Russian avant-garde in painting - artists, trends, characteristic features. Presentation on the topic “Masters of the Russian avant-garde

What is avant-garde art? Why did avant-garde artists despise “public tastes” so much? Why did they think that the classics were “not the same anymore”? Why did avant-garde artists create such strange paintings? And yet, is the Russian avant-garde a fight against God or a search for God?

We are talking about this with an art historian and culturologist.

For whatXXdid the century need avant-garde art?

Kazimir Malevich. Athletes. 1932

- What is avant-garde?

What we combine with one word “avant-garde” includes very diverse movements (for example, cubism, futurism, primitivism, suprematism, dadaism), different names and ideas. But all of them were characterized by one thing - a revolutionary perception of reality.

The avant-garde is usually associated with the revolutionary processes of the early 20th century, and many avant-garde artists welcomed the revolution. Of course, what they meant by it was not some kind of social explosion, but rather a revolution of the spirit, and above all, a revolution in art. What was it? In a radical break with world tradition, with previous searches in art. In refusal to reflect physical world- instead, the avant-gardeists sought to develop a new language to describe the metaphysical, invisible world. This is the cornerstone idea of ​​the avant-garde - going beyond the known into the unknown and even unknowable. It is no coincidence that Velimir Khlebnikov called the created “new language” of poetry “zaum.”

However, it is extremely important to understand that when we begin to immerse ourselves in avant-garde art, we must be prepared to dialogue and interact with a deep philosophical system. In this way it differed from the trends and moods in art that preceded it. Kazimir Malevich himself, for example, was a metaphysician and through his images sought to express meanings of an absolutely philosophical scale.

Why was such a radical change in art suddenly required? Because this was required by the era of the 20th century with all its catastrophes, tragedies, and fault lines. It became obvious to everyone that after the world experienced such upheavals - the First world war, two revolutions in Russia, the Civil War, it is unthinkable to continue to blithely draw “cupids” in the azure sky of Europe. The language of previous art was unable to comprehend the crisis that struck all of humanity. As the philosopher Theodor Adorno later said: “Writing poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric.” The old had died, disintegrated into chaos, and the outlines of the new were still visible in it, which had to be seen and understood through the prism of philosophy. That’s why all the avant-garde artists were so keen on it.

Was the avant-garde itself, as a movement in art, a completely unexpected phenomenon, or did it have some kind of historical basis?

Of course, the avant-garde as a cultural phenomenon of the early 20th century responded to, or, more correctly, fit into the processes that arose at the dawn of the century. It was a great time. A time that in Russia is called the Silver Age. The time of discovery of the ancient Russian icon, the time of great experiments in art, the time of great hopes.

If we look at history Western art, then in a sense it has always developed according to the principle of the avant-garde. Each emerging movement addressed entirely new problems. Impressionism, for example, shifted its focus from the “photographic” description of the surrounding world (as accurate as possible, fully close to nature, which was what the realism that preceded it strived for) to the emotional response and impression that are born in the artist’s soul at the moment of contemplation. After the Impressionists, symbolists appear, who take a different path - they begin to develop a special vocabulary of symbols, with the help of which they hope to achieve a perfect and comprehensive description of the world. There are many examples of such fundamental changes in artistic search, given that the development of art accelerated enormously towards the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, literally every decade gave birth to one, or even several, new directions. But the most important thing is that each new movement in art tried to run ahead, to jump beyond the event horizon of the present, anticipating the future itself.

Avangard is certainly an explosion, but a predictable explosion. This bomb had its own “wicks” attached to it. One of them is a systemic crisis of culture. According to many contemporaries, its supporting foundations were shaken, its meaningful message was exhausted. In addition, this is also technical progress, with which the idea of ​​speed literally bursts into art. Photography and cinema appear, against the background of which simply copying reality with a brush and paints has become unnecessary. Malevich wrote about this very vividly: “You can, of course, interpret the plots of the past and show them modern world, but this will not stop today’s life and cars will not turn into gigs, telephones will not disappear and submarines will not turn into the ships of the classical Greeks.”

The scientific and philosophical picture of the world is also rapidly changing: what was traditional and undeniable yesterday is now gathering dust on a shelf. In addition, a grandiose process of economic globalization has begun on a worldwide scale. In the end, society - its structure, its driving forces - was transformed. All this has accumulated and stuck together into a huge tangle of problems that have not been solved for art. The explosion was inevitable. And it happened.

Avant-garde is most often associated with flamboyant manifestation. It was, as they said, a slap at tradition, a slap in the face to public taste. What irritated the avant-garde artists so much? What did they raise their “artistic rebellion” against and what did they offer in return for what was destroyed?

Most of all they were irritated by bourgeois satiety with its petty-bourgeois morality, the indifference and downtroddenness of the poor strata, and the omnipotence of the bureaucracy.

Avant-gardists declared the creation of something new through a radical aesthetic experiment. At the same time, they destroyed classical aesthetics because, in their opinion, it was absolutely false. An ordinary artist, depicting, for example, beautiful girl on the background beautiful landscape, lies, because in reality the girl is not like that beautiful and the landscape behind it is not so beautiful. And all together this does not reflect real life, but simply made up. This is what the avant-garde artists thought and put forward the idea of ​​a fundamentally new aesthetics for the world they created. It required new perceptions, different tastes, categories, and descriptive language. And in their creativity itself, the avant-garde artists, no matter how strange it may sound, constantly turned to God. The Holy Scripture says that the Creator created the world “out of nothing,” which means that true grandiose art must create new world in the same way, destroying everything to the ground (to “nothing”) and building something completely new in its place. Avant-garde aesthetics is a radical aesthetics, which in its task is “divine” because it must create something completely new.

What did the avant-garde artists believe in and worship?

Kuzma Petrov-Vodkin. 1918 in Petrograd. 1920

If the avant-gardeists opposed any form of traditionality, if they wanted to destroy the whole existing world art and ideas, which means that religion, such as it was, also did not suit them. Or I'm wrong?

It is impossible to answer this question unequivocally, because, as I have already said, all the avant-garde artists were very different. For example, Natalya Goncharova (1881–1962), apparently, was a believer. She even painted icons in an avant-garde style. But Kazimir Malevich, although he was not a religious man, traditional sense this word, but received a creative stimulus when I saw how artists from St. Petersburg were painting the cathedral in Kyiv. Kazimir was fifteen years old, but this amazed him so much that he begged his mother to buy him brushes and paints and since then he has never parted with them. He was greatly impressed by the discovery of ancient Russian icons, when at the beginning of the 20th century, restorer Vasily Guryanov found a way to remove the layer of drying oil from darkened icons. Before this, they were completely blackened due to the dust and soot that had accumulated on them for centuries. And then suddenly the true colors and colors of the images began to be revealed and it became a real sensation. A special event was the discovery of Rublev’s icons, for example his famous one. Of course, for Malevich himself the icon was interesting only as an aesthetic object.

Many of those whom we consider today to be avant-garde artists often turned to Christian images and reflected on gospel stories. (1878–1939), for example, was brought up in Orthodox traditions and therefore remained a religious person all his life. It is known that in the city of Khvalynsk, where he got married, there was a temple for which he wrote “The Crucifixion” (unfortunately, the church itself has not survived to this day). Petrov-Vodkin also had a series of paintings dedicated to the theme of the Mother of God, where (for example, in the “Petrograd Madonna”) an attempt was made to comprehend the woman of his time through religious image. It is interesting that even in his revolutionary paintings there is a spherical perspective characteristic of icons.

The religious quests of Nicholas Roerich (1874–1947) are well known, for a long time I was fascinated by the topic of Russian saints. One can recall his famous cycle about St. Sergius of Radonezh. And Malevich himself, although formally far from religion, called his series of “Squares” “new icons.” Famous artist said that his paintings are road signs that should guide a person along the path of art. He believed in God, but perceived Him not as a person, but as a certain first principle.

But still, I think that the question of whether the avant-garde artists were believers or not is secondary. More importantly, the general impulse of the avant-garde was religious in spirit. It was imbued with a distinct religious pathos, in fact, like any revolutionary movement. By the way, Nikolai Berdyaev wrote about this in his book “Religious Origins of Russian Communism.” The philosopher, in particular, noted that Russian people, even through fighting against God, come to seek God. And this thought of Berdyaev, it seems to me, explains a lot in the very avant-garde.

We encounter god-fighting pathos, for example, in Malevich, when he, together with the artist Mikhail Matyushin (1861–1934) and the futurist poet Alexei Kruchenykh (1886–1968), created a grandiose mystery opera, “Victory over the Sun.” Malevich, in connection with the production, later wrote in the article “Theater” very characteristically: “The sound of Matyushin disintegrated the adhered bark of the sounds of old music, greasy with applause, the words and letter sounds of Alexei Kruchenykh dispersed the thing word. The curtain tore, tearing at the same time the scream of the consciousness of the old brain, revealing before the eyes of the wild crowd roads sticking out both into the ground and into the sky. We have opened a new path for the theater." It was an attempt through denial to reach new creative heights, and this concealed its own, perhaps very complex, in some sense dramatic, non-linear, search for God.

It is interesting that we find similar motifs in the famous composer Alexander Scriabin (1872–1915), who in his music tried to combine sound with color, that is, to “color” it, as it were. staves, let the listener see and feel the color perspective behind the sound. The musician tried to recreate the act of divine creation of the Universe, or at least touch it. And we see such space projects in art all the time at the beginning of the 20th century. This was typical of the spirit of the times. All of them echoed each other, influenced each other, creating a single revolutionary leitmotif - certainly anti-God, but through which, one way or another, the search for God shone through.

Natalya Goncharova. The Virgin and Child. 1911

If the avant-garde strived for such grandiose creativity, if it radically abandoned old traditions and “hackneyed” images, why did the artists of this movement so often turn to Christian ideas and subjects? Why was dialogue with Christian culture so important to them?

First of all, this is due to the realities in which they were formed. Russian avant-garde artists were largely brought up within Christian culture, and this predetermined their appeal to its main themes. Moreover, Christian art itself is very powerful. The avant-garde felt it.

It’s not for nothing that the famous French artist and sculptor Henri Matisse (1869–1954), having arrived in Russia and seeing ancient icons for the first time, said: “This is true great art. I am in love with their touching simplicity, which is closer to me and more expensive than paintings Fra Angelico. In these icons, like a mystical flower, the soul of the artists is revealed. And from them we need to learn to understand art.”

The icon had what the avant-garde artists were looking for: freedom from nature, the dominance of lines and planes, a different space and time. They understood that dialogue with Christian culture could be very fruitful, that the religious tradition had not lost its understanding of the ultimate goal of art - touching the metaphysical. This understanding was characteristic, for example, of the Middle Ages and was less noticeable in the post-Renaissance era. In addition, Christian art is very symbolic, and avant-garde artists valued the sign for its capacity and at the same time bottomlessness. And here again we remember Malevich, who perceived his paintings “signally”.

Why did Malevich write “Black Square”? And what was Kandinsky looking for in Paradise?

Kazimir Malevich. Black suprematist square. 1915

- They say that Malevich called his “Black Square” an anti-icon. What does it mean?

- In order to decipher the meaning of this statement by the artist, we must remember that he painted this picture at the time of a colossal historical catastrophe - at its height (1914–1918). Through “Black Square” he tried to show the abyss into which humanity was sliding at that time. Malevich himself hung it in the “red corner” of his workshop - indeed, as if as an icon. But “Black Square” is an anti-icon not in the sense that something contrary to the icon, something devilish, is hidden here. In this picture, according to Malevich’s plan, symbolism of the same strength was contained. It has, if you like, an apophatic beginning.

Taking the shape of the icon, close to a square, making the margins white and the center black, the artist is clearly starting from the iconographic canon. The square has always been a symbol that draws the whole world into itself - all four ends of the world. That is why the icon is quadrangular. It seems to absorb the scale of the entire universe. Malevich reduces all the multicolored icons to two colors: black and white - light and darkness. It is these principles that fight in the world - light and darkness, existence and non-existence, God and His adversary. And here non-existence, that is, the black color, seems to displace, pushes the light into the fields, occupying the entire space of the square in the middle. Where there should be a face there is darkness, which dully warns: there is no further road! In this sense, Malevich, as it were, puts an end to art, because the world is being destroyed by a world war. But this is only one interpretation. There is an opinion that the “Black Square” symbolizes, on the contrary, the beginning of the Universe, which is about to appear, or, conversely, has already disappeared, and behind it a new sky and a new earth will be born. The painting depicts both the beginning and the end at the same time.

In this sense, “Black Square” is an anti-icon that symbolized both the collapse of conventional forms of expressiveness and the beginning of a new creative search. It is interesting that Malevich subsequently wrote “White Square on a White Background” and then “Red Square”. The artist himself continued to move further, crossed the “point” of the “Black Square”, trying to comprehend and express new horizons of art.

Wassily Kandinsky. Subsequence. 1935

In the history of the Russian avant-garde, there are perhaps two most important and recognizable figures - Kazimir Malevich and Wassily Kandinsky. Did Kandinsky follow the same path as Malevich?

No, they are completely different. It seems to me that Malevich is more apocalyptic in spirit. He, as an artist, is drawn to the end of this world, trying to indicate its death. At the same time, peering into the abyss of the “Black Square”, the artist catches behind the blackness of the universal “Apocalypse” glimpses of new art, what he called “Suprematism” or non-objective art.

Wassily Kandinsky (1866–1944) goes in a completely different direction - to the beginnings of the world. He can be called a “paradise” artist. It is as if he dissects all forms of art down to the primary elements - points, lines, spots - from which the artistic image is composed. Kandinsky strives to show the world as it was at the very beginning. The artist comes into contact with unfolding existence. Kandinsky's art returns us to that heavenly state when Adam breathed air for the first time and saw the world around him in its formation - still only splashes, unformed colors, sensations. He sees a line that has not yet been contoured, he sees a point from which stars and planets have not yet scattered. With Kandinsky, everything is “primitive”, and therefore abstract, without finished forms.

Both Kandinsky and Malevich were avant-garde theorists. Vasily Vasilyevich left us a small but very capacious book - “On the Spiritual in Art”, in which he explained why he used the language of abstractions for his creativity. The artist compared the art of painting with music.

Music itself is abstract, but a person always hears something concrete and personal in it. And in order, for example, to musically depict the morning, it is not necessary to drag a rooster into the orchestra pit.

For Claude Debussy or Pyotr Tchaikovsky, just the harmony of seven notes was enough to “depict” the morning to the listener. In the same way, in Kandinsky’s paintings, using a combination of seven colors and freeing his paintings from objectivity, the artist sought to immerse his viewer in the “music of light.” Usage abstract painting was substantiated by the artist psychophysically. And it’s true, when we look at the landscape outside the window, first of all, at the emotional level, we see it as either sunny or cloudy. And the artist, in order to convey this feeling, does not have to meticulously copy the entire landscape. It is enough just to abstract it from specific outlines and convey the mood itself, give it a musical sound.

Nevertheless, it seems to me that the religious search, the understanding of the sacred, the divine in Malevich and Kandinsky are still not fully understood and appreciated.

How did the avant-garde end?

Kazimir Malevich. White on white. 1918

Any creative outrage, any thoughtful and planned props in art today, as a rule, is associated with the avant-garde. If a painting shocks us, if we see an unexpected experiment, then, as a rule, we define what we saw as art. It may be incomprehensible and strange, but it is art, and avant-garde at that. The avant-garde artists shocked the society of that time with their exhibitions. How valid is it to compare contemporary art with the avant-garde?

The external resemblance is really noticeable. Both avant-garde artists and many contemporary artists used and continue to use shocking as a tool for creative broadcasting. But the radical difference is that when you start to analyze the painting of the first half of the 20th century, you understand that behind the external, certainly bright and shocking form, there is always a very deep and complex philosophy hidden. The external showiness of avant-garde art lured the viewer deeper into the meaning of what the artist was trying to say. And each time the viewer was faced with a colossal, well-thought-out philosophical system. The example of the “Black Square”, which we talked about above, is a clear confirmation of this. You feel the same when you read Kandinsky’s works. You understand how powerful the intellectual base was behind his creative system.

Unfortunately, contemporary art, with its unusual forms, gains attention for the sake of attention. This is a well-developed method of PR and nothing more. Of course, in modern art there is a lot of interesting and deep things, artists often raise philosophical themes, but the so-called contemporary art mainly builds its strategy on scandal, which is often part of the artist’s plan; it seems that such a statement by the author will be noticed faster. But, by the way, in modern art there is little that is actually new; everything has already happened to one degree or another. For example, the so-called “actionism” (a phenomenon of the mid-20th century, when art itself approaches action and takes on the features of a public action) was also in the art of the early 20th century, when artists, poets, thinkers carried out their bright, special, strange for the average person exhibitions, wrote grandiose and daring manifestos, and organized entire processions. But all this was done not only for the sake of attracting the public’s attention to their worldview, but to make a person think about what they were stating, to ask him questions that he would never have thought about.

Today's actionism in art has become not only an end in itself, but also a means of political propaganda. It can be a bright shell, but, as a rule, with empty content. Contemporary art, in my opinion, is very poorly developed philosophically. Although, of course, you can find positive examples, but there are fewer of them.

Today there is a huge debate between adherents of classical and avant-garde art. At the same time, the gap between opponents is enormous, and the language of communication is sometimes rude. What do you see as the reason for such ardent rejection of each other between these two positions?

Art is a sphere where a person reveals himself primarily emotionally, therefore, debates around art are conducted with heightened emotions. And besides, there is a question of language and a question of context. As we said, the avant-garde sought to create a new language, different from the classical one, it wanted to break with the entire previous tradition, to create a new art. And he created a language that is incomprehensible to adherents of tradition. But I think that if you want, you can learn to understand any language and hear what the artist wanted to say.

Here it is important to take into account the context, because the avant-garde was born in an atmosphere of collapse not only classical art, but also the classical idea of ​​the universe and man. Today it is no longer possible to say that the experience of the twentieth century has not changed a person, and that he feels himself in the universe in the same way as two hundred, three hundred, and five hundred years ago. We have become different, and art is a kind of our mirror, and therefore it also changes. But there is not and cannot be any opposition here. Classic is good in its own way, avant-garde is good in its own way.

Pavel Filonov. Drummers (Masters of Analytical Art). 1934-1935

The avant-garde declared that the classics were outdated, that they were incompetent and deceitful. Has this position stood the test of time? Are classics really so powerless?

No, of course, the classics have not become obsolete, that’s why they are classics. How many centuries have passed since antiquity, but it still nourishes European and world culture. The same is true for Byzantine and Old Russian icons. It was not possible to “throw Pushkin off the ship of modernity” - and thank God! The youthful impulse of the avant-garde (and this was a revolt of children against their fathers) to destroy everything completely failed. But we managed to erect our own building next to the classics. And this is the value of the avant-garde, at least at the beginning of the twentieth century, that it not only destroyed, but also built. And art was nourished by his achievements throughout the twentieth century and continues to be nourished today. To some extent, we can talk about “avant-garde classics.” Avant-garde has also become a classic. Question: what is replacing it? It is very difficult to answer.

A whole century has passed since the birth of avant-garde art. To what extent have the plans and programs of these artists been realized? Isn’t it possible that they ended in failure, since today a narrow circle of specialists and amateurs are interested in the avant-garde?

A hundred years have passed, and we can confidently say that the Russian avant-garde is a great phenomenon; it deeply influenced the course of development of world art. As we know, Wassily Kandinsky went to Germany and became the founder of two associations “Blue Rider” and “Bridge”, and became a significant figure in German art XX century. And Marc Chagall is in French. Kazimir Malevich never left, but became one of the most popular and influential artists of the 20th century; his work still inspires artists around the world.

Unfortunately, the fates of many avant-garde artists were tragic. Some were forced to leave Russia, like Kandinsky, Chagall, Burliuk, Goncharova, Larionov and others, while others could not or did not want to go to the West. And here some fit into the Soviet system, while others did not. One of Malevich's students, Sterligov, was imprisoned in the 1930s. Alexander Drevin was shot in 1938 at the Butovo training ground. Pavel Filonov died in 1941 in besieged Leningrad from hunger, and El Lissitzky the same year in Moscow from tuberculosis. Malevich, Petrov-Vodkin, partly Vladimir Tatlin and Robert Falk were able to fit into the Soviet system, but already in the 1930s the avant-garde was branded as harmful formalism, and everything was done to reduce all the diversity of artistic movements to one thing: socialist realism. But in the post-war years, especially in the 60s and 70s, the seeds sown by the rebel artists sprouted. And we can talk about the so-called “second avant-garde”. It, of course, was not so large-scale and deep. But he was, which means that the efforts of the artists of the early twentieth century were not in vain. By the way, an interesting fact: one of Malevich’s students, Vladimir Sterligov, in the 1960s founded a group of artists who worked on the creation of religious art. The work of this group was based on Sterlig’s theory of “Bowl-Dome Consciousness,” which, as he believed, developed the Suprematist ideas of Malevich.

Unfortunately, you are right, avant-garde art is known mainly to connoisseurs and amateurs, avant-garde is highly valued by collectors, it is quite expensive. But the general public is not very interested in him, because they don’t understand. And if this is a failure, then it is a failure in the sense that we do not truly teach our children to look at and understand art, and, growing up, they cannot rise further than Shishkin and Vasnetsov. I think we need to tell people more about art, which has so many different and interesting languages, trends, names, ideas.

Malevich’s program manifesto “From Cubism and Futurism to Suprematism.”

There is an interesting book by Elena Sidorina “Constructivism without shores. Research and studies on the Russian avant-garde" (Moscow, 2012).

Andrey Krusanov has a study in three volumes, “Russian Avngarde” (Moscow, 2010).

But still, direct contact with this art is only possible in a gallery. These paintings need to be seen in person, with the understanding that to understand them you will need to learn the specific language in which they were painted.

* – Apophatic theology (or negative theology) is based on the fact that the essence of God is explained by denying all possible definitions as incompatible with His nature. - Note ed.

Interviewed by Tikhon Sysoev

At the beginning of the twentieth century, one of the movements appeared in Russia, which originated from modernism and was called the “Russian avant-garde.” Literally it sounds like avant - “ahead” and garde - “security”, but it went through the so-called modernization and sounded like “advanced detachment”. In fact, the founders of this movement were the 19th century, who propagated the denial of any foundations that were basic for all times of the existence of art. The main goal of avant-garde artists was the denial of traditions and unwritten laws of artistic skill.

Avant-garde and its movements

Russian avant-garde is a combination of Russian traditions with some techniques of Western European painting. In Russia, avant-garde artists are those who painted in the style of abstractionism, suprematism, constructivism and cubo-futurism. Actually, these four trends are the main directions of the avant-garde.

Artistic features and aesthetics of the avant-garde

The avant-garde movement is characterized by certain features that distinguish it from other movements:

• Avant-gardists welcome any social changes, for example, revolutions.
• The current is characterized by a certain duality, for example, rationalism and irrationality.
• Recognition, admiration and admiration for scientific and technological progress.
• New forms, techniques and means not previously used in the artistic world.
• Complete rejection of the fine art of the 8th century.
• Denial or recognition of traditions, established principles in painting.
• Experiment with shapes, colors and shades.

Wassily Kandinsky

All avant-garde artists of the 20th century are the “children” of Wassily Kandinsky, who became the founder of the avant-garde in Russia. All his work is divided into 3 stages:

• During the Munich period, Kandinsky worked on landscapes, creating such masterpieces as “The Blue Rider”, “The Gateway”, “The Bay Shore in Holland”, “The Old Town”.
• Moscow period. Most famous paintings of this period "Amazon" and "Amazon in the Mountains".
• Bauhaus and Paris. The circle is being used more and more often compared to others geometric shapes, and the shades gravitate towards cold and calm tones. Works from this period are “Little Dream in Red”, “ Composition VI II", "Small Worlds", "The Yellow Sound", "Bizarre".

Kazimir Malevich

Kazimir Malevich was born in February 1879 in Kyiv in Polish family. He first tried himself as an artist at the age of 15, when he was given a set of paints. Since then, for Malevich there was no matter more important than painting. But the parents did not share their son’s hobbies and insisted on getting a more serious and lucrative profession. Therefore, Malevich entered the agronomy school. Having moved to Kursk in 1896, he makes acquaintance with Lev Kvachevsky, an artist who advises Kazimir to go to study in Moscow. Unfortunately, Malevich was twice unable to enter the Moscow school painting. He began to learn the skill from Rerberg, who not only taught young artist, but also looked after him in every possible way: organized exhibitions of his works, presented him to the public. Both early and late works K. Malevich is pomposity and emotionality. Like other Russians, he combines decency and indecency in his works, but all his paintings are united by irony and thoughtfulness. In 1915, Malevich presented to the public a series of paintings in the avant-garde style, the most famous of which is “Black Square”. Among the many works, both fans and avant-garde artists highlighted “Some Malicious”, “Rest. Society in Top Hat", "Sisters", "Lingerie on the Fence", "Torso", "Gardener", "Church", "Two Dryads", "Cubo-Futuristic Composition".

Mikhail Larionov

He studied at the Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture. His mentors were: famous painters, like Korovin, Levitan and Serov. In Larionov's early work one can trace notes characteristic of the work of Nesterov and Kuznetsov, who are by no means avant-garde artists and their paintings do not belong to this movement. Larionov is also characteristic of such directions as folk art, primitivism. There are military notes, for example, “Resting Soldiers” and the theory of ideal beauty, illuminated in the paintings “Venus” and “Katsapskaya Venus”. Like other Soviet avant-garde artists, Larionov took part in the exhibition " donkey tail" and "Jack of Diamonds".

Natalia Goncharova

Initially, Goncharova studied sculpture and only over time switched to painting. Her first mentor was Korovin, and during this period she delighted exhibitions with her paintings in the spirit of impressionism. Then she was attracted by the theme of peasant art and tradition different nations and eras. This became the reason for the appearance of such films as “Evangelists”, “Harvesting Bread”, “Mother”, “Round Dance”. And the paintings “Orchids” and “Radiant Lilies” became the embodiment of the idea of ​​immortal art on canvas.

Olga Rozanova

Like most artists, Rozanova after graduating from college came under the influence of other painters. Avant-garde artists introduced the young talented girl to public life, and over the 10 years of her activity she took part in a large number of exhibitions and designed a lot of books and productions. Rozanova went through several stages of creativity, changing styles and directions.

Ivan Klyunkov (Klyun)

The creative path of Ivan Klyun changed dramatically after meeting Malevich. Even before meeting him, the artist studied French painting and visited the exhibition “Jack of Diamonds”. After fateful meeting Clune expands his collection with the paintings “Gramophone”, “Jug” and “Flying Landscape”. The artist performed later works in the style of figurative painting, creating compositions, still lifes, and illustrations.

Alexandra Exter

Exter became an artist thanks to where fate brought her together with such world-famous artists as Picasso, Jacob, Braque, Apollinaire, among whom were avant-garde artists.
After the trip, Exter began to paint in an impressionist style and the result of her work was the paintings “Still Life with Vase and Flowers” ​​and “Three female figures" Over time, pointillism and cubism began to appear in the works. Alexandra presented her paintings at exhibitions. Later, the artist devoted a lot of time to non-objective compositions and painting screens, lampshades, pillows, as well as decoration theatrical productions.

Vladimir Tatlin

Tatlin began studying at the Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture, and then at the Penza School art school. But due to frequent absences and poor academic performance, he was expelled without receiving a diploma. In 1914, Tatlin already exhibited his works at the exhibition “Jack of Diamonds” and “Donkey’s Tail”. Basically, his paintings are associated with everyday fishing. The meeting with Picasso played an important role in the change of direction: it was after it that Tatlin began to create in the style of cubism and in the style of “Larionov’s influence.” His creations reflected structures made of wood and iron and became fundamental to the constructivist movement in the Russian avant-garde.

El Lissitzky

Lissitzky first came into close contact with painting at the Jewish Society for the Encouragement of the Arts, where he worked since 1916. At that time, he not only illustrated Jewish publications, but also actively participated in exhibitions held in Moscow and Kyiv. The author's works harmoniously combine handwritten scrolls and world of art graphics. Upon arrival in Vitebsk, Lissitsky became interested in non-objective creativity, designing books and posters. El's brainchild is “prouns” - three-dimensional figures that are the basis for furniture production even today.

Lyubov Popova

Like most artists, Popova went through a multi-stage path of development: her early works were made in the style of Cezanne, and then features of cubism, fauvism and futurism appeared. Popova perceived the world as a large still life and transferred it to canvas in the form graphic images. Love paid special attention to the sounds of colors. This is what distinguished her work from the work of Malevich. When designing theatrical productions, Popova used the Art Deco style, which harmoniously combined avant-garde and modern. The artist tended to combine the incongruous, for example, cubism with the Renaissance and Russian icon painting.

The role of the Russian avant-garde in history

Many of the ideas of the avant-garde artists are still used in modern artistic arts, despite the fact that the avant-garde itself as a movement did not last long. The main reason for its collapse lies in the many directions that avant-garde artists created. Avant-garde as an art made it possible to develop the photo and film industry, allowed us to develop new forms, approaches and solutions in solving artistic problems.

One of the major phenomena of the 20th century - Avant-garde - originated in the middle of the 19th century in France. The word avant-garde - came into art historical terminology from military vocabulary - meaning “advanced detachment”.

The term “Russian avant-garde” unites radical movements Russian art, which appeared in 1907-1914 and reached maturity in the post-revolutionary years.

In fact, avant-garde phenomena are characteristic of any turning point. But in the twentieth century, the Avant-garde became a powerful cultural phenomenon, marking enormous changes in world artistic culture. The twentieth century was characterized by global cultural and civilizational processes that affected not only culture, but also science, as well as human society.

The first steps of Russian avant-garde artists

The first step towards avant-garde art was made by members of the artistic association "Blue Rose" in 1907, whose painting style was close to neo-primitivism, which had a very strong influence on the work of major representatives of the avant-garde: Larionov, Goncharov and others.

Benois was the first to use the word “avant-garde” in Russia; with this word, with some irony, he described a number of artists who presented paintings at the exhibition of the “Union of Artists” in 1910, who were mainly affiliated with the association. In the same year, “Knave of Diamonds” loudly announced new art at their exhibition, and from that time on it is generally accepted that everything innovative in the world is created by Russian artists. In 1912, a new association “Donkey's Tail” emerged, and a year later the exhibition “Target” opened, at which futurist artists showed their works. At the same exhibition, Larionov presented his famous “Radiant Works” to the viewer for the first time.

In St. Petersburg in 1910, the Youth Union association was formed; it included representatives different directions(Altman, Exter, etc.). Also in St. Petersburg, a new style of painting emerged - (a combination of Italian futurism and cubism). St. Petersburg became the capital of another new style - “Abstract Realism”, which combined poetry and painting.

Aesthetics and artistic features of the avant-garde in painting

This direction is characterized by:

• experiment(usually conscious) as a manifesto and as practical direction creativity

• negation traditional art , as well as aesthetic and moral norms of the philistine, “bourgeois” world

• revolutionary and sometimes destructive pathos of creativity

• rejection of canons 19th century in fine arts, i.e. refusal to depict visible reality

• desire to create new in forms, techniques, means of the artistic world

• shocking character behavior and presentation

• recognition and admiration achievements of scientific technical progress

• quest for the Spirit as a panacea for materialism

• On the one side, rationalism in art(for example, constructivism),
• with another - irrationality artistic creativity (for example, in surrealism)

• welcoming any social changes in society (Russian revolution)

If European avant-garde artists were inspired by the creativity of “primitive” peoples, then the artists of the Russian movement drew their techniques from ancient Russian and peasant art, urban folk crafts: popular prints and store signs.

At the same time, they relied heavily on modernist trends European art(cubism, futurism, fauvism, etc.).

The art of avant-garde painting is imbued with the spirit of nihilism, revolutionary aggression and combines destructive and creative principles.

As an aesthetic, it aims to change human consciousness and, perhaps, human nature itself.

Directions of the artistic avant-garde in Russia

This is a multifaceted and variegated phenomenon that unites several large currents Russian art of the 20th century, created and theoretically substantiated by famous masters such as K. Malevich, P. Filonov, M. Larionov and others.

Or non-objective art used associative perception; artists of this direction worked mainly with color, creating abstract forms.

In 1910, the main theorist of this movement, Kandinsky, created his first abstract painting (he called them compositions).

The essence of abstract art lies in solving abstract painting problems - harmony of color and form.

Kandinsky likened painting to music, and his main goal was to express the sound of the “Spiritual World” on canvas. At the same time, abstractionism elevated the aesthetic significance of color and form to an ideal.

We can say that other directions of avant-garde art in painting also belong to abstractionism (the Suprematism of K. Malevich, the Rayonism of M. Larionov, the “non-objectivity” of O. Rozanova and L. Popova)

As a movement, it originated in 1910, with K. Malevich occupying a leading position in it.

The main thing for Suprematism is the image of reality expressed in simple forms, a combination of colored circles with squares and triangles, straight lines.

In the canvases of the Suprematists, paint, from Malevich’s point of view, became the first step “ pure art", which equalizes the creativity of man and Nature (God).

Futurism

This is to a greater extent literary direction, but it also found expression in painting.

Futurism in painting is characterized by the energy of movement, the fragmentation of figures into fragments, the movement is transmitted by the superposition of various successive phases on the canvas.

The first Russian futurists were the Burliuk brothers.

This direction of M. Larionov and N. Goncharova interpreted creativity as the desire to depict not an object, but its reflection in the rays, i.e. The artist on the canvas does not depict an object, but only the rays falling on it.

Rayism was based on the mixing of color spectra, as well as the possibilities of light and color rendering.

M. Larionov wrote:

“It’s almost like a mirage that appears in the hot desert air.”

Since 1910, the artist began to defend the principles of analytical art, which were based on complex, kaleidoscopic compositions. The analytical art of P. Filonov is based on the principle of “organic growth” artistic form" The artistic canvas arises from the particular to the general, as if it sprouts, like a grain sprouts. The works of this artist expressed the spiritual and material laws of history; he embodied in them his dreams of an ideal future in which the justice of goodness would triumph.

Primitivism

It arose in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century; members of the Blue Rose association were the first to turn to it.

Primitivism is based on deliberate simplification of the image, i.e. such an image that is similar to a Russian popular print or a child’s drawing.

Larionov, Goncharova and Malevich also paid tribute to the primitive. Primitivist artists turned to the forms of primitive and medieval art, folk and children's art; they used pure colors and ornamental elements.

Constructivism

The current arose under the influence of technological progress. It is most widespread in architecture. How the direction appeared in the 20s of the twentieth century.

Its representatives considered the main principle of organizing a work to be construction. For this direction, function, geometricism, laconic forms, and industrialism are important.

• discovered the relativity of forms, means and methods of artistic thinking
• developed a huge number of new forms, techniques, approaches to solving artistic problems and tasks
• led to the emergence of new types of art (cinema, photography, etc.)
• showed the importance experimental work in artistic creativity
• showed the exhaustion of the main types of modern European art

Many ideas, developments, findings of this artistic direction Russian art still find their use in artistic life modern Russia.

And we also have a crossword puzzle on this topic -

Grade: 11th grade.

Program: Rapatskaya L. A. World art culture. 10-11 grades. M.: Vlados, 2007

Lesson type. Learning new material.

Lesson format: lesson-lecture.

Target. To form an idea of ​​artistic culture Russia XIX- beginning of the 20th century.

• introduce students to the concept of “avant-garde”, the life and work of avant-garde artists;
• draw students' attention to the worldview of avant-garde artists and the features of their painting;
• help students determine their attitude to avant-garde painting;
• cultivate a love for national and world culture.

Equipment: computer, projector, demonstration board, cards, textbook Rapatskaya L. A. World artistic culture. 1, 2 parts. Grade 11. M.: Vlados, 2007

Visual: epigraph on the board, presentation - slide show (Appendix 1) on the topic of the lesson.

During the classes

A new form gives birth to new content.
Art has always been free from life,
and color was never reflected in its color
flag over the city fortress.
V. Shklovsky

I. Organizational moment.

II. Report the topic and objectives of the lesson. (Annex 1)

Epigraph of our lesson: reading record.

III. Getting to know new material.

Recording in plan notebooks.

1. About modernist trends in the art of the beginning of the century. The concept of "avant-garde".
2. Artistic associations and their representatives.
3. Russian avant-garde.
4. Avant-garde in literature (poetry). Futurism.

1. Introductory conversation about modernist movements in the art of the beginning of the century.

1) The concept of "avant-garde".

When you come into contact with the art of the early 20th century, you are amazed: how diverse and interesting it is! Of course, I would like to bring all existing trends into a coherent system, so that it would be easier to determine the place of this or that artist in world culture. Alas, this is not always possible: the directions are closely intertwined, and the artists, it turns out, created, going beyond the framework of the theory they themselves proclaimed.

The concept of "avant-garde" comes from the French words "avant", which translates as "advanced", and "qarde" - "detachment".

More precisely, a symbol of European artistic movements of the 20th century, expressed in a radical renewal of all types of art, a modernist initiative in art: cubism, fauvism, futurism, expressionism, abstractionism (beginning of the century), surrealism (twenties-thirties), actionism, pop art (working with objects), conceptual art, photorealism, kineticism (sixties-seventies), theater of the absurd, electronic music, etc.

What all these areas have in common is:

Rejection of the norms of the classical image,

Deformation of forms,

Expression.

Avant-garde art is designed for dialogue between artist and viewer.

Why do you think avant-gardeism is close in meaning to modernism?

(Avant-gardeism is close in meaning to modernism (a collective designation for all the latest trends) and differs from modernism (a style in art late XIX- early 20th century)

Innovation in all areas of art is the main slogan of the avant-garde. Avant-garde is a collective concept of the most “left-wing” experimental creative movements in art.” silver age"In avant-garde movements, despite all their diversity, the common features were novelty and courage, which were considered a measure of creative talent and a standard of modernity.

What was also common was the artists’ naive belief in the advent of a special and unusual historical time - an era of miracle technology capable of changing people’s relationships with each other and with the environment). The problem of continuity did not seem to exist for supporters of the avant-garde.

In the 10s. XX century artistic experimentation in different types art reaches its apogee, and surprisingly synchronously.

The main reason for the synchronicity lies in the obvious mutual attraction of artists, poets, performers, musicians, in the commonality of creative, and sometimes vital interests. A generation of innovators looked for like-minded people in each other in the difficult task of overthrowing the foundations.

2. Student performances.

Artistic associations:

1. Union of Moscow Artists "Jack of Diamonds".

The basis of their painting was the subject as such, in its pure form. Moreover, the subject is stable, taken point-blank, devoid of any understatement or philosophical ambiguity.

The “Jacks of Diamonds” canvases amazed viewers with their deliberate roughness of volume, piercingly flashy color, and bulging “flesh of things” (P. P. Konchalovsky).

Pyotr Petrovich Konchalovsky (1876-1956)

• "Return from the fair"
• "Lilac", "Dry paints"

Ilya Ivanovich Mashkov (1881-1944)

• "Camellia", "Moscow food: breads",
• "Still life with magnolias"

Alexander Kuprin (1880-1960)

• "Poplars", "Factory", still lifes,
• industrial landscapes.

Robert Rafailovich Falk (1886-1958)

• "Old Ruza", "Negro", "Bay in Balaklava"

Aristarkh Vasilievich Lentulov (1882-1943)

• "Ringing", "At Iverskaya", "Self-portrait",
• "Oil Refinery Cracking"
• "Vegetables"

2. Group of painters "Donkey's Tail".

A group of young artists who separated from the “Jack of Diamonds” led by M. F. Larionov in 1912. Consistently promoting primitivist painting, Larionov developed a style that absorbed elements of signs, popular prints, and children's drawings. They turned to primitivism, to the traditions of Russian icon painting and popular prints; part of the group was close to futurism and cubism.

Main representatives and their works:

Mikhail Fedorovich Larionov (1881-1964)

• "Provincial dandy", "Vacationist"
• Soldier", "Rooster", "Rayism".

Natalia Sergeevna Goncharova (1881-1962)

• "Peasants Picking Apples"
• "Sunflowers" Fishing", "Jews.
• Sabbat."

Marc Chagall (1887-1985)

• "Me and the Village", "Fiddler", "Walk",
• "Above the City", "Holy Family".

Vladimir Evgrafovich Tatlin (1885-1953)

• "Sailor", "Model", "Counter-relief",
• "Project of a monument to the Third International",
• "Letatlin"

3. Russian avant-garde.

Experiments with form (primitivism, cubism) were combined in the work of representatives of the avant-garde with the search for new “rhythms of time.” The desire to recreate the dynamism of an object, its “life” from different angles.

Main representatives and their works:

Wassily Vasilyevich Kandinsky (1866-1944)

• "Houses in Murnau on Obermarkt"
• "Improvisation Klamm", "Composition VI",
• "Composition VIII", "Dominant Curve".

Pavel Nikolaevich Filonov (1883-1941)

• "Peasant Family", "City Winner"
• "Illustration for the book by Velimir Khlebnikov",
• "Formula of Imperialism"
• "Spring Formula"

Kazimir Severinovich Malevich (1878-1935)

• "Flower Girl", "Lady at the Bus Stop"
• Tram", "Cow and Violin", "Aviator",
• "Suprematism", "Mower", "Peasant Woman",
• "Black Suprematist Square".

3. Poetry. Futurism.

The dynamism of discoveries in the field of form and the movement towards intuitive creativity also captured poetry. The aesthetic rebellion against “public taste”, “mystical ideals” of symbolism and the classical heritage was most clearly reflected in futurism (future from Lat.)

Literary and artistic movement of the early 20th century in Italy and Russia.

Futurists contemptuously rejected the past, traditional culture in all its manifestations and praised the future - the coming era of industrialism, technology, high speeds and pace of life.

Futurism painting is characterized by:

- “energy” compositions with figures fragmented into fragments, it is dominated by rotating, flashing, explosive zigzags, spirals, ellipses, funnels;

One of the main principles of the futuristic picture is simultaneity (simultaneity), i.e. combining different moments of movement in one composition.

The first manifesto of Futurism was “thrown” into the culture of the “Silver Age” by the Italian poet and publicist F. T. Marinetti from the pages of the Parisian newspaper Le Figaro on February 20, 1909. “There is no beauty without struggle. There are no masterpieces without aggressiveness.” He also admitted, “We want to destroy museums and libraries. To fight moralism:.”

In February 1914, Marinetti appeared in the famous St. Petersburg basement “stray dog”, where artistic youth and creators of “new art” gathered.

It was not by chance that Marinetti felt his students in the St. Petersburg bohemia, and futuristic slogans in Russia fell on well-prepared soil.

The word “futurism” first appeared in the name of a group of poets who called themselves “Egofuturists.” True, this direction was by no means monolithic, and its invention belonged entirely to the poet Igor Severyanin (I.V. Lotarev, 1887-1941). Published during 1904-1912. 35 collections of poetry. Lines from "Samohymn":

My verse is silver and diamond
Life-giving, like oxygen.
- Oh, brilliant! Oh, talented! -
The people will thunder in my praise.
And he will drink pomegranate liqueur
For my jubilant sunrise.

In the fall of 1911, a meeting between the poets D. D. Burliuk and V. V. Mayakovsky took place at the Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture. It was they, together with A.E. Kruchenykh who joined them, who formed the core of the literary association “Gilea” - the first major community of futurists.

On December 18, 1912, the almanac “In Defense of New Art” was published. Its title - "A Slap in the Face of Public Taste" - became declarative and common noun, and the preface to the collection was perceived by readers as a manifesto of Russian futurists.

In the preface, the rebels loudly proclaimed complete freedom of creative experiment and proposed throwing Pushkin, Dostoevsky and Tolstoy “off the Steamboat of Modernity.” “Public taste” was indeed shocked.

Even Igor Severyanin, who is not too committed to the classics, responded to this call with the words:

To sober up the people,
Which fell into a dangerous spleen -
Not Lermontov from the ship,
And Burliuk - to Sakhalin.

The circle of like-minded futurists, for whom Velemir Khlebnikov (1885-1922) coined the name “Budetlyane” (from “future”), had an original philosophical and aesthetic program. Art should not reflect reality, but remake it, and the word should be free of any specific meaning - this is roughly what their theoretical doctrine sounded like.

Khlebnikov himself argued that “word creativity is the enemy of bookish fossilization of language,” and called on his futurist comrades to work on the destruction of traditional poetic speech.

This slogan was most consistently implemented by Alexey Eliseevich Kruchenykh (1886-1968). The poet selflessly searched for a valuable, “self-contained” word and rebelled against any signs of traditional rhyme and specific meaning. Having completely given himself over to the experiment, he became more and more immersed in his own poetic world, far from common sense, and finally declared five famous lines a masterpiece:

Dyr bul schyl
Ubeshchur
Skum
Are you with boo
Rlez

Kruchenykh resorted to sound and graphic analogies. Sometimes his poems consisted only of “inconvenient” dissonant sounds, and the poet did not use punctuation marks at all. Some of his writings are saturated with the poison of predictions of the death and decay of the world:

The world is dying
And should we stop?
Will we stop the landslide?
Dying beautiful world
And we won’t pay with a single word
His death...
The tired wind peeks through the narrow entrances
On the back of the head
It's scary...

Khlebnikov's innovation knew no bounds. In search of an adequate reflection of the integrity of the universe, he invents an unusual “star” language:

Manor at night, Genghis Khan!
Make noise, blue birches.
Dawn of the night, dawn of dawn!
And the sky is blue, Mozart!
And, dusk of the cloud, be Goya!
You are a cloud at night, roops!

In the flow of innovations and discoveries, against the background of loud-sounding names of representatives of painting and poetry, the achievements of avant-garde musicians seem more than modest; Moreover, radical positions were reflected in the works of little-known composers who were not considered classics.

IV. Consolidation of what has been learned.

What art is usually called avant-garde?

What did the masters of the Russian avant-garde believe in?

Why was the rejection of tradition necessary for the avant-garde masters?

Have their dreams of “the art of the future” come true?

V. Homework.

P.210-220 - answer question No. 10, 11.

Literature.

1. Aksyonov M., Maysuryan N. Encyclopedia for children. T.7. Art. Part 2. Architecture,

fine and decorative - applied art of the 17th - 20th centuries. M.: Avanta +, 2005.

2. Aronov A. A. World artistic culture. Russia late XIX-XX centuries. M.: Publishing Book and Printing Center, 1999.

3. Gorelova I., Bragin A. Art. M.: AST, 2003.

4. Rapatskaya L. A. World artistic culture. 1, 2 parts. Grade 11. M.: Vlados, 2007

The classical Russian avant-garde is a phenomenal phenomenon of the beginning of the last century, covering all areas of art: from painting and architecture to design and printing. And where do modern masters around the world now draw inspiration from, if not from the Russian avant-garde?

Wassily Kandinsky

Was it only the impressionistic “Haystack” by Claude Monet that made the lawyer Wassily Kandinsky take up painting professionally? Probably, the Vologda expedition, during which he was amazed to find himself inside a peasant hut-picture, and the discovery made by world science about the division of the atom, suggesting the “disassembly” of the world into intangible particles, and Wagner’s opera “Lohengrin”, during which Kandinsky clearly saw the colors of sounds. Whatever the reasons, the ex-lawyer went down in the history of world art as a theorist of Russian abstract art, despite the fact that he died a citizen of France.

Kazimir Malevich

A different metaphysics of color, a rejection of the literal perception of reality, a transition to “pure” planes - Malevich’s theory of Suprematism initially did not find understanding among his fellow Cubists, but this did not prevent it from becoming a world concept of avant-garde creativity. The “black square” has become the “zero of forms”, allowing one to escape “from the circle of things”. In addition to fundamental works on the theory of Suprematism and recognized world masterpieces, Malevich’s authorship belongs, for example, to the design of a mug with a square handle - very uncomfortable, but very original.

Vladimir Tatlin

The founder of Russian constructivism was a passionate opponent of Malevich. According to one of the tales, he allegedly knocked the chair out from under the Suprematism theorist and suggested that he sit on color and geometry. Tatlin advocated the connection between art and life, and the German Dadaists were inspired by his revolutionary ideas. The Tatlin Tower, although it remained only a project, is still considered today one of the symbols of the world avant-garde. The design of the iron monument, which includes seven buildings of various shapes rotating in spirals, was conceived as a symbol of the unification of people who ceased to understand each other during construction Tower of Babel. The monument to the Third International also had a practical purpose - members of the Comintern were supposed to work in it.

Pavel Filonov

In an attempt to counter Malevich’s method and Tatlin’s “pictorial anecdote,” in 1914 Filonov and his comrades published “Made Pictures” - a manifesto of analytical art with the main idea of ​​“persistent drawing of each atom.” In 1936, the leader of the Russian avant-garde was accused of “formalism.” At that time, “Filonovism” appeared - a symbol of non-proletarian art. Filonov’s works adorn only the walls of his modest home, and he himself is starving, irregularly receiving the pension of a “third-class researcher.” Pavel Nikolaevich died in the first days of the Leningrad siege on the roof of a house during his regular duty during German air raids. His theories would have a significant influence on subsequent generations of artists and writers.

El Lissitzky

The man who created a new type of creativity in the Land of the Soviets - design -
and together with Malevich he developed the foundations of Suprematism and went down in the history of world architecture as the author of horizontal skyscrapers. When Lazar Mordukhovich (real name El Lisitsky) presented his first project in the USSR, it was rejected: it was impossible to build such a thing. The buildings themselves are based on three solid supports with elevator shafts. Later, similar designs were implemented by architects in the Netherlands, Germany, China, and Ecuador. The designers of the Moscow school of management Skolkovo also took advantage of Lisitsky’s ideas.

Varvara Stepanova

Varvara Fedorovna was not only a co-author of many works by her husband Alexander Rodchenko, but also worked independently, exhibiting avant-garde paintings under the pseudonym Varst. Her revolutionary work in the field of textile design for the First Calico Printing Factory is widely known. Sharing the basic ideas of constructivism and considering fashion a bourgeois phenomenon, she designed overalls - new uniform for workers, which should be functional, simple, ergonomic. Together with Lyubov Popova, she developed new prints for fabrics. Geometric abstractions replaced petal flowers. In Soviet stores, textiles a la Stepanova were torn off with your hands.

Alexandra Exter

One of the key figures of today’s popular art deco, Alexandra Ekster, also worked together with Popova and Stepanova. She became the author of numerous works for the theater. Her costumes for the 1924 science fiction film Aelita were enthusiastically received in Venice and Paris and allowed her to receive an order for a series of puppets, the ideological embodiment of which was inspired by American pop art of the 50s and 60s. It is interesting that Exter was part of a group of fashion designers who developed the uniform for the Red Army - the gray overcoat and the famous Budenovka.

Vladimir Shukhov

More than two hundred towers around the world were built according to the designs of the outstanding Russian engineer and architect Vladimir Shukhov, including the famous television and radio broadcasting tower on Shabolovka. He developed construction technologies for oil industry, pipelines, bridge construction. The academician's ideas formed the basis of avant-garde architecture. In particular, he was the first in the world to use hyperboloid shapes and steel mesh shells as the load-bearing structure of a building. Shukhov's solutions are actively used by modern high-tech architects Fuller and Foster.

Vesnin brothers

Most famous project Soviet constructivist architects Alexander, Victor and Leonid Vesnin are considered to have designed the Moscow ZIL Palace of Culture. For the 1930s, the solutions proposed by the architects were distinguished by their boldness and undoubted innovation. At 23 thousand square meters settled down auditoriums, spacious halls, a library, a winter garden, and an observatory on the roof. It’s interesting that for individual scenes of “Sorcerers,” which was stylish for its time, it didn’t take long to look for a filming location - the avant-garde interiors created by the Vesnins were ideal. In addition, the brothers designed a large number of original buildings that were built throughout Russia.

ASNOVA

Printing house of the magazine "Ogonyok", 1930-1932

In 1923, in opposition to the constructivists and classical architectural societies, the rationalists created the Association of New Architects (ASNOVA). Representatives of the rational direction of the Russian avant-garde designed functional and laconic buildings of strict forms, paying great attention to the psychological perception of the object. Nikolai Ladovsky became the creative leader of the association. In particular, he proposed building up Moscow along a parabolic pattern. According to his project, the central axis of the Russian capital would coincide with Tverskaya Street, and the city itself, growing to the northwest, would eventually connect with St. Petersburg. In 1928, one of Ladovsky’s students, Georgy Krutikov, introduced sensational project floating city-commune. It was not implemented, unlike the project of the Northern River Station in Moscow by Vladimir Krinsky, Ladovsky’s closest associate.

Konstantin Melnikov

Back in the 30s, Konstantin Melnikov received global recognition as a classic of the Russian avant-garde. Melnikov's house in Krivoarbatsky Lane has become a cult object of world architecture. In Moscow, a dozen buildings designed by the architect have survived, all of which compete with each other in originality. The Rusakov House of Culture for employees of the tram depot is crowned with a giant gear protruding from the facade; The central facade of the club of the Svoboda factory on Vyatskaya is made in the form of a parallelepiped. The main entrance to Gorky Park was also designed by Melnikov. It is interesting that his project for Lenin’s sarcophagus in the form of a crystal was recognized as the best by a commission headed by Dzerzhinsky.

Natalia Goncharova

One of the “Amazons of the avant-garde,” Natalya Goncharova, stood at the origins of Russian primitivism. The very first works she exhibited, depicting nude models, were called pornographic, and late paintings were removed from exhibitions for religious reasons. Goncharova’s images are accessible and understandable. Throughout her life, she urged “not to follow tradition, but to live in it,” drawing inspiration from Russian lubok and other types of folk art. In the age of the flourishing of individualism, she propagated its rejection. Tsvetaeva, who was friends with Goncharova, wrote that she works “without disasters”: “always, everywhere and everything.”

Mikhail Larionov

The name of Natalia Goncharova is inextricably linked in the history of the Russian avant-garde with her husband Mikhail Larionov. He starts out as an impressionist, but eventually comes to primitivism. The emergence of Russian abstract art is usually associated with Larionov’s canvas “Glass”. By 1912, he became the ideological inspirer and theoretician of a new direction of non-objective creativity - Rayonism. For almost 10 years, he and his wife would work on sets and costumes for productions of Diaghilev’s Russian Seasons in Paris.

Aristarkh Lentulov

The talent of the classic Russian avant-garde was called cheerful, his temperament was exuberant, and his love of life was captivating. For the unusual coloring of his paintings, his friends jokingly called Aristarkh Vasilyevich Yarila, and his colleagues highly valued his bold, sometimes desperate experiments. Lentulov preferred art to the rank of priest - daring, sunny, overthrowing any authorities and cliches. In an effort to demonstrate the superiority of Russian talent, the master liked to repeat: “We are rebels, and therefore our avant-garde will be cooler!”