Russian Icons
Russian icons are an important part of medieval painting. Their aesthetic value, however, was not fully appreciated until exhibitions of early icons began to be held. The first, the Russian Medieval Art Exhibition, took place in 1913 in Moscow. The public was struck by the breathtaking beauty of an art whose charm resides in pure and spontaneous feeling, harmonious composition, and extraordinarily eloquent figures. The interplay of colors was unparalleled in luminosity and gaiety by anything in Byzantine, Roman, or Gothic art.It is only when icons have been cleaned of dark varnishes and repainting that the Russian primitives appear in their true light. But this fact was not always recognized by collectors, or even by museums, for they did not really know the treasures in their possession. Hidden by metal frames and several layers of over painting, the old icons looked dull and dreary. It was only towards the end of the Nineteenth Century that they took on a new lease on life as they began to be systematically cleaned of retouches and varnishes. Suddenly the somber and darkened colors shone as radiantly as when the icons were new. The long painstaking work of the restorers revealed hundreds of icons which today constitute the collection that is the pride of the Russian Museum in St. Petersburg, the Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow, and the Art and History Museum of Novgorod. It is very regrettable that icons are so underrepresented in Western Museums which in large part possess only unimportant works. To see icons in their most beautiful condition, one must visit the museums of Russia.
Somewhat tragically there are no real examples of Slavic paintings of the pre-Christian period in Russia today. However, early chronicles allude to pagan temples built of wood and decorated with paintings. After Russia converted to Christianity under the Grand Dukes of Kiev, around 989, many stone churches were built. The Russians, like the Byzantines, decorated their churches with frescoes, mosaics, and icons. It is certain that Prince Vladimir had Byzantine master masons collaborate in the building of the great Cathedral of St. Sophia in Kiev (1037-1046) during the reign of Yaroslav, son of Vladimir. As was often the case in medieval Europe, workshops of experienced artists were entrusted with the decoration of important buildings. At first, painters brought from Constantinople took charge, with Russian artists as their assistants and pupils. The local painters gradually replaced their masters and the Greco-Russian workshops became purely Russian. This was the manner in which the Russian school of architecture and painting came into being.
The earliest Russians icons are those from Novgorod. In the Twelfth Century, the power of the Duchy of Kiev began to decline, and Novgorod obtained its independence. The power of the princes of the city began to decline and a republican government was set up. It was also in the Twelfth Century that Novgorod art achieved its individuality. Easel painting was strongly influenced by the Byzantines, who had been in favor with the princes. That this trend was to die out in the following century, is evidenced by two remarkable icons: Saint George and the Archangel. The former was painted around 1170 and is now in the Cathedral of the Annunciation in the Kremlin. It was probably commissioned by Prince George of Novgorod, the youngest son of Andrew Bogoliubsky. Saint George, the prince's patron saint, is represented as the guardian of the prince's arms. The left hand of the painted figure bearing a sword is only partially visible. His powerful torso, which occupies almost the entire surface of the panel, stands out conspicuously against a gold background. The architectonic character of the design of this open, youthful face with its courageous expression provides a particular fascination.
The Archangel, like Saint George, dates from the end of the Twelfth Century. It belonged to the group of heads which decorated the architrave of an iconostasis. The ethereal expression of the face and the characteristically soft treatment of light and shade, relate this icon to Twelfth Century works belonging to the Novgorod School, together with the Ustyug Annunciation and the Savior (Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow).
The large icon of the Dormition is unique. Painted at the beginning of the Thirteenth Century, it is in many ways similar to the icons in the Byzantine style, but for the first time the figures lose their relief, bright colors are used for the garments, and facial expressions are more natural. The Assumption is represented in complex iconographic form: Christ is shown holding in his arms a child in a white robe symbolizing the soul of the Virgin Mary, which he is about to raise to heaven. The Twelve Apostles are seen descending from the skies to bow down before the Virgin's death bed. Just above the figure of Christ, four graceful angels hover against a gold background. The placement of the angels and the apostles reveals the constant concern of the painter to centralize the composition and to retain that decorative character without perspective which was so sought after by masters of Russian medieval painting.
In addition to the schools of Kiev and Novgorod, local schools of painting sprang up in the Twelfth Century at Vladimir, Suzdal, Yaroslavl, and Pskov. It is to the Yaraslov school, which flourished in the first third of the Thirteenth Century, that we owe the magnificent Virgin Orans. The infant Jesus is depicted, arms outstretched, in a medallion on the Virgin's breast. We can see plainly that the Russian version of this theme is considerably less severe than traditional depictations. The style is bold and dynamic. The gold bands of the drapery gain in width and are used to good decorative effect. At Yaroslav the dark Byzantine palette was superseded by brighter and brighter colors.
It is important to remember that the Thirteenth Century witnessed the development of urban civilization in Western Europe, but was a time of utter devastation in Russia. In 1223, the Mongol invasions began. The cities of Russia were sacked and relations with Byzantium and the Balkans were broken off. Within Russia the provinces were more and more isolated from one another. It was no time for development of any kind. Indeed, even money and labor were lacking. Fortunately the Tartars did not succeed in conquering Novgorod and Pskov and in these two privileged cities the tradition of icon painting was kept alive.
The Novgorod school reached the height of its development at the turn of the Fourteenth Century and during the Fifteenth when its finest works were produced. By this time all traces of Byzantine influenced had vanished. The artistic output had acquired clearly marked national characteristics to which specific local Novgorod qualities were added. The whole of Novgorod art bears the imprint of a lively popular taste: it is brightly colored, expressive and concise. The painters avoided the complicated symbolism so much in vogue with icon painters of a later date. Their themes are simple and require no commentary. Many icons were devoted to the saints commonly held to be the protectors of the peasants. An example is the "Prophet Elijah," regarded by the people as the "Thunderer," or "Rainbearer," and the protector of their homes. The masters of the Novgorod School generally placed him against a background of flaming vermilion and gave him a penetrating expression. Saint George was also regarded as a protector of peasants, a guardian of the herds, and the embodiment of the forces of light. Wise Saint Nicholas was the object of a special cult. Sick people and travelers addressed their prayers to him, and he was asked to intercede in cases of fire--the terrible scourge of wooden villages and cities. The Novgorod workshops also produced icons of St. Frol and St. Lavr, the protectors of horses. All of these images were moving in their simplicity. Even when Novgorod painters introduced multiple figures into their works, the compositions were always so clear and airy that they can be understood without effort. The secondary episodes never obscured the main theme of the icon.
The artists of Novgorod liked to paint strong, vigorous models; they preferred faces of a well-defined national type, with bold and sometimes even coarse figures. Because of their barely indicated volume and the sharpness of their outlines, the persons appear indissolubly linked to the whole of the composition and share in its calm, epic rhythm. The Novgorod master's palette consisted solely of unmixed colors, intense and remarkably vibrant tones with flaming vermilion predominating. It was not so harmonious as that of the Moscow master; on the other hand it possessed a virile and dynamic quality all of its own. Matisse admired these colors, with their unforgettable brilliance and chromatic tension. In them the artistic taste of the Novgorod school is most completely expressed.
Twentieth Century research produced evidence of other regional schools beside Novgorod in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries: Tver, Pskov, Suzdal, Rostov, and even distant Kargopol near Arkhangelsk. From Kargopol we have a number of remarkable icons which once formed a part of the iconostasis of that city's cathedral. They are characteristic of what is called the "Northern School,'' largely influenced by that of Novgorod but with a certain concise style. For instance, figures are stylized in the extreme, gestures are restrained, movements slow, and elements such as hills or buildings are suggested by simple masses. These icons are the work of a great painter and an excellent colorist. The purity and tension of the colors bring to mind the Novgorod masters, but the Kargopol master was original in that he used larger patches of color, avoiding unnecessary intersections and distracting effects. In that way the coloring became more vibrant, especially in areas illuminated by vermilion.
The Pskov painters used a very different color range in which intense green and orange-red predominated. The plain, simple faces of the Pskov icons are strikingly alive. Dead-white, they are modeled in monochrome and glow with an intense life. The beautiful icon of the Dormition of the Virgin form a rhythmic parabola re-echoed by the parabola of the blue aura around Christ. The soul of Mary is symbolized by the child in immaculate white which Christ holds in his arms. On the clouds are repeated the busts of the apostles which appeared on the Thirteenth Century icon from Novgorod. In the central medallion the Mother of God, before ascending to Heaven, is handing her red belt to the Apostle Thomas, who arrived late. This theme, taken from apocryphal writings of the Fifth Century, is known in Italian art as "La Madonna Della Cintola." It was introduced into Russia in about 1313 in the wall paintings of the Snetogorski monastery. The icon of the Dormition of the Virgin is remarkable not only because of the complexity of its composition, but also because of the exceptional beauty of its colors, among which, vibrant blues are dominant. It is known as the "Blue Assumption."
The Tver's school of icon painting was characterized by rather pale light colors with a profusion of light blues and turquoises.
By the Fourteenth Century Moscow began to develop rapidly, and it was Moscow that led the other Russian states in the struggle with the Tatars. After the victory of Kulikovo in 1380, the Moscow princes assumed control of the nationalist movement to free Russia from Mongolian bondage. Their court became a center of attraction for painters and craftsman from the other principalities. It was likewise in Moscow that the artists from southern Slav countries invaded by the Turks sought refuge. Relations with Byzantium, broken off at the time of the Tatar incursions, were resumed. In the beginning, the Moscow painters filled the Vladimir-Suzdal school, as may be seen by the superb icon of St. Boris and St. Gleb, attributed to a Moscow painter. These saints were the object of a widespread cult. Facing the spectator, they are shown in hieratic posture, in tunics and manties, wearing princely toques edged with fur. The cross each holds in his right hand reminds us that they died a martyr's death, the sword in the left hand, that they were revered as the patron saints of princes and warriors. The rather heavy proportions and stiff postures associate the icon with those of the Thirteenth Century. Moscow was later to borrow extensively from the rather original Byzantine art of the time of Paleologues. But the Moscow painters transformed the Byzantine style out of all recognition in the course of an evolution in which a painter of genius, Andrew Rublev (circa 1360/70-1430), was to play a determining role. With Theophanes the Greek, Rublev was actually the creator of the Russian iconostasis as we know it. In 1405, moreover, these two masters worked in collaboration at the Blagoveshchensky Cathedral in Moscow. They raised the height of the iconostasis so that it completely hid the altar from the congregation. The Byzantine iconostases were relatively low. All this constituted a monumental ensemble without precedent in Byzantium or elsewhere. Russia is rich in forests and the painters were not sparing of wood, So the iconostasis, which functioned as a support for a great many evangelical and hagiographic scenes, replaced mural painting to some extent.
Most of the icons we admire in museums as works of art in their own right were originally integral parts of a large ensemble, the iconostasis. The latter having fundamentally an architectural construction, the painter was obliged to simplify forms, lines, and volumes so that they would be seen better at a distance. In this way the iconostasis contributed to the formation of that concise, unencumbered style so typical of the best Fifteenth Century icons.
A characteristic luminosity and an exceptional richness of feeling distinguish the works attributed to Rublev. Rublev's saints are inspired by his own conception of moral perfection; generous to a degree, they are ever ready to help. These images move us by their purity and poetry even today. The Trinity is the most celebrated work of Rublev. The angels, seated at a low table, form such a closely knit group that it is impossible not to interpret it as embodying the ideal of peace and harmony. The whole composition revolves around the chalice. The angels on the left and in the center are blessing it. Their attitude is the key, which enables us to interpret the complex symbolism of the picture. The angel in the center represents Christ. Thoughtful, with head bent to the left, he blesses the chalice, thus indicating that he is prepared to offer himself as a sacrifice. God the Father (the angel on the left), whose face expresses profound grief, is encouraging him in his sublime gesture. The angel on the right represents the power of the Holy Ghost. We have here the embodiment of the greatest sacrifice of which love is capable (a father commits his son to death). But the artist goes even further: he shows the act of submission, the son accepting his upcoming death.
In Rublev's Trinity, as in all great words, composition, color and linear rhythms obey a guiding principle. The angels, almost ethereal in their lightness and grace, are so placed around the table that they form a circle. The circle theme may be regarded as the key to the whole composition. It is evident in the central angel's head, turned leftwards, in the way the two seats are brought together, in the curve outlining the angel on the right, in the contours of mountain and tree. The painter has no fear of breaking the circular rhythm by introducing a vertical portico. He knows his composition will gain in freedom and elasticity. The turn of the central angel's head, which disturbs the symmetry of the upper part of the picture, does not worry the painter, who merely moves the seat to the right to restore the balance. The chalice does not occupy the center either. It is placed to the right, where it balances the central angel's left -turned head . This liberal use of deliberate asymmetry gives the composition a remarkably open feeling. While the volumes remain centered and balanced, the composition acquires complexity as a result of the many variations on the circle theme. By fitting the composition into a simple geometrical figure, the circle, Rublev restricts it almost entirely to the two dimensional plane, which is that of the panel on which the icon is painted. And although the angels on either side are seated in front of the table and the central angel at the back, they appear to be on the same plane. Extremely slight, the depth is in strict correlation with the height and width of the panel. The three dimensions are thus in harmony , making of Rublev's icon a perfect work of art. By excluding relief and using line and color as the sole means of expression, Rublev succeeded in preserving the two dimensional rhythm which has always attracted Russian painters and which endows their compositions with their surprising airiness.
Perhaps the most remarkable thing about this icon is the color. Closely bound up with the design, it is the essential factor in the artistic quality of an icon distinguished by its harmony, clarity, and purity. The color range of the Trinity expresses with rare eloquence the idea of concord between the three angels.
A characteristic of Rublev's art is the almost total absence of shadow. When Rublev introduces a dark patch or a deeper tone, it is solely to bring out the luminosity of another color. This clever handling of color gives Rublev's palette its extreme luminosity and also an exceptional transparency reminiscent of Piero Della Francesca. By skillfully combining three shades of blue, Rublev produces subtle harmonies with complex overtones. The visitor, on leaving the room where the Trinity is shown, cannot easily forget the resonance of these extraordinary colors.
With Rublev's works the Russian art of the icon reached its peak. But Rublev was not the only great master. Many talented painters were working around the same period (the end of the fourteenth -- the beginning of the Fifteenth Century) and they did not all belong to the same school. Another unparalleled master was produced by the Moscow school in the fifteenth century- Dionisii (circa 1440-1508). He comes within the Rublev tradition.
Clearly Dionisii strove to maintain the spirituality and the purity of Rublev's art. He, too, was fond of light, gay colors and generous line harmonies. Some new features are nevertheless discernible in his art. The faces of the saints no longer express the same strength of feelings; the colors have lost in vigor; and the artist seems to prefer washed -out tones and compositions with an abundance of ornamental motifs. With his more profane conception of the religious picture Dionisii likes what is graceful, elegant, and delicate. His work further reflects the growing importance of aesthetic canons and norms, auguring a continuing evolution of conventional art. Thus the art forms of the Fifteenth Century, which were to open a new era in Russian painting, imperceptibly took shape.
The powerful current of the Renaissance, which swept over most of Europe, did not reach Russia. It would therefore be a mistake to study Russian art within the framework of Renaissance realism. The universe created by these early Russian painters requires very different criteria. Then and then alone may we feel the full impact of its spiritual wealth and of its perfect forms of expression.
The Immortal Itinerants (Peredvizhniki)
In order to understand the most important era of Russian art, one must appreciate the fact that, until the second half of the 19th Century, artists in Russia were trained to paint in the classical style (Academy Style) and that human events were never portrayed in realistic terms. In order to help stamp out the new winds of reform that were sweeping Europe with the onset of Napoleon, and after the Napoleonic invasion of 1812 and forward, the monarchy began to closely control the nature and subject matter of the art produced by the Academy. By the 1850s, Nicholas I, had gone so far as to appoint a member of the Royal family as President of the Academy in order to control, not only the output, but the curriculum as well. His intent was to tightly control the content of art from the Academy in order to ensure that the monarchy was glorified to the highest extent possible. This was almost a natural extension of the period of patriotic art that followed the victory of the Russians over the French after Napoleon's Grand Armee was destroyed in 1812.By the end of the first half of the 19th Century, Russian intellectuals supported the need for reform in Russia. Russia had entered the age of capital development. Influenced by the liberal ideas of Chernyshevsky and Belinski, the Itinerant movement established the first Free Society of Artists in Russia. The founding of the Itinerant's movement was a measure calculated to express the need for rejection of the social order in Tsarist Russia. The objectives of the Itinerants contained three main objectives: 1. The enlightenment of the people by affording them the opportunity to learn about the new Russian Art 2. The aesthetic objective of forming a new artistic sense and taste 3. The economic objective of attracting new buyers in order to have a market for the new art
With the onset of the itinerant movement, new terms to describe Russian art began to be heard. Phrases such as "Enlightening," "aesthetic objective," "economic objective," "new," "fresh," "for the first time" were heard all over the country. This was the first time in the history of the Russian World of Art that the subject matter was rich and expansive. The method used by these artists was to conduct traveling art exhibits in Moscow, St. Petersburg, and other large cities throughout Russia. This set the Itinerants on a collision course with the forces of the Academy and set the stage for an entirely new type of art. Russian art has never looked back. Everyone in Russia became involved in the conflict. Critics, artists, academics, newspapers, politicians, and even the common people could not let the matter rest. Exhibition halls became battlegrounds between the new and the old. Today it is difficult to understand that the emotion of the times and the results of the movement clearly shook the forces of empire to their very depths.
The itinerant artists themselves were from all walks of life and age. Some were peasants, and some were of the nobility, but all were united in a single goal. That goal was to depict life in Russia as it really was. The difference between this path and Classicism and Romanticism was that for the first time painting was focused on present day reality. The artist's hand was freed from the restrictions of lofty ideals. Painting reflected events and the contradictions of Russian society. The lives of common Russian people including their struggles against oppression were revealed through art. The love of the Russian people for their country and its nature was deified, and for the first time, paintings were free of social prejudice. One must be aware that all the while Russia, unlike other Western European countries, was a land where the political freedom to express oneself was strictly prohibited. Free expression was prohibited almost to the point of non-understanding in this country. It was only in the field of the arts (painting, literature, music, theater, etc.) that there was any possibility self expression. This led the Itinerants to feel as if they were given a special responsibility to effect change. The artists willingly took on this mission as a sacred duty. The great Ilya Repin wrote that artists come from the people and that the people expect art that reflects a clear understanding of conditions and nature.
This generation of Itinerants tried to analyze and determine what art was and what role it played in social life. The great Russian art critic Vladimir Stasov defined this aspiration as follows: "The artists striving to unite to setup their own society were not doing it for the purpose of creating beautiful paintings and statues for the sole purpose of earning money. They were striving to create something for the minds and feelings of the people." This is why arguments that arose at the exhibition halls were concerned with far more than pure artistic arguments. The artists themselves were of varying talent, and different painting genres, but as members of the Society became "Universal Artists," who worked in different forms of art. For example, the most talented of the Itinerants (Repin, Shiskin, and others) worked in both painting and drawing. As a result of their efforts, easel drawing stopped being merely preparatory work for future paintings and developed into an independent form of art.
Other examples of multi-talented artists include artists such as Vasily Polenov and Victor Vasnetsov. These two Itinerants worked, not only as easel painters, but each also devoted a great deal of time in reviving theater scenery painting thus laying the foundation for the tradition of Russian theater decor that reached its peak at the turn of the 19th and 20th Centuries. This effort was done in conjunction with artists of another artistic society, the World of Art. Vasnetsov, among others, also created many mural paintings for churches. Being universal artists, many Itinerants worked successfully in other genres. Ivan Kramskoi, Nikolai Ghe, Ilya Repin, and Vasily Surikov were fine portraitists and history theme painters. Polenov was an historical painter as well as a landscapist. Yaroshenko worked in portrait, landscape, and genre painting. In spite of multi-talented artists that worked in many genres, one must not forget, subjects and heroes, the images of Russian nature and human destiny always remained the main themes of their creativity. While working on these motifs each artist revealed his own understanding of the fundamental problems of human existence.
In order to comprehend the work of the Itinerants more fully, one must examine some of the new tendencies brought by the Itinerants to Russian art. Genre painting was the primary method of bringing realism to Russian art though it was not new for Russian art in the whole. The range of themes represented here was extremely wide, embracing studio works depicting everyday life in the city and peasant life in the country. In some instances huge paintings were created in order to accomplish these goals.
Before serfdom was abolished by the reform act of 1861, peasants had belonged to a landlord. The liberation of the serfs entailed many new problems in society. The serfs were freed but were not given the right to own land. So, they had no means of support. Many serfs fled to the cities and into the arms of a miserable existence. They were no longer peasants but they did not find acceptance in the cities. They were no longer able to always maintain the ties that had previously bound them to their families. The villages they left behind were also changed. Customary ways of making a living were changed forever, and again family relations were affected. The peasantry became very heterogeneous and in some cases were able to engage in cottage industry that changed their relationship with the local nobility. A classic painting by Maximov, The Division of the Family Property is a sterling example of this change in Russian lifestyles.
Makovsky, a very prolific artist dedicated his creative works to a reflection of urban life. His paintings the Date and On the Boulevard are perhaps his two best works. By depicting ordinary life he managed to reflect the deepest tragedies of contemporary society. The poverty of the most vulnerable members of society children and their miserable existence, mothers being doomed to the worst, the estrangement of sons totally exhausted by backbreaking labor were clearly recognizable in these two paintings. The Date is particularly remarkable. When viewing the painting, you can sense the same strain and emotional disconnect that you find in On the Boulevard. At first glance nothing seems askance in either painting. You sense nothing amiss due to the lack of action or covert tension. You see two people sitting on a bench--one of them a young woman with a child, newly arrived from the village to visit her husband. Her husband sitting beside her has become a foreigner to his family and apparently has been so for sometime. The more you look the more you see of a tragedy slowly unfolding before your very eyes. The viewer becomes aware of the contrast between the interplay of the people and the surrounding beauty of an August day on an old Moscow Street, oblivious to the tragedy between the husband and wife.
The oldest artist among the itinerants was Vasily Perov. His creativity played a special role in the establishment of Russian realism. In his painting Religious Procession on Easter that belongs to his early period, we can find a critical tendency, a typical feature of early realism. He criticizes priests that are to bring the faith to the people but actually do not deserve to be the Lord's pupils. Following a period of creativity, Perov tried to avoid a rude unmasking of people's sins and defects. He starts telling a sad story of contemporary reality. Seeing -off the Deceased is a story in art in which we can see the image of a peasant woman free from idealization. Her fate gains the sympathy and compassion of the viewer. The landscape in an artist's paintings starts playing a specific role in setting the mood of the whole painting. In the 1870s, Perov changed from sad and tragic subjects. He started depicting common people happy with their simple human joy and hobbies. He depicted fishermen, hunters on the Holt, and bemused duck hunters.
The creative heritage of Ilya Repin plays a special role in genre painting and in Russian art as a whole. He is considered to be the most talented and famous Russian painter. His interests in painting were pointed mainly to contemporary subjects. He was interested in all aspects of Russian reality, but his talent was more fully revealed in genre and portrait painting. His works can be considered as an encyclopedia of Russian life with its heroes and events. His first famous painting, Barge Haulers on the Volga, painted while he was a student of the Academy of Fine Arts, showed his talent and characteristic manner of work. Unlike the artists who had treated this subject before, Repin was much more interested in the participants of the scene. He wanted the viewers to see their fates and personalities more than the hard labor they were forced to perform. He was the first in the history of art who tried to peer into people's faces to understand who they were. For the first time a common Russian man was depicted as a hero of artistic work. He didn't idealize his heroes but tried to demonstrate their personality. For the first time people could see a group portrait of miserable and humiliated Russian people.
Such an artist's aspiration to concentrate attention on the psychology of the bargemen was always Repin's characteristic feature. Another illustration of this was his painting Religious Procession in Kursk Province. This painting is very typical of Repin and is remarkable for its characteristic details of that time. Being a talented artist he had a wonderfully keen feeling of the main idea that needed to be expressed. One of the features of art of the 1870 - 80 s was the tendency to create big monumental works whereby a person viewing the one life depicted on the canvas could analyze present day reality and see the whole historical epoch of the Russian people. This technique illustrated that genre painting proved to be as powerful and as important as historical painting. Genre paintings illustrated the life of the Russian province, in both events and in human portraits. The action in Religious Procession in Kursk Province takes place in a province famous for its dense forests, but in the picture we can see only stumps left after the trees had been cut down. Modern man's activity resulted in the destruction of nature. We see crowds of people marching along the dusty road.
The composition was arranged in such a way that we almost feel the crowd moving forward, about to crush the spectator. Real religious faith can be read on the faces of heroes depicted on the left of the canvas and especially in the face of the hunchback on the foreground. Note that he is pushed aside by the policeman riding a horse because this poor cripple might disturb rich people proceeding along the road. (Didn't Christ say we are all equal before him?) The painting shows us two extremes: superficial, cold, hypocritical religious feelings on the right half and true believers in God in the left half of the painting. These people are rejected by this insincere society on the left part of the painting. By paying such attention to the individuality of a person, Repin displays the great variety of types and characters of his heroes. In the foreground we see a rich merchant woman avidly holding a icon. She is drawn into arrogance, clearly breaking a main tenet of Christianity. We can spend hours examining the painting whereby the motley crowd is represented as an integral part of the Russian people.
Painting present day reality, Repin managed to reveal a new social phenomena by using new participants. He was an artist forever seeking new subjects, themes, images and means of expression. Many times in his paintings he addressed new social and political moods and, of course, revolutionary events. The policy of terror carried out by several revolutionary organizations entailed cruel murders of some prominent politicians and the assassination of Emperor Alexander II in 1881. This consequently resulted in extremely strict and bloody responses by the Government. As the country became more and more submerged in the blood of innocent victims, the attitude towards revolutionaries gradually changed in the society. Art in this matter absorbed and reflected all topical ideas. Initially revolutionary activity was often compared with the excruciating life and death of the saints of the Gospel who sacrificed their lives for faith. Repin was affected by these ideas, and he painted his Refusal to Confess which glorified fanatical ideas of the day.
Afterwards he conceived the idea of another work They did not expect him, a story about the return of an exiled convict. The interesting thing is that originally Repin planned for a woman to be the main actor in the painting, as women were fighting for these new ideas next to men. Later the artist gave up this idea having considered that it would add some sentimental aspect to the painting. Besides, he realized that the question of the main hero was not so relevant compared to the subject itself. Terrorists were ready to die for the sake of the idea and for the sake of their loved ones. Did these loved ones want such a sacrifice to be made? How did relatives meet these returning anarchists after being separated for decades? Repin's contemporaries usually associated this painting with the parable of the return of the prodigal son. None of the artists expressed an opinion, thus making the viewer decide the destiny of the hero.
* * *
Bloody events of reality had not always been reflected directly in genre painting. The background of Repin's Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan was an expression of the artist's feeling of the atmosphere and smell of spilled blood in the room where Ivan the Terrible is holding the head of his son. A son he had just struck in the head with a stave and murdered in a fit of temper. Another painting Nicholas from Mirl, calls for love and forgiveness and shows us how the main hero, Saint Nikolai, intervenes at an execution and saves the lives of people sentenced to death.
In the 1870-80's historical painting for the first time seemed to reveal all answers to relevant questions addressed by the past. Popular revolts, acts of terrorism, execution, heroic deeds, sacrifice, suffering, betrayal, faithfulness to ideas and treachery are the concepts dominating the society of that time. Some artists approached these problems via religious subjects, very familiar and clear to Russian people. Nikolai Ghe was one of them. His work, The Last Supper, lacked mystery and sacred meaning. Like - minded people had become enemies. Judas, who thought of the salvation of his people, did not grasp the great idea of Christ providing salvation for the whole of mankind. The philosophic disagreement, but not the betrayal of a greedy man, became the subject of the painting. (Note there are only 11 Apostles depicted in the painting and that Judas looks like a winged Angel of Death.) His works, Calvary and Crucifixion, were dedicated to humanity, at a time when spiritual strength and faithfulness to ideas overcome physical suffering.
Ivan Kramskoi also painted religious subjects. In his work, Christ in a Desert, he shows the hero at the moment of making a choice of his life's way. This feeling of choice was familiar to many people: whether to remain faithful to destiny or to yield to temptation and retreat, having foreseen terrible consequences of remaining steadfast. All his life Kramskoi was devoted to a large painting called, Christ before the people, where he interpreted the subject of sacrifice and suffering for a people that did not understand.
Surikov's most famous work is his trilogy painted in the 1880s. Each of these three paintings is devoted to a specific epic collision of paramount significance: The Morning of the Execution of the Streltsi, represents the nation in history. Menshikov in Beryozovo, depicts a hero in history. Finally, the Boyarina Morozova, is an example of a hero and the people. Surikov approached the most dramatic points of Russian history: Reformation of the church in the mid 17th century, Peter the Great's reforms of the 18th century, etc. In Surikov's own time, the late 19th century, there were numerous flashbacks of those events in Russia. The nation found itself on the threshold of major changes once again. Incidentally, Surikov in his Morning, showed for the first time how an historical inevitability can divide a single nation, turning fellow countrymen against each other. In the painting, one of Peter's soldiers is carefully supporting a strelets (a member of Ivan the Terrible's elite corps) while leading him to scaffold. These two Russians are not enemies, only a historical coincidence has turned one of them into a hangman and the other into his victim. Could Surikov have foreseen that twenty years later Russia would be flooded with blood once again, and brother would turn against brother in a civil war? He looked to the past for answers about Russia's future.
Surikov neither passed judgment nor took sides in his paintings, and his characters were neither saints nor criminals. Each of them was convinced he was doing the right thing, but in the eyes of history, "right" is synonymous with "imperative." It is the inevitable collision of historical interest entailing the death of one of the parties that the artist rendered with disturbing vividness. Relying on his creative imagination, the artist craftily conjured up pictures of the past, encouraging the viewer to ponder traumatic historical collisions that had once shaken the nation, compelling every person then living to make his choice. His task was to make his characters convincing and historically credible, to make the viewer believe in the image before his eyes. In later years, Surikov abandoned his preoccupation with dramatic turning points in history in favor of glorifying Russia's heroic past. In spite of this he remained true to himself: The Russian people were still the main character of his works, and courage and daring were the artist's principal subject-matter. In his paintings, Surikov always focused on fine portraiture. His female images are particularly elaborate and masterful. He appreciated and knew how to depict the beauty of a Russian woman; he understood her contradictory personality, her tenderness, kindness, compassion, cordiality, quiet resignation, and readiness to sacrifice herself, and he recognized that sometimes, her courage, strong will, devil-may-care attitude, and her strong convictions bordered on fanaticism.
* * *
During that epoch --- the heyday of portrait genre in Russian art --- many artists tended to emphasize their characters' personalities in their historical and genre painting. Itinerants made a particularly notable contribution to portraiture. For the first time in Russian art, portraiture stopped being merely the art of painting family members and stopped serving exclusively the sentimental needs and vanity of individuals and families. As a result of the itinerants, the very word portrait acquires new understanding. The reason for the above we find in the definition of reconsidered art that achieved vivid social status. Portraits became very regulated such as the portraits of contemporary heroes, public figures, common people, peasants, and workers. Art changed much. Now it served more for exhibition purposes rather than purely as private commissions.
The name of Pavel Tretyakov is closely connected with establishment of this new art destination. He was a Moscow merchant who had decided to set up a gallery of the national modern art. He started buying itinerants' work, not only at the exhibitions, but also unfinished works while they were in an artist's studio. Tretyakov attended artists' workshops and often paid money to an artist in order for him to complete the work. Moreover, he commissioned different artists to make portraits of writers, musicians, actors, and other artists in order to leave a cultural heritage for the generations to come. His life and the life of his family were very modest as most of his money was spent for paintings. Being so interested in portraiture, he got other artists interested in this genre. Among the artists working in portrait genre there are several outstanding masters whose names are worthy of mention.
Vasily Perov was the first who featured mostly in psychological portrait the complicated inner world of the person and his soul. His portraits of Feodor Dostoevsky and of Alexei Ostrovsky are considered to be his best and most famous portraits. The portrait of Dostoevsky, a great Russian writer who tried to penetrate the darkest parts of a human soul, is of special value. Kramskoi used this painting to reflect his own understanding of duty and honor of Russian intelligence. He strove to reveal the versatile personality of the writer.
Ivan Kramskoi, being a very talented portraitist, was a prominent public figure and art was not the only domain of his activity. Kramskoi was the head of the Society of Traveling Art Exhibitions from the time it was established. His particular understanding of art as a way of educating people dictated his individual choice of the model and interpretation of his portrait image. He chose those whom he considered to be an ideal subject and who shared his views on the exclusive educational mission of art. His views coincided with general trends and objectives in art --- a search of the identifiable person. The resulting form of the above social significance of a model was of particular importance for Kramskoi. A fine example of this approach is the portrait of L. Tolstoy. The ascetic simplicity of the writer's image and feeling of serious, dramatic thought that dominated Tolstoy was reflected in Kramskoi's opinion on the writer's destiny.
After the death of Kramskoi, Nikolai Yaroshenko, who was called "the conscience of the Itinerants" for his integrity and adherence to principles, headed the itinerants' society. Yaroshenko created his own portrait type, and his representation of a specific model became the basis for his generalized image of the representation of the different layers of society. Girl Student, is typical of Yaroshenko. His Portrait of Pelageya Strepetovo, a Russian tragical actress, is a very good example of his work. She specialized in the roles of the poor and humiliated, exhausted by life women, and these roles left their mark on this portrait. Looking at the clenched hands of this fine, young, but not pretty woman, we can feel her inner strength and the emotional strain in her image. This image probably reminded contemporaries of young girls exiled to the mines for expressing their ideas. One critic noted the resemblance of bracelets on her wrists to fetters,
As has been mentioned, the most famous among the portraitists was Ilya Repin. He saw the souls of every person who posed for him, and he destroyed all conventional rules adhered to by other portraitists. He was unsurpassed as a master of any form of portrait from bedchamber to state portraits. He worked both in painting and drawing. The backgrounds for his portraits could be a house interior or landscapes. Using particular composition, color schemes, lines, and strokes, he underlined unique individual features of the model. The German poet, Rilke, said: "Repin has the nature of an artist. With a glance, he inspects everyone he meets, studies him and assigns him to remote corners of his soul and doesn't let him move away until Rapin is finished." Repin models came from all types of society to include peasants as well as the aristocracy. He painted men, women, old people, children, friends and relatives. The fine portraiture of Repin gives us an integral, profound, all-embracing, general presentation of 19th Century society and lively individual images of its representatives. Many admire the works of Repin. Especially fine paintings include Autumn Flowers, Portrait of artist's daughter, Portrait of M. Musorgsky, and the Portrait of Ivan Kramskoi... The list of works is endless. In the history of Russian art, the portraiture genre is one of the oldest and most traditional genres. First introduced at the time of Peter the Great, it was developed by different generations of artists, but it was the itinerants that made a particularly notable contribution to portraiture. They were also great innovators in Landscape genre.
Another important concept of the specific national character of Russia, the peculiarity of Russian nature, was done for the first time by Itinerants. Works by Alexei Savrasov, Ivan Shishkin, Vasily Polenov, Arkhip Kuinji, and Isaak Levitan were wildly received by the public. These masters showed the highest importance of ordinary motifs, scenes, and seasons of the year Country sights were approached by artists much more often than urban motifs, thus emphasizing peasant themes. But it was not based purely on social problems. The whole gamut was captured on canvas. Green plain expanses, fallowed fields in the rain, endless travel-worn roads, narrow paths that stretched from different parts of the vast land, dense forests, impassable thickets, small lakes like blue saucers, hidden copses, and the beauty of the big Russian river Volga were all acceptable subjects for these Russian immortals.
The concept of nature, for Russian Itinerant artists and since, has always been closely connected with a man being painted in his natural environment. Concerns about people and their thoughts and the Russian character were very much affected by landscape. The narrations about Russian nature indeed involved the telling of the life story of human beings living in nature. One of the first among itinerant landscape artists was Alexei Savrasov. His painting, Rooks Are Back Again, was exhibited for the first time at the exhibition of 1871 and it amazed viewers. For the first time they saw a plain native landscape far removed from the flourishing Italian beauty typical of classical and romantic artists. A feeling of nature awakening after winter, as a tree with its bared branches is depicted standing in the distance, soft light coming from the blue sky, a bustle of the first birds, all combined to evoke a feeling of something dear to one's heart.... a familiar scene dating back to childhood. This sentimental landscape gained high significance in this genre.
Each painter approached similar motifs in his own artistic manner. Ivan Shishkin in his works glorified the heroic spirit of the Russian land. He liked to emphasize the might and grandeur of Russian nature. Depicting mostly fields and forests, he was given an artistic name of "singer of fields and forests.'' His selfless love of nature made him not only an artist, but a botanist as well. He refused to be inaccurate depicting tree or blade. Numerous studies and sketches that survived till today offer testimony concerning his great care in studying nature.
Although Shishkin was often criticized for his naturalism and his unreasonable standards in his representation of nature, the careful work at the details of his paintings can't be called "naturalism." Naturalism in painting means blind imitation of a natural view without a well thought-out composition and without the correlation of common details and a particular selection of the items painted. At first sight, Shishkin's landscapes look so trustworthy that one can get the wrong impression of the artist's work. The artist desires the viewer to believe in the reality of such an existing view.
In this connection, his painting, The Rye, is very typical. The artist selected the typical natural motives of a central Russian landscape: the field of rye, the road, and mighty oaks. Next he thought about the composition, trying to get the right correlation between the sky and the earth, the fore and background, as well as the right light combination. All these details create mighty images that affect the feelings of the viewer. In this painting the artist truly glorifies the true beauty and grandeur of Russian nature.
One must give credit to the Itinerants for the creation of the genre of "plein air" painting. Two of the best were Polenov and Levitan. Polenov's artistic manner was much different from that of Shishkin. In his paintings Moscovite Courtyard and Grandmother's Garden, he acts as a delicate lyric, entertaining storyteller. For the first time in these paintings he demonstrated the principles of so-called "plain-air painting." However, the greatest "plein air" landscape painter in Russian art was Levitan. Considering the power and might of his talent and his contribution to the landscape genre he can be compared with Repin. His huge creative legacy gives an idea about the broad scope of his interests in the landscape field. Some of his works are full of delicate lyrics while others have epic and broad generalizations.
Levitan had a very profound understanding of nature. Nature in his opinion holds onto its inner content. He said, "Can anything be more tragic than to feel the endless beauty of surroundings, the concealed secrets of nature, to see the Lord in everything and have no possibility to express such deep emotions?" These words reveal the modesty of the artist who has created real masterpieces but was not satisfied with himself and who worried about his inability to achieve perfection. Levitan confirmed once again that Russian landscape art demands to be considered as an object of the highest ideals of art. Many of his paintings contain a reflection on people's destiny and the meaning of their life. His paintings are full of literary associations and philosophical ideas such as Over Eternal Peace, and Eternal Chime. In an entirely different manner he created landscapes in natural beauty, illustrating the waking up of nature March and the fading of nature in Golden Autumn. Levitan painted typical Russian landscapes, reproducing different states of nature correlating with human emotions.
The pictorial freedom of Levitan's creative manner made him different from other landscape painters of his time. His last painting, Rus, was not finished. He dreamed of creating the common artistic image of his homeland in this painting. Levitan fell deeply in love with the Motherland as did all of the Itinerants. They dreamed and believed that their art would give people happiness and hope and recognition of the need to develop a high moral ideal in Russia. The Itinerants held sway over Russian art until the first ten years of the 20th Century. For me they will always be the best that Russian art has to offer. They painted in many styles, but they depicted life as they believed it was. They did this at great risk to themselves, and it is hoped that finally Russia stands on the golden threshold of freedom that they envisioned for her so many years ago.
Michael E. Donnelly
Ph.D.
Return to Reference page