Goncharova N.S. “Women with a rake” 1907 Oil on canvas

“Peacock under the bright sun” 1911 Oil on canvas. 129 x 144 cm.
State Tretyakov Gallery

Description of the picture

The artist depicted the same peacock in 10 styles (Egyptian style, Russian embroidery, futuristic, cubist, etc.). A whole series was created called “Artistic Possibilities About the Peacock.” He was her symbol, the symbol of her art.

The peacock was close to Goncharova because it is a deep, holistic symbol. For example, in Roman art it could represent the triumph of the emperor's daughters. In the East, the peacock was an expression of the soul, which drew its strength from the principles of unity. In Christianity, the peacock was considered an image of faith in immortality and resurrection, and its plumage of “thousand eyes” indicated omniscience. The multicolored plumage hinted at the beauty of the world (in China) and the very act of creation in Islam is a symbol of the Universe).

The peacock can be perceived as a sign of the unity of Being. Its symbolism is associated with those ancient syncretic cultures that the artist loved so much. In the Egyptian version, the head and neck of the peacock are depicted in profile, and the tail, according to the canons of Egyptian art, is turned frontally. At the same time, it seems to be spread out on the plane of a dark background, standing out with its unique plumage. It is as if he is covered not with feathers, but with bright colors, affecting the viewer more physiologically.

The bright colors embody truly primordial energy, reminiscent of similar embodiments of human emotions in Russian folk art. Presumably this painting reflected the young artist’s passion for Gauguin’s paintings with their colorful exoticism and freedom of natural life.

Goncharova N.S. “Sheep shearing” 1907 Oil on canvas

“Cyclist” 1913 Oil on canvas. 78x105 cm.
State Russian Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia

Description of the picture

The film accurately conveys the rapid speed of movement. Street signs flash past the speeding cyclist and merge into one. The rapid movement of the wheels is conveyed through their repeated repetition next to each other.

And the person himself, bent over the steering wheel, becomes stratified and becomes subordinate to the general idea - speed. These are the main signs of futurism - displacement of contours, repetition of details and inclusion of unfinished fragments. Decomposing the forms of the visible world, Goncharova, nevertheless, managed to create a holistic image of the dynamics in the life of an individual.

This picture embodies the aesthetics of the twentieth century - the century of technological progress and accelerated pace of life.

The 1st Russian Revolution of 1905 has already occurred. On the eve of the First World War, which began in 1914, the turbulent situation in society was subtly captured by the artist and expressed in an innocent plot - the conventional figure of a man on a bicycle.

This is one of the best paintings by the artist in the style of cubo-futurism. Goncharova’s subsequent work was in the spirit of the new style “rayonism” invented by M. Larionov.

“Round dance” 1910 Oil on canvas Historical and Art Museum, Serpukhov, Russia

“Archangel Michael” 1910 Oil on canvas 129.5 x 101.6 cm

Goncharova N.S. "Liturgy, St. Andrey" 1914

Goncharova N.S. “The Virgin and Child.” Description of the painting

The painting is made in the spirit of Russian iconography. The artist used traditional schemes and techniques, and at the same time she was not constrained by any boundaries.

The Mother of God is depicted in yellow clothes with brown folds. On her left hand sits a baby, whom she holds with her right. Contrary to Orthodox traditions, the child does not look at her or at the viewer. A simple blue background is filled with primitively interpreted green plants and figures of angels. The conventional interpretation of the face of the Mother of God is complemented by its unconventional coloring, which is characteristic of Rayonism.

The free plastic transformation of the figures of angels and the child of Christ is complemented by the sonority of bright colors, which distances the picture from iconographic canons and places it in its rightful place among the achievements of like-minded people.

Goncharova N.S. "Mowing" 1910

Goncharova N.S. "Harvest" 1911

Goncharova N.S. "Little Station" 1911

“Airplane over a train” 1913 Oil on canvas. 55 x 83 cm
State Museum of Fine Arts of the Republic of Tatarstan, Kazan, Russia

Goncharova N.S. "Cats" 1913

Goncharova N.S. "Peasant Dances" 1911

Goncharova N.S. "Flowers" 1912

Goncharova N.S. "The Laundresses" 1911

Goncharova N.S. "Dynamo" 1913

“Portrait of Larionov” 1913 Oil on canvas. Museum Ludwig, Cologne, Germany

Goncharova N.S. "Nutbumort with a Tiger" 1915

Goncharova N.S. “Planting Potatoes” 1908-1909

Goncharova N.S. "Len" 1908

Goncharova N.S. “Pillars of Salt” 1908 Description of the painting

The painting is characterized by great architectonics, complexity and multi-figure composition, a variety of angles, and freedom in constructing forms.

Using the technique of a “pictorial story,” Goncharova takes the biblical legend of Lot as the basis for her composition, but retells it with a digression.

The point of attraction for the cubist interpretation is the moment of transformation of the human figure into a salt crystal against the background of the overthrown city.

In Goncharov’s interpretation, all participants in the scene turned into pillars - Lot, his wife, his daughters, even their future children.

Many pictorial and plastic techniques flow from the previous painting “God of Fertility”, namely the interpretation of the face, especially the double outline of the eyes, the line of the eyebrows turning into the nose, the head set on the shoulders, thin arms and legs, rigid deformations of proportions, dominance of 4- coal forms.

In the pictorial development of the surface, a new element is also outlined - having the shape of a “swallow’s tail” in the image of Lot. Here it has not yet been sufficiently revealed either functionally or pictorially, but it will find its place in subsequent works.

Goncharova N.S. "Stone Maiden" 1908

Goncharova N.S. "Peasant Women" 1910

Goncharova N.S. "Naked black woman." Description of the picture

This painting is an illustrative example of Goncharova’s primitivism. She breathes with the super-energy of the movement of nature and the dynamism of painting itself. At the same time, she is close to both Picasso and Matisse.

In the interpretation of the feet, hands, and especially in the shape and position of the head, one can feel the plastic closeness of Picasso’s “Dryad” and “Friendship”. The shading on the face is reminiscent of the Blanket Dance.

The influence of Matisse is palpable in the grouping of the figure depicted in a rapid dance, which allows it to be shown simultaneously from different angles, color contrasts (black figure on a crimson-pink background), in the expression of movement, the compression of the figure in a minimal space and super-relief contours, in the optimism of the images.

Goncharova softens the cubist cut and achieves greater plasticity of the image, compared to the emotional fractures of the figures on the canvases of her idols. The popularity of the painting was facilitated by the cultural expansion of the population from conquered countries, which swept the countries of Europe. The passion for new forms was picked up by Russian artists following their European colleagues.

Goncharova N.S. "Emptiness" . Description of the picture

This picture is an exception and at the same time an innovation. In Goncharova’s work, for the first time in almost all Russian avant-garde painting, an abstract structure appears in the form of multi-colored concentric rings of irregular shape.

This structure, which has a biological, protein form, is unstable in its outline, compressing and expanding in breadth and depth, similar to an unknown material substance, a burst of energy. It is filled, as always with Goncharova, with the breath of life, however, life of a different level - the life of thinking matter.

The rhythm and alternation of blue and white rings of decreasing sizes with the changing width of a ribbon of dense smooth texture creates its own space, flowing within these forms, streamlined by another space, formed by a picturesque mass of black-green-lilac color with a matte texture. The surrounding space becomes permeable, despite the ability of the dark matte structure to absorb all light.

Goncharova violates the physics of color and the physics of matter, destroying the unity and material density created by coloring pigments, introducing white painterly elements reminiscent of mirror highlights. The flatness of the entire pictorial field of the picture seems to be losing its material boundaries. And the composition is ready to overcome them, becoming, as it were, an illustration of the position about 4 dimensions: “The picture is sliding, gives a feeling of what can be called the 4th dimension - timeless and spaceless...”.

Material volume - paints, their texture, i.e. “full” - depicts “empty”: “full” gives birth to “empty”, volume becomes a category of space. The painting may seem purely abstract. If you think about theosophical knowledge, you can imagine that the central white spot is, as it were, a designation of a tunnel that leads to another world, to an imaginary “emptiness”. It's an otherworldly color. The blue rings are a kind of transition steps through this tunnel to another world.

This is not the first time that the theme of transition to another world has been raised in the works of artists. Similar tunnels were present in the works of other spirit artists. A striking example is “The Birth of the Human Soul” in 1808 by the German romantic F.O. Runge.

Goncharova N.S. "Angels throwing stones at the city." Description of the picture

One of 9 expressive paintings of the general cycle called “Harvest”.

In this picture, Goncharova builds her religious picture of the world. The top of this world is the divine heavenly world. Everything on earth is accomplished under his auspices, and warrior angels intervene directly in earthly life, opposing technicalism and urbanism and at the same time protecting arable lands and gardens. Thus, the oppositions “city-rural” and “natural-technical” are built.

In addition, the idea of ​​retribution, heavenly punishment, fate, fate, in general, apocalyptic sentiments correlated with Christian symbolism, is strong. The painting was created by the artist during a period of creative quest: Rayonism, Futurism - all this was ahead. Only primitivism and participation in “Jack of Diamonds” have so far constituted Goncharova’s creative experience. So this painting in the neo-primitivist style is considered one of the best.

Like many others, this painting is distinguished by its outstanding decorative qualities. In particular, the rhythmic movements of lines and spots are noticeable, and the accentuated gravitation towards the plane - the earth - is clearly manifested. All this emphasized Goncharova’s desire for monumental forms.

Goncharova N.S. "Yellow and green forest." Description of the picture

One of a series of “radiant landscapes”. Everything in this picture is blurred by glimpses of intersecting rays, behind them the outlines of trees can barely be discerned. In the center of the composition are 2 trunks going up, in dull blue and brown tones. An intense patch of yellow in the crown of a tree, from which rays burst out, thick green and dark blue tones reaching an absolute depth of color.

High crowns of trees - all in intersecting rays. Even in the deep brown tone of the earth, glimmers of rays of light flash. This brings an excited and upbeat, but unreal, almost mystical sound to the landscape.

There is an opinion that this landscape is a simple illustration of the philosophical constructs of P.D. Uspensky “Tertium Organum. The key to the mysteries of the world." Mysticism and esotericism were intertwined in his life path with the occult and healing. An innovative model of the Universe proposed by the philosopher, in which there are not 3, but 4 dimensions, including time. He also called for the creation of a world based on the idea of ​​a synthesis of Psychology and Esotericism, which led to a higher level of comprehension and awareness of human life.

Born on August 16, 1881 in the village of Ladyzhino, Tula region. Natalya was raised in the family of an architect. This family belonged to the ancient Goncharov family.

Fascinated by art, Goncharova began studying at the Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture, which lasted from 1901 to 1909. At first, Natalya was engaged mainly in sculpture, and later began to get involved in painting. The first mentor of the aspiring artist was K.A. Korovin. At the same time, the artist’s sculptural works also received high praise.

Goncharova's early works were paintings in the spirit of impressionism. These paintings were successfully exhibited at the World of Art and Moscow Art Theater exhibitions. Later she received an invitation from S.P. Diaghilev. He invited the aspiring artist to participate in the Autumn Salon in Paris.

During this period, Goncharova painted mainly streets with ancient buildings and city parks using pastel techniques. The peculiarities of worldview that can be traced in these paintings clearly indicate the influence of the work of the masters of the “Nabi” group on the artist. However, the gentle lyricism that distinguished the works of the early period soon gave way to consistent neo-primitivism.

While still studying at the school, Goncharova met M.F. Larionov. Soon this acquaintance will lead to a warm relationship, and Larionov will become the artist’s husband. Together with him, Goncharova participated in various Russian and European exhibitions. The creative rise of the young artist was associated with 1906, when Goncharova began to work closely with paintings in the spirit of primitivism. The artist is attracted to the theme of peasant art. She strives to understand the essence of the people's creativity in all its depth.

Later, Goncharova would work in other styles, actively using the traditions of different eras. At this time, the paintings “Mother”, “Round Dance”, “Harvesting Bread”, “Evangelists” appeared.

In 1913, Goncharova worked a lot on illustrations for literary works, including publications by S.P. Bobrova, A.E. Kruchenykh, V.V. Khlebnikov. Since 1914, the artist has designed theatrical productions such as The Golden Cockerel. In the late period of her creativity, Goncharova created many works that support the idea of ​​non-objective art. At this time, the paintings “Radiant Lilies” and “Orchids” appeared.

In 1915, Goncharova and her husband left for France. Here the artist’s life would end on October 17, 1962.

The most expensive painting, “Flowers” ​​by N. Goncharova, was sold at Christie’s for $10.9 million in 2008.
And this is a record for works of art created by women.

Natalya Goncharova “Flowers” ​​(1912)

This painting is considered iconic for the Russian avant-garde. In it Goncharova mixed the latest
trends in European art (she studied paintings by Gauguin, Matisse, Picasso) and her own
a new direction - Rayonism. This style is one of the early forms of abstract art -
Goncharova came up with it together with her husband, futurist Mikhail Larionov.
Artists depicted rays of light with colored lines, and thus conveyed
image of objects. They believed that objects in human perception are
is the sum of rays coming from a light source and reflected from an object
and those who came into our field of vision" (from the "Manifesto of Rayonism").

Louise Bourgeois “Spider” Price: $10.7 million Auction: Christie’s 2011

An American of French origin, Louise Bourgeois, lived to be almost a hundred years old and
tried herself in almost all the main directions of art of the twentieth century -
cubism, futurism, surrealism, constructivism and abstract art.
But Bourgeois became famous, first of all, as a sculptor. All her works are united by a unique
system of symbols. The key theme of her work is childhood memories.
The spider, or rather the female spider, in Bourgeois’s symbolic system is a symbol of the mother.
“She was as smart, patient, pure, reasonable and obliging as a spider.
And she knew how to protect herself,” the artist said about her mother.
Louise Bourgeois's giant bronze spider sculptures are breaking records at auction.
The last record belongs to the almost seven-meter “Spider” from a private collection
in Napa Valley near San Francisco: acquired on November 8, 2011
at Christie's for $10.7 million.

Natalia Goncharova “Spanish Flu” (1916) Price: $10.7 million Auction: Christie’s 2010

This painting was painted by Goncharova during the First World War. Then serious changes occurred in the artist’s life. She moved from Russia to Paris, where she made scenery for Diaghilev's Ballets Russes. “The Spanish Flu” demonstrated Goncharova’s skill as a theater artist: the composition conveyed the powerful energy of Spanish dance.
At the same time, she managed to combine the detailing of theatrical scenery and the simplification inherent in abstract art.
The Spanish Flu featured a radically new technique, which was later called theatrical constructivism.

Natalya Goncharova “Apple Picking” (1909) Price: $9.8 million Auction: Christie’s 2006

According to the results of the auction “Impressionists and Masters of the 20th Century” in 2006, “Apple Picking” set a record for Russian painting.
True, it is not known who bought the painting: the buyer wished to remain anonymous.
At the moment when this work was painted, the artist was interested in impressionism, post-impressionism, cubism and futurism, but the influence of Gauguin was especially noticeable in it. Goncharova was also inspired by the Russian icon painting and popular print tradition. As a result, a whole cycle of “Gathering Fruits” arose, executed in a completely original manner.

Joan Mitchell “Untitled” (1959) Price: $9.3 million Auction: Sotheby’s 2011

“Untitled” is one of Mitchell’s first works in the style of abstract expressionism, which was new to her at that time. Mitchell, according to the Berlin trading company Artnet.com, is the most successful artist in terms of auction turnover. During the period
from 1985 to 2013, 646 of her works were sold, for which buyers paid a total of $239.8 million. Unlike other American artists who worked in the style of abstract expressionism, Mitchell turned to the European tradition.

Tamara de Lempicka “Dream” (“Rafaela on a green background”) (1927)

Price: $8.5 million Auction: Sotheby’s 2011

Tamara de Lempicka is an American artist with Polish roots, who for some time
lived in St. Petersburg for a while. She worked in the Art Deco style that emerged in the 1920s and 30s
years and absorbed the spirit of the “Jazz Age”. "Dream" was written by Lempicka in the fruitful
Paris period and after the 2011 auction it turned out to be the most expensive of the artist’s creations.
Before this, her most expensive works were sold in 2009.
“Portrait of Marjorie Ferry” ($4.9 million) and “Portrait of Madame M.” ($6.1 million).

Joan Mitchell "Salute, Sally!" (1970) Price: $7 million Auction: Chistie’s 2012

This painting is dedicated to Mitchell's older sister, Sally. The work differs sharply from her previous paintings. Bright times have come in the artist’s life, which is reflected on the canvas. "Salute, Sally!" - a bright and sunny picture. By 1970, Mitchell had found a permanent home, settling in the small town of Vétheuil, 55 km from Paris. There she observed nature and constantly drew on her terrace, mainly sunflowers and other bright flowers. Mitchell received recognition from the Parisian public - the first solo exhibition of the abstract artist was held in the French capital in the same 1970.
The painting is painted in oil on canvas. Before the sale, the painting was in a private collection.

Cady Noland "Ozwald" (1989) Price: $6.6 million Auction: Sotheby's 2011

American Cady Noland is a sculptor and installation artist working in the postmodernist style. The peak of her creativity came
for 1980-1990, and Noland created her last work 11 years ago. This, however, does not prevent her paintings from becoming more expensive.
According to Bloomberg, Noland is one of three artists whose works have risen in price the most over the past 13 years (+5.488%). She achieved such impressive figures thanks to the “Ozwald” sold for $6.6 million. The sculpture depicts Lee Harvey Oswald, the only suspect in the assassination of American President John Kennedy. Noland worked on this installation using her usual technique. She uses images from the media (newspaper clippings, news footage), enlarges them and
using silk-screen printing, applied to aluminum sheets, and then cut out. To give the figures expressiveness, in some cases she makes holes - bullet marks. Noland's works are in leading galleries. Her personal exhibitions were held in the USA, Japan, Europe, and her works are sold by the world's leading auction houses.

Tamara de Lempicka “Sleeping” (1930) Price: $6.6 million Auction: Sotheby’s Year: 2011

Portraits, including those in the nude genre, occupy an important place in de Lempicka’s creative heritage. She created the image of a strong and sexy woman (it is not surprising that Madonna became one of the main collectors of Lempicka’s works). The artist's world is filled with luxury, expensive dresses, perfect bodies.

Natalya Goncharova “Blossoming Trees” (“Apple Blossom”) (1912)

Price: $3.96 million Auction: Sotheby’s Year: 2011

In this work, Goncharova, according to critics, is much closer to the pictorial French tradition of the 19th century than to the works of Kazimir Malevich and Wassily Kandinsky.

“Of course, I could do without flowers, but they help me maintain self-respect, because they prove that I am not shackled hand and foot by everyday worries. They are evidence of my freedom" (Rabindranath Tagore)

What an interesting and deep thought: flowers - and personal freedom! Even more amazing is what the man says about this. Writer, poet, composer, artist, public figure, Nobel Prize winner in literature... He found time to enjoy the beauty of flowers and feel free!

Six months of cold weather in Russia is a lot! Snow-covered gardens, fields and forests, gray skies... The need for a feeling of the fullness of being has always prompted people to create analogues of the beautiful creations of nature, capable of delighting the heart and soul all year round.

That’s why Russian folk art is so bright and festive. And it is no coincidence that in the 19th century, another wonderful fishery arose in the center of Russia, which was named, as is often the case in such cases, after its “residence” - Zhostovo! There is hardly a person in our country whose memory will not immediately evoke bright, almost fabulous, bouquets of flowers when he hears this word! Flower arrangements - on a metal tray. And it must be said that the freedom that Tagore’s genius noted when communicating with flowers is most clearly manifested in the creation of the famous Zhostovo bouquets.

A representative of one of the famous dynasties of Zhostovo artists is Larisa Goncharova (examples of the master’s works). A dynasty in any field of activity is the history of a given business. By contacting one family, you will learn the centuries-old history of the development of an entire fishery. So, speaking about the secrets of craftsmanship, Larisa said that painting is an improvisation: the author himself does not know what will happen, his hand goes “automatically”!

What a Master one must be so that these bewitching flowers, glowing from the depths of the buds with a magical light, reverently “sound” on the varnished surface, like notes of virtuoso musical improvisation! The exquisite beauty of the flowers created by the Goncharovs is filled with a special meaning, conveying to us the mood of either a jubilant holiday or impartial contemplation.

Admiring the perfection of the implementation of the plan, enjoying the freedom and airy lightness in the depiction of bouquets, you begin to understand that a once utilitarian object has long ago become a symbol of art, and that Zhostovo painting is an independent form of art.

The village of Zhostovo, which is located very close to the capital, has been a symbol of the unique Russian craft for several centuries. In the last decades of the 20th century, the village was chosen by new Russians, tired of the bustle of the city and the deteriorating environment. By the way, Gerda from “The Snow Queen,” whom we have known since childhood, or rather, the popular theater and film actress Elena Proklova who played her, has also lived for many years in this village next to the forest, enjoying landscaping, growing organic fruits and vegetables. She did not escape the temptation to learn how to paint trays!

Against the backdrop of the ever-expanding “city of mansions,” the houses of the old-timers became lower and lower, “grew” into their native land, clinging deeper and tighter, as if afraid of being uprooted. And there were reasons for this.

At first there were rumors, but I didn’t want to believe it. Could an ancient folk craft, of which the state was so proud, become private property? A little time passed and the rumors became a fait accompli. The owner of the legendary Zhostovo fishery became the Bank (we won’t do additional advertising for it, especially since the owner of the bank can sell it!). And everything went according to the usual pattern. The bank promised to preserve folk crafts and the famous Museum of Zhostovo Trays, but began to rent out the territory and space of the factory. There are now about thirty enterprises not related to the tray fishery. The thirty young masters remaining at the factory huddle in four small rooms reserved for painting workshops. Now they work “for the owner.” All the great artists, old masters, real creators have left their craft and are working at home. Lately they have practically stopped cooperating with the factory.

The tray as a household item has been known since ancient times, but it was from the beginning of the 19th century, due to the growth of cities, the emergence of numerous hotels, taverns, restaurants, that trays began to be required in large quantities and were used not only for their intended purpose, but also to decorate interiors. Bright bouquets, still lifes, scenes of tea drinking or troika riding are traditional subjects of tray paintings that adorned the walls of such establishments.

Zhostovo trays belong to a trend that has the general name “Russian varnishes”. First, at the end of the 18th century, lacquer miniature painting on papier-mâché appeared. The village of Danilkovo near Fedoskino, the villages of Zhostovo and Ostashkovo were famous for the production of boxes, snuff boxes, boxes, glasses for pencils, cigarette cases, albums, crackers, wallets - items decorated with miniature paintings. Artists at that time turned to famous works of easel painting and engravings, freely interpreting which to create their own works. Having originated in the mainstream of lacquer miniatures, the production of trays gradually became an independent craft. The starting point is 1807, when the workshop of Philip Nikitich Vishnyakov began working in Zhostovo. Although the foundation of the fishery is associated with the name of another Vishnyakov - Osip Filippovich. By the middle of the 19th century, there were already twelve workshops in the district: Belyaev, Mitrofanov, Zaitsev, Leontyev and others. The craft developed, and trays began to be made not only from papier-mâché, but also from iron. Undoubtedly, in this regard, the influence of the famous tray production center in Nizhny Tagil since the 18th century.

If at first the owners worked on an equal basis with the workers, then by the 1870-1880s they increasingly turned into entrepreneurs. During these years, there were more than 240 hired workers in the tray industry near Moscow. Usually three people worked on one tray: a farrier who made the mold, a putter who primed the surface, and a painter who painted the tray. After drying, the primer coated it with varnish.

By the beginning of the 20th century, having mastered all the most interesting things that were in the tray production of St. Petersburg, Nizhny Tagil, in lacquer miniatures near Moscow, easel painting, porcelain painting and other forms of art, the artists of Zhostovo formed their own style, based, after all, first of all on , on the development of their local traditions. A system has been developed, a professional pictorial canon that is inherent in the art of Zhostovo even today. In the sequence of techniques of multi-layered Zhostovo writing, a kind of alphabet is recorded, which is absorbed by the masters, which is called “with milk”. Shading, shading, laying, highlighting, drawing, tying - these are the “steps” that from the generalized silhouettes of flowers and leaves of shading led to the creation of complex compositions with the finest details of tying, combining flowers into bouquets and connecting it with the background. And only having mastered this alphabet “perfectly”, having learned to “speak the most difficult words clearly”, does the artist receive the long-awaited Freedom. Now the Master’s hand has the right to lead him along his own paths of magical gardens in which birds of paradise live, and masterfully improvising, create ever new bouquets of fabulous beauty.

Communicating with famous masters of various Russian crafts, I noticed that they are all talented not only in their main profession, but often in many other areas of activity. Several years ago, Nikolai Gushchin, People’s Artist of Russia, chief artist of the Nizhny Novgorod craft “Khokhloma Artist”, was a participant in the Buyan Island festival in Sochi. He amazed the participants not only with the works brought to the exhibition, the talented painting that he demonstrated at the master class, but also... with his wonderful gift as a dancer! How he danced at the banquet! Not many men can boast of such abilities. And one more thing: the artist’s eyes constantly snatch from the surrounding reality the elements necessary for creativity, and each creator has his own. I remember how, having come to visit me, Gushchin immediately found new ideas for his paintings: in the first minute of walking through the garden, he picked an inconspicuous flower. Admiringly looking at the curls of the “weed,” he said that he had never seen anything like it in the middle zone and would definitely use it in his paintings. He carefully wrapped the flower blade of grass and put it in his pocket. Flowers are the most popular motif of paintings in Russian artistic crafts.

This is how traditions develop. Each artist brings into the established canons what he has seen and experienced. Each author has his own individual style. Professionals can easily distinguish the “hands” of masters by the nature of the strokes, and, noting the individuality nurtured by labor and talent, they often give definitions that are by no means art historical terms. They enthusiastically call the brushstroke of the Honored Artist of Russia Larisa Goncharova, a master of Zhostovo painting, “dancing.” Larisa sings as... as she writes her famous flowers (or writes as she sings!).

Larisa Goncharova's diploma work at the Art School named after. Kalinina was highly appreciated by the commission and sent to VDNKh, and Larisa received the Komsomol Central Committee Prize.

As a child, Larisa studied choreography, but having received the profession of an artist, she sang in the folk ensemble “Rus” for many years and toured. She is also a born fashion designer and can sew herself a beautiful outfit overnight. Try to repeat it: a taffeta dress with rabbit trim, painted with Zhostovo flowers - exclusive!

A positive character and bright artistic inclinations were naturally reflected in the painting. Hence the “dancing” stroke!

An artist in the fourth generation, from childhood Larisa could observe all the stages of creating the famous Zhostovo trays, running to her mother’s work (fortunately, the Zhostovo Decorative Painting Factory was located next to the house!), although she had no intention of following in her footsteps. But mom was a wise woman and was able to gradually guide her along the right path. This is where genes obviously played a role. After all, the same Timofey Maksimovich Belyaev, who in the 1830s had his own workshop for making trays in Zhostovo, was the great-grandfather of Larisa Goncharova’s mother, Nina Nikolaevna, People’s Artist of Russia, Laureate of the State Prize named after. I. E. Repin.

The pre-war history of the fishery left us only male names. But 1941 turned the life of the country upside down and began to write its history in all areas and spheres of life. The men were taken to the front. And for the first time, so that the Zhostovo industry, already more than 100 years old, would not perish, six girls of 13-14 years old were hired at the factory. Among them was Nina Belyaeva (later by her husband Goncharova). Military childhood in production is a separate article. You can write novels and make feature films! Nina Nikolaevna told how they, little girls, carried logs from the forest on themselves to heat production, and painted cans, since there was no iron (all the metal was used for defense). It is unlikely that in those years Nina could present her works in museum collections and the best exhibition halls in the world! Obviously: it doesn’t matter what walls, floors, pots and jars your child’s hand paints. It is important who “bet” this hand. The girls were taught by the oldest master Andrei Pavlovich Gogin, who played an outstanding role in the history of Zhostovo. It was Gogin who, in the 20s of the last century, became an active organizer of the artel, on the basis of which he created many outstanding works and taught traditional skills to numerous students. He was one of those whose activities helped to survive the crisis that disrupted the work of literally all folk crafts at the beginning of the 20th century. In 1928, the artels merged into one - “Metal Tray”, which in 1960 was renamed the Zhostovo Decorative Painting Factory. All these stages were the life of Andrei Pavlovich, and after the war, from 1948 to 1961, he headed the craft as artistic director and chief artist. At that time, the team of Zhostovo artists still had to overcome the attempts of Soviet government agencies that began in the 20-30s to change the established direction of development of the craft by introducing a straightforward statement of realism. Such innovations could destroy an entire movement in Russian art. But leading masters were able to resist this, directing the implementation of new ideas to deepen traditional craftsmanship.

In his work, Gogin experimented with the shape of trays and with compositional schemes, using mother-of-pearl inlay, colored and gold backgrounds. His lyrical gift remained unchanged, which he passed on to his student, Nina Goncharova. For more than half a century she has been creating works that delight us with their perfection.

It has long been proven that a person who does not live in the area where the craft originated and developed will never become its representative and will not be able to develop traditions. The art of Russian folk crafts is truly alive only in its native land and is inspired by it. Despite this, in different parts of our country and in many countries of the world there are people who are passionately drawn to the beauty of Russian art and dream of mastering at least the basics of craftsmanship. That’s why our artists are invited to different countries, schools are organized, and master classes are held. Larisa often travels abroad and teaches foreigners. Anyone can learn the basics of Zhostovo painting, but not everyone can be an artist of this painting. Foreigners study because it is new to them. For many, acquaintance with Russian art for many years was limited to nesting dolls. For some it is now entertainment, for others it is business. L. Goncharova taught in Australia and Taiwan. She had the opportunity to visit America several times: art studios in 8 states organized her master classes. And one day such a master class on painting trays turned into a real and unique show: it took place against the backdrop of a performance by a folk ensemble, whose participants were dressed in chic, colorful Russian costumes. Larisa also sang, alternating her performances with teaching. In a luxurious suit, she sat behind a tray against the backdrop of the ensemble! American women ran to watch the singer-artist change her clothes and outfit in one minute: the spectacle was breathtaking!

“Foreign countries will help us” is such a familiar phrase to everyone. Classic. The frequent trips of our artists abroad for long periods in recent years confirm this without humor. Working and living conditions, wages are immeasurably higher there! Although no, you can “measure” it, but you don’t want to! Money is good: the master receives satisfaction not only from the fact that he can buy bread and butter. Money is a “measure”, an assessment of the creator: “They pay me well, which means they value my talent and the works I create. So, I have achieved something! It was not in vain that I studied and worked hard!” It turns out that money is an incentive to work further! But the phrase: “An artist must be hungry”... Starve yourself, gentlemen!

Times are changing, Zhostovo painting, responding to fashion trends, now decorates not only traditional trays, but also other interior items: cabinets, tables, chests, boxes... and even buckets! If there were orders: you could paint both shoes and a dress. And it's really beautiful. Several years ago, the exhibition “Everything about the structure of the world” was held in Moscow. The organizers ordered Larisa Goncharova to paint the computer. The result was a wonderful and unusual artifact!

And yet, talented craft artists are doing everything to preserve the Zhostovo tray as a phenomenon of Russian culture. And “Flowers of the Goncharovs,” with its subtle lyricism and exquisite beauty of painting, breaks everyday shackles from our hands and feet and gives us a feeling of freedom and joy!

Natalia Tsygikalo

M.: Lithography by V. Tityaev, . 39 l. Circulation 220 copies. On the publishing cover, made using the collage technique, there are two stickers: text: Mirskonta /A. Kruchenykh/V. Khlebnikov and in the center: collage made of colored paper by N. Goncharova [flower]. 18.7x15 cm. All lithographs (ink) are printed on one side of the sheet. Lithographed collective collection of Russian futurists. Here Natalya Sergeevna Goncharova (1881-1962) acted as the creator of the world's first book collage. This is precisely the value of this lithographed edition.

Cover, text above and below:

Mirskonta /A. Kruchenykh/V. Khlebnikov;

in the center: collage made of colored paper by N. Goncharova [flower].

The most interesting thing about this collection is that for the first time a collage was placed on the cover. Natalia Goncharova used this extraordinary technique in the design of the book. A sticker made of colored paper in the shape of a flower occupies a dominant place on the cover space. Today, about 12 different variants of the cover of this publication are known. The collages on all copies of the book are significantly different. They are designed using several types of paper, most often black, green or gold, with embossed and marbled patterns. The flower itself also changes shape and is located either in the lower or in the upper part of the leaf. Collage is a technical technique in art, gluing onto any base materials that differ from it in color and texture. A work made using this technique is also called a collage. It is used mainly in graphics and posters to enhance the emotional expressiveness of the texture of the work and the unexpectedness of the combination of dissimilar materials. As a formal experiment, collage was introduced into painting by representatives of cubism, futurism and dadaism. And later, already in the 20s-40s, it clearly showed itself as an artistic technique of photomontage in the poster.

M. Larionov. Above text: How difficult it is to resurrect the dead...;

ending: fig. [radiant composition];

below: left: Lithography / V. Tityaeva Moscow, right: M. Larionov

M. Larionov. [Lady at the table], top right: Larionov

M. Larionov. [Akhmet], to the left of the image: AH/ME;

bottom: left: lit. V. Tityaeva / Moscow; right: Larionov

Text: AKHMET/HOLDS THE BOWL...

M. Larionov. [Street noise], top right: Larionov. M.

M. Larionov. Text: Khvachi forge black swords...

M. Larionov. [Human profile and sounds], top right: Larionov;

in image letters included: 033

N. Goncharova. The text of the poem “in front of the undertaker” (rat ta tat...);

on the right and below the text: fig. [flowers]; bottom right monogram: NG

N. Goncharova. Text of the poem “dream” (T-shirts are sitting...);

on the right and below the text: fig. [flowers].

N. Goncharova. [Cityscape], below the image on the right: Natalya Goncharova.

N. Rogovin. [Cow, boat with rowers, dog and human face].

N. Rogovin. [Figures], right: N Rogovin.

N. Goncharova. [Seated woman with disheveled hair], bottom left: Goncharova.

A. Kruchenykh. Text: they know what they are doing, I would say goodbye, I would put it on my shoulder...;

in the center: fig. N. Goncharova [deer].

N. Goncharova. [Skeleton under a tree], bottom right: Natalia Goncharova.

N. Goncharova. [Growling Beast], bottom left: N Goncharova

A. Kruchenykh. Text: but then the earth became dead and wrinkled...;

in the center: fig. N. Goncharova [sailing boats].

N. Goncharova. [Animals under a tree], bottom left: N. Goncharova.

N. Goncharova. Text: save the scissors are cutting...;

in the center: ending [flower], right: Goncharova;

under the image: fun / fun.

N. Rogovin. Text: About Dostoevsky / mo; to the left of the text and bottom right:

rice. [human figures].

M. Larionov. [Rooster and Knife], to the left of the image. along the edge of the sheet: Or. No. 8v;

Top left: Larionov, below the image. text (in mirror image):

Our kochet is very concerned...

M. Larionov. [Human figures],

To the left of the image. along the edge of the sheet: Larionov,

under the image text: The Universe's name is the world and its half-dead...

M. Larionov. Text: From the poems of the Haidamaks...;

ending [flying bird with a twig in its beak], bottom right: Larionov

N. Goncharova. [Soldiers], bottom right: Natalia Goncharova.

N. Goncharova. [Vila and Leshy].

N. Goncharova. Text: From “Pitchfork and Lshago”...;

on the right in the margin and below the image: fig. [flowers]; top right: NG.

N. Rogovin. Text: A shooter whose waist was narrow...; on the right in the margin: fig. [Diana].

M. Larionov. Text: Be formidable like Opage...;

ending [rayonist drawing], bottom right: ML

M. Larionov. Text: MIP FROM THE END...;

Back cover, bottom left typograph, method: price 70 kopecks.

Bibliographical sources:

1. Polyakov, No. 16;

2. The Russian avant-garde book/1910-1934 (Judith Rothschild foundation, No. 14),R. 88-89;

3. Markov. With. 41-42;

4. Khachaturov. With. 88;

5. Kovtun, 2;

7. Compton. R. 12, 19, 72-74; 90-92, col. pi. 2-3;

8. Rozanov, No. 4881;

9. Zheverzheev, 1230;

10. Book. l., No. 33950;

11. Rats, 59;

12. Tarasenkov. With. 197;

The first collective lithographed collection of Russian futurists. In addition to the drawings, poetic and prose passages by Khlebnikov and Kruchenykh were reproduced in a lithographed manner (the author of the artistic design of the page is indicated in the description). Some of them were printed by A. Kruchenykh using children's typesetting alphabet (marked with an asterisk in the description). The back covers are made of thick paper, the text and illustrations are printed on thin glossy paper.

N. Rogovin (Nikolai Efimovich). Painter and graphic artist.

Lived in Moscowon Ostozhenka, in his house.

Was close to M.F.’s circle. Larionova.

Participated in the exhibitions “Jack of Diamonds” (1910-1911),

“Youth Union” (1911), “Donkey’s Tail” (1912), “Target” (1913).

During Soviet times, his area of ​​interest shifted to architecture.

The drawings of Larionov and Rogovin are designed in a primitivist manner, especially noteworthy is the attempt to use the expressive capabilities of primitive and children's art (fol. No. 5, 28, 30). Larionov, along with primitivist sheets, gives examples of the “Luchist” style (fol. No. I, 3, 7, etc.). Tatlin's first experience in book illustration is also interesting. The image of a circus act with a beheading, entirely built on fast-moving “formidable” lines, turned out to be a very successful equivalent to Khlebnikov’s famous lines “Be formidable like Ostranitsa...”. Larionov’s sheet No. 9 is perceived as an illustration of lines from a poem by the poet Lotov, cited by Larionov in the collection “Donkey’s Tail and Target” (“Oz z z z z z o”, p. 140). The largest number of drawings belonged to N. Goncharova. In addition to page-by-page illustrations for Kruchenykh’s “A Journey Around the World,” she created a number of ornamental drawings (for example, sheets No. 10 and 11), “decorating” the page with the text. The collection was published, apparently, at the end of November, since in the “Book Chronicle” it was noted in the first ten days of December. The first “review” of the book also came out in December [Blue Magazine]. The cover of each copy. Instead of drawings, it was decorated with a sticker made of colored paper, made by N. Goncharova. There are three types of paper: most often black (as in the described specimen), green (collection Cl. Leclanche-Boule, Paris) and gold, with an embossed pattern. There are 5 copies in the collection of the Museum of Modern Art in New York. collections with differently designed covers; in one case, the collage was made of paper with a so-called marble pattern. The sticker itself is shaped like a flower. It clearly shows the calyx of the flower, the stem and the leaves directed in different directions. In our case, the “flower” is located diagonally and its silhouette resembles a children’s paper boat (the symmetrically arranged “leaves” are given as a single mass), it is placed under a sticker on which the title is printed. Another option [Kovtun, Compton] suggests a different solution: the “flower” is located at the top of the cover, above the title, and its shape is emphatically vertical. Three preparatory drawings by N. Goncharova for lithographs No. 22, 24 and 34 are known and are in a private collection in Moscow. A copy that belonged to V. Bart is in the National Library of Russia. Some of the lithographs by Goncharova and Larionov from this collection were printed on thick paper and included in the collection “16 drawings by Natalia Goncharova and Mikhail Larionov.”

The dissimilarity of the creative principles of Larionov and Goncharova did not prevent both artists from performing together. The first experiment of this kind was carried out by them in the collection of A. Kruchenykh and V. Khlebnikov “Mirskontsa”. N. Rogovin and V. Tatlin also took part in it, but the bulk of the drawings belonged to Larionov and Goncharova. Larionov's drawings were distinguished by the greatest stylistic diversity. Next to the Luchist “Street Noise” and “Lady at the Table”, with the famous “Akhmet” in the spirit of “infantile” primitivism, two compositions were placed that testified to the artist’s maximum approach to the world of primitive images. Both of them arouse keen interest on the part of researchers and are often interpreted by them as indisputable evidence of the artist’s intensified archaeological “studies.” According to E. Parton, Larionov’s primitivism owes its development to archaeological interests. The first drawing is a primitively interpreted profile of a singing man with an elongated lower jaw and sounds emanating from his mouth, indicated in the form of the letters “033”. Parton reads it as an image of a primitive shaman, under the influence of the spirit that has moved into him, changing his appearance. The second drawing consists of schematically interpreted figures representing running people. The stripes, which are drawn in disorder across the entire margin of the page, are perceived by both E. Parton and S. Compton as an imitation of incisions characteristic of rock art. The reliance on primitive “iconography” in these works by Larionov is undeniable - just look at the silhouette of a female figure in the second drawing with “chopped off” limbs typical of Paleolithic art. But on the other hand, it is impossible to completely ignore, as both researchers do, the fact that the drawings are illustrations associated with specific poems. So, in the first case, the drawing is associatively correlated with the lines of Kruchenykh:

The Old Believers are knocking from inside with the fire of a poker - from his excerpt “Khvachi forge black swords...”.

The second composition is associated with a small fragment by Khlebnikov, the beginning of which:

The universe is called Mirya, the half-children and the dying curse -

placed on the sheet itself to the side of the image. The vision of impending death encrypted in these lines finds its continuation in Larionov’s drawing - in the stars falling from the sky, in the “roar of swords” depicted on the left side of the composition, in the whistle of bullets, the flight of which is indicated by intersecting lines, etc. Second place in the number of drawings in the collection belonged to N. Goncharova. The artist illustrated Kruchenykh’s prose passage “A Journey Around the World.” In addition to the page-by-page drawings combined into its traditional “series,” one should also note two pages of text, which include: in the first case, an image of a deer, in the second, sailing boats sailing along the river. Unlike “Game in Hell,” where image and text, meeting on the same page, entered into conflicting coexistence with each other, here we find an example of a more harmonious solution. One of the reasons for this is that the drawings placed in the text were devoid of a dark background; their lines were thus in the same plane as the lines of the text. It also played a role that the drawings, like the entire collection as a whole, were executed in ink, which predetermined their lined character.

S. Krasitsky. About Kruchenykh. At the beginning of glorious deeds.

Slurry of foul language

my cries are self-proclaimed

there is no need for a preface to them

I'm all good even when I'm scolded!

A. Kruchenykh about himself

You are the most persistent among us, we should follow your example.

B. Pasternak

“The book of Russian literature”, the “enfant terrible” of Russian futurism, the “futuristic Jesuit of the word”, Alexei Kruchenykh is one of the key figures and, perhaps, the most consistent figure in the Russian avant-garde in his radical aspirations. It is safe to say that none of the Russian writers of the 20th century encountered such stable misunderstanding among their contemporaries, were subjected to such derogatory criticism and, ultimately, such an unfair assessment as Kruchenykh. Moreover, this misunderstanding (or demonstrative non-recognition), despite the obvious interest in the poet’s work, was not just a momentary, quickly passing reaction, but stretched over several long decades and, in fact, covered several literary eras. However, this kind of “rejection reaction” is hardly explainable only by ideological reasons (as was the case in the Soviet period), but is also due to many immanent properties of Kruchenykh’s work, the fundamentally “extreme” position that he adhered to throughout his more than half a century of creative work . The reputation of a hopeless outcast, a tireless graphomaniac, an irresistible experimenter, a frenzied polemicist, who, it seemed, could not imagine his stay in art outside of a state of permanent dispute and overthrow of authorities (which often created the impression of the absolute self-sufficiency of this dispute, so to speak, the dispute “as such”) all this made the Kruchenykh’s position very vulnerable and, as it were, intended for condemnation, ridicule, and rejection. Without an intense desire to understand, to delve into the essence, meaning, pathos of the poet’s work, without “methodological trust” (in the words of P. Florensky) in the author’s activity, which is so necessary when turning to the literary heritage of the Kruchenykhs (due to the exceptional specificity of the material), without realizing it , that it is impossible to approach his poetry as “just poetry,” since when reading it is necessary to take into account many additional conditions, thereby developing a special reading methodology - without all this, a more or less adequate perception of the Kruchenykh phenomenon is truly impossible. And in this sense, the reaction of most critics to the work of the “wildest” (by self-definition) of poets seems generally natural and logical. However, now, with the possibility of a more holistic consideration of the path of Russian literature (or some very significant part of it) in the 20th century, right up to the latest trends, it becomes obvious not only the self-sufficient nature of the Kruchenykh’s poetic experiments as a historical and cultural phenomenon of a certain period, period classical Russian avant-garde, but also the certainly promising, and in some ways visionary, nature of its activity. This also concerns the influence, direct or indirect, on the work of poets of subsequent generations, and the fact that Kruchenykh was one of the first to raise and in his own way try to resolve the question of completely new principles for the existence of literature as the art of words in the context of realities that arose precisely in the 20th century , about the relationship of literature with other types of art and other areas of human existence.

Twisted, Alexey Eliseevich born in 1886 into a peasant family in the village of Olivskoye, Vavilov volost, Kherson province. After graduating from the Odessa Art School in 1906, he received a diploma as a teacher of graphic art. Art education and professional painting will be of exceptional importance for the future literary practice of the Kruchenykhs; for Russian futurism, which emerged a few years later as a cohesive group, this will generally become the most important phenomenon, since one of the main principles of the literary practice of the “Budetlyans” (the Russian synonym for the word “futurists” proposed by V. Khlebnikov) will be the orientation of literature towards the methodological principles of modern painting, expressed in Khlebnikov’s call: “We want the word to boldly follow painting.” Apparently, the acquaintance in Odessa (around 1904–1905) with David Burliuk in Odessa (around 1904–1905) became important for the creative fate of the Kruchenykhs (just as subsequent acquaintances with the future “father of Russian futurism” Vladimir Mayakovsky, Benedikt Livshits and some other participants in the futurist movement became fateful). movement). In the meantime, before the actual formation of the noisy futurist company, which occurred in the spring of 1912, Kruchenykh participated in the art exhibitions “Impressionists” (St. Petersburg) and “Wreath” (Kherson), acted as an artist in the press, published a number of works on painting issues, and also fiction. The first poetic work of the Kruchenykhs appeared in the newspaper “Khersonsky Vestnik” at the beginning of 1910. The poem “Kherson Theater Encyclopedia” is not much different from many other poetic feuilletons typical of periodicals. But knowing the further creative fate of its author, already in it one can consider some of the contours of the Kruchenykh’s literary position: awareness and assertion of oneself in polemics, the fight against stereotypes, a look at life phenomena and artistic phenomena, directed as if from the side, from the edge, from the side, into from a special, unexpected, unusual perspective. He will always remain faithful to this position (while constantly changing the angle of observation). A decade and a half later, B. Pasternak, characterizing this “extreme”, “borderline” of the Kruchenykh’s aesthetic credo, wrote, addressing him: “Your role in it (in art) is curious and instructive. You're on the edge. A step to the side, and you are outside it, that is, in the crude philistineness, which has more quirks than is commonly thought. You are a living piece of his conceivable border.” It is quite difficult to talk about the literary “teachers” of the Kruchenykhs, about the authors who most strongly influenced his work. He himself did not openly express his literary preferences either in theoretical or in memoirs, and this could hardly be expected from one of those who threw almost all previous and modern literature “from the Steamboat of modernity.” However, as is known, the development of existing trends and traditions can also manifest themselves dialectically in denying them, pushing away from them, and trying to overcome them. And the categorical demands of manifestos and declarations are one thing, literary practice is another (after all, B. Livshits admitted in his memoirs that at that time he “slept with Pushkin under the pillow”: “... am I alone? Didn’t he continue and in a dream disturb those who declared him more incomprehensible than hieroglyphs?”). Kruchenykh, like none of the Russian futurists, was distinguished by his constant intense attention to Russian literature. Another thing is that he again chooses a special, specific approach to it (for example, from the point of view of the struggle of Russian writers with the “devil”, in the aspects of “shiftology” or anal eroticism): on the one hand, this suggested a new, fresh look at , it would seem, has long been known to everyone, but on the other hand, it should have contributed to the discrediting of the classics or the most prominent contemporary writers (primarily the Symbolists) and the establishment of the latest art, including in the person of itself (“Russian writers were replaced by speech-makers - bayachi there will be people"). In the case of Kruchenykh, his literary sympathies can apparently be judged by which of the writers more often became the object of his attacks in poetic and theoretical works. Of particular interest, naturally, is the “beginning of all beginnings.” And already in the first book of poetry by the Kruchenykhs, created in collaboration with V. Khlebnikov, the poem “The Game in Hell” (1912), which the author himself described as “an ironic, made to look like a popular print, a mockery of the archaic devil,” the authors’ appeal to the Pushkin tradition is obvious ( R. Jacobson also wrote about this later). Later, in “Abstral Rot,” Kruchenykh will offer his own version of “Eugene Onegin,” stated in two lines; even later, Pushkin would turn out to be an ally of the Kruchenykhs when he developed the theory of “shiftology.” The interest of Russian futurists in the irrational, illogical, absurd world of Gogol’s works is known. Repeatedly mentioned in the works of Krucheny Lermontov. Of his contemporaries, Fyodor Sologub received the most from the Kruchenykhs (according to the Kruchenykhs - “Sologubeshka”): “the awakened locusts (evil spirits) sleepily grabbed Salogub and, chewing with their lips, vomited him and he came out of her mouth wrinkled, loose and shaved”; “It’s not for nothing that in some provinces to kill oneself means to engage in masturbation! “At the “First Evening of Speech Makers in Russia,” held in Moscow in October 1913, Kruchenykh (one can assume quite sincerely) called Ardalyon Peredonov from the novel “The Little Demon” the only positive type in Russian literature, because he “saw other worlds he's gone crazy." And perhaps, the influence of Sologub (intonation, motives, language - such a characteristic tongue-tiedness) is noticeable in the poems of Kruchenykh, included in the books “Ancient Love” (M.,) and “Lesiny Bukh” (St. Petersburg,). However, he himself later admitted that in his first poetic experiments he was engaged in “oiling the swamps of Sologubovshchina.” Russian futurism, especially the most radical and militant of its groups - the Cubo-Futurists, was generally characterized by awareness and self-affirmation primarily through negation. Nihilistic, outwardly destructive tendencies, especially at first, dominated in painting, in literature, in theoretical works, and in the behavioral practice of the “Budetlyans”. So the main symbolist images are replaced in the poetry of the futurists by the “dead sky”, “worm” stars, the “louse” moon by David Burliuk, the defeated sun and the dying world of Alexei Kruchenykh, the “spit” stars and the “cloud in pants” by Vladimir Mayakovsky. Instead of the ideal “eternal femininity” - a “simple glorious” Inca or “Masha with a red face” (or generally a proclamation of “vile contempt for women and children”). And also - an apology for “pigphilia”, books published on wallpaper or wrapping paper, scandalous, provoking speeches, often ending in scandals and the intervention of a policeman, provocative appearance (painted faces, carrots in a buttonhole, Mayakovsky’s “yellow jacket”, etc. ). Art thus overcame the line that traditionally separated it from life; it most decisively invaded life, influenced life, and became a part of life. Life-creation, a decisive, revolutionary transformation of reality - such was the super task of futurism - the goal, of course, as the “Budets” themselves believed, justifies the means. And it doesn’t matter what the reaction of the despicable man in the street was (laughter, irritation, indignation, arrogant disgust, the desire to rein in the “knights of the green donkey” with the help of the law) - the main thing is that this reaction was there. “I like the horror of Messrs. Chukovsky, Redko and Filosofov in front of the “pigphiles,” wrote Kruchenykh. “Yes, we pushed your beauty and intelligence, woman and life out, call us robbers, boring, hooligans!..” And therefore, much in futuristic practice was done according to the principles “You! " and "Here!"; hence the clearly hypertrophied anthropocentrism of many futurists (another principle is “I!”), and although this “principle” is usually rightly associated with the personality of V. Mayakovsky, without a doubt, it was also represented in the works of his associates, including and among the Kruchenykhs, although in a very unique form, determined by personal qualities and tasks to be solved. In general, taken together, the group of “Budetlyans” was, apparently, a very impressive ensemble, consisting of colorful figures, each of which - both in art and, so to speak, in life - was assigned an individual role, contrasting with the others . And now it is difficult to determine with certainty what in the position, in the behavior of this or that futurist was a true, sincere manifestation of personal qualities, and what was the result of conscious and purposeful work to create an image, a thoughtful or spontaneous game for the public, bravado, badassery - in principle , it doesn’t matter, and this same public was least concerned about the question of the “sincerity” of the futurists. In numerous reporters' reports, in the photographs that captured them, in memoirs - they remained forever: the imposing, one-eyed, with a lorgnette in his hands, the cynical and unbreakable David Burliuk; powerful, ready, it seems, to crush everything in his path, loud, “handsome twenty-two-year-old” Vladimir Mayakovsky; a quiet genius, apparently detached from everything worldly, constantly dwelling in his inner world and intensely struggling with mysteries of a universal scale, Velimir Khlebnikov. And next to him (again - next to him, on the side, not in the center) - nimble, fidgety, restless, a sort of cunning “laugher” from the famous Khlebnikov poem, and even with such an expressive surname - Kruchenykh. They call him a “pigphile,” and he agrees. They call him crazy, they call for him to be sent to a mental home, but he himself happily goes “to Udelnaya” and forbids him to read his books “in his right mind.” But if Kruchenykh caused laughter, it was often a tense, nervous laughter, bordering on a feeling of danger, even fear. In addition, he was seen as one of the indicative personifications of futurism, one of the faces of the “Coming Ham” (in the words of D. Merezhkovsky). And they took him quite seriously back then.

24.08.2010 11:15