous moti"s that had revi- e0uivalent. However, the most in"luential rede- ously been outside the "ocus o" artists. =hese include cessors o" the !ussian landsca e ainters were o- the ste e, vast ex anses o" ,rain "ields, the wild ets, who were the "irst to create the #myth& o" a !ussian rimeval "orests, the deserted shores o" uniquely !ussian nature. 4lexander 'ushkin, 4"anasy northern lakes, birch thickets, barren suburban areas, @et, Nikolai Ao,ol, Fyodor =yutche) and others created and muddy, im assable roads. 6uch motives, which im ressive literary landsca e ortraits2 that were hard we today consider typical "or de ictions o" !ussian >an DachariEF Russian landsca e- ainters traveling (entral $uro e kunsttexte.de/ostblick 3/2016 - 2 nature, underwent a major rocess o" change during had naturally reached its acme in the works o" the their Gcanonization* in the 19th century. It is these !ussian realists. =he strict division o" Soviet historians changes that will be the rimary "ocus o" this study: into those who specialized in non-Russian art and the changes in understanding "orest and ste e mo- those who "ocused on !ussian art also layed its art tifs and the relationship o" "i,ures to the landsca e, in this develo ment. =his has re ercussions to this an aspect to which the intensive dialo,ue with the day in the continuing division o" academic institutes o" Central Euro ean environment was crucial. Hne le,- art history into #world& and #!ussian& "ields. acy o" !ussian 19th century to the "ine arts scene was Nevertheless, the com arative method survived a com lex system o" de icting these motifs. =he and was cultivated even in 6oviet art history, at least lingering 0uestion is, however, to what extent it was until the time o" the =haw, rimarily in the oral "orm o" influenced by knowled,e o" the %estern : specifically lectures, thanks to authorities including 4lexei @e- Aerman and 6wiss : landsca e painting, so very o - dorov-Da)ydo), who was o" the o inion that #!ussian ular in the Russia o" the day. art, althou,h it would like to see itself next to @rench, =he 19th- and 20th-century research into !ussia*s is closest to Aerman art&.7 8o written overview o" this relationship with Central Euro e as re,ards landsca e stance was roduced, howe)er. =he ,roundbreaking ainting underwent a com lex evolution that mirrors ublication was 3mitry 6arabyano)*s 19th-Century the socio-political situation o" its day. @or instance, !ussian 'ainting amon, the Euro ean 6chools8, the renowned !ussian art critics Vladimir 6taso), 4l- which was the "irst work to examine the relationship exandre Jenois and 4bram $"ros,6 aside from their dif- between !ussian and Euro ean art, rimarily through "ering o inions o" articular artists, tended to com- exam les o" aintings "rom the 19th century. 6araby- are !ussian landsca e ainting to its Euro ean anov later synthesized his conclusions in his study en- counter art and evaluate it on the same basis. 6o "or titled !ussia and the %est9, but unfortunately insuf"i- Jenois Iasilye) was nothing but a !ussian G3Kssel- cient focus is given to landsca e painting in this work. dorfian*, while "or $"ros he was a GJarbizonian*. !esearchers on the other side o" the Iron Curtain 6taso), Benois and $"ros wrote analyses and com ar- had limited access to artworks in 6oviet collections. isons o" Russian paintings with the work o" German or 8onetheless, at least two studies emer,ed that aimed @rench ainters, with which they were intimately famil- to include some !ussian landsca e aintings o" the iar, but their intention was to evaluate individual aint- 19th century in the Central Euro ean context.10 6ince ings and artists rather than to examine them, and so the dissolution o" the 6oviet Union, Jettina Jaum,Lr- their ercipient remarks and artial analyses "ailed to tel11 and Aalina Churak 12 have ex lored the relation- result in any dee er understanding o" the relationship ships o" !ussian artists with the 3Ksseldorf 6chool between !ussian and Central Euro ean landsca e within a lar,e exhibition project. ainting. 4rt historians o" the 6oviet era could have ,ained II. =he 'ath to 3isco)erin, $uro ean +and- "rom the turbulent develo ment o" art history had it sca e 'aintin, in !ussia not been "or the unfortunate "act that they were not !ussian ainters ,ained their "irst contact with con- able to study artistic relationships between !ussia tem orary %est Euro ean art through art collections and Euro e "or a number o" reasons; many 6oviet art in lar,e cities such as 6t. 'etersbur, or 7oscow. Es- historians were unable to travel and hence to ,ain ecially si,nificant was the rivate collection o" Count "irst-hand ex erience o" works that had been im ort- N.A. Mushelev-BeBrodko, which included works by the ant "or !ussian art roduction o" the 19th century. 4nd Jarbizon 6chool and by Aerman, Jelgian and 3utch even if they had travelled, the social and olitical de- ainters, and is today housed in the Hermita,e. =his mand, especially in the 6talinist era, was "or a story o" collection was accessible to artists, and a"ter 1864 it !ussian art as an autonomous entity that develo ed became a art o" a "reely accessible institution with a inde endently o" its environment, in the context o" the ermanent exhibition.13 It was articularly im ortant strug,le "or democracy and nationalism in art, which "or those artists who could not or would not travel >an DachariEF Russian landsca e- ainters traveling (entral $uro e kunsttexte.de/ostblick 3/2016 - 3 outside their home country "or various reasons, as duration o" an art de,ree mi,ht there"ore be nigh on was the case o" the !ussian landsca e ainters @y- ten years.