"but judges - who are they?"
So asked the principal character
from "Misfortune of Intellect" by Griboyedov (a classical Russian writer of 19th
century). The phrase was intended to cast doubt on the personalities of those
who are empowered to rule justice. Some
time ago I asked Robert Wornum, the writer from London, what of Siberian art life
would be of interest to him. One of the ideas he sent was a question "who controls
the exhibitions?" It was a good question and I became curious.
Perhaps, the genius artist doesn't
need to show their art to anyone. Still "normal" artists, similar to a newborn
baby crying to indicate their existence in the world, do require the publishing
of their art. Otherwise, who will know that they are artists? Besides such an
existentialist rationale, Russian artists have always had another, pragmatic reason
to participate in exhibitions. I have mentioned in a previous publication that
the majority of artists in Russia wanted to enter the Russian Union of Artists.
In the era of Soviet Union, membership gave them a legal right not to be assigned
to a working place. "Who doesn't work doesn't eat," - that was the motto of the
society. Nowadays, the membership means a little bit more comfortable tax load
and guaranteed pension insurance. Among other things, however, the membership
requires a good record of exhibitions.
As
far as I can see, there are three types of exhibition control:
- who exhibits, i.e. galleries and
their exhibitors;
- who
creates, i.e. artists;
- who
saves the public morality.
There
are in Krasnoyarsk a number of ventures and institutions that exhibit art. I considered
two municipal and two private galleries. the
krasnoyarsk culture and historical complex
As
a rule, the museum gives artists an opportunity to exhibit with no charge. The
content of the exhibitions is in a way controlled, but solely by the associates
of the museum. Up to now, no cases have occurred when any city or territorial
board tried to influence the institution or artists. Particular artworks may be
put under question, but it's a matter of discussion. The artist can still make
an argument for the participation of the artwork, which, on examination, means
that every artwork can go through. "What we haven't yet exhibited!" - exclaimed
the deputy director of the museum Vera Potylitsina, who is responsible for expositions.
Some visitors may criticize what is shown but no conflicts with official bureaucracy
have yet occurred.
krasnoyarsk
city exhibition hall
The
Exhibition Hall belongs to Surikov Art Museum, therefore old traditions are strong
there, and the requirements are considered to be rather high. As the head of the
contemporary art department Natalia Simkina said, there were cases in which the
exhibitions were declined. The reason: they did not achieve a "museum level".
Decisions about a particular exhibitions are made by the managers of the Exhibition
Hall, no supervision from "above" has as yet occurred. She admitted to having
heard of a commission dealing with morality but, in practice, she has not come
across it. She, however, made a remark that they, independently of any commission,
would never accept any artworks glorifying porn or violence.
art
gallery "khingan"
This
is a private exhibition hall that is fully supported by his owner, who makes quite
a lot from other businesses. As a rule, artists pay for the opportunity to exhibit
there. Ekaterina Storoguk has managed the gallery for five years and could not
remember a case of an exhibition being declined. Sometimes artists exhibit something
that could shock common people. "But we do it because we have to educate the public."
No control by any public or government institution has occurred. She did mention
an exhibition held in the gallery - after its closure she was sorry to have accepted
it. "We'd probably be better off without the exhibition. It made too black an
impression."
art
salon "diana"
It's
a truly independent venture, an art shop that holds regular exhibitions as well.
The exhibitions are chargeable. As
a rule, the artists who want to exhibit are known. So, the owners know approximately
what they can expect from the artist. If the artist says that there will be landscapes
and still life subjects, nobody tries to check the paintings beforehand. In the
case of an unknown artists, the director of the shop first makes
a selection from photographs, and some artworks may be declined.
Elena Kasatkina, the director, formulated the selection criterion in this way:
"Art must bring light and optimism. I decline some paintings because they are
too heavy, some are apparent kitsch, like those by Vallejo." She mentioned she
would never exhibit the painting by Vasilii Slonov "Enemy".
Enemy, oil on canvas, by
Vasilii Slonov.
I
have also interviewed some exhibiting artists to hear their opinions.
konstantin voinov
He had an interesting experience
being, on the one hand, an independent artist, and on the other, for some years,
the chairman of Young Artists Section of the Territorial Division of the Russian
Union of Artists. He, therefore, was responsible for collecting artworks for the
annual exhibition of young artists held by the Union. In the Soviet times, the
content of the exhibitions was under intense supervision of the Union of Artists.
Konstantin says: "An artist brings a painting, it's somehow accepted, and then
along comes a delegation of old uncles and they begin to teach." Today,
the control is very weak, if any. However
he admitted that he had personally declined some
paintings that looked vulgar to him. Konstantin never heard of a control outside
the circles of the Union of Artists.
oleg
finogenov
Oleg,
a Krasnoyarsk photographer, told me that once an artwork by him was removed from
an exhibition. It depicted a girl draped in the Soviet flag. In spite of the fact
that the Soviet Union was no longer actual, some older visitors were indignant
about the use of the flag. The organizers had to remove the picture.
Oleg heard something about an ethics
commission, but has never had anything to do with it. His impression is that those
who own a particular exhibition place are primary decision makers over whether
and what to show, or not.
Composition IX by Oleg
Finogenov
vasilii
slonov
He said
he was often in a situation when his artworks were declined. The painting "Awaiting
II" was first accepted to a young artists exhibition but then the 'old masters'
of the Union demanded it be taken away. No argument. Especially in provincial
towns, the painting was removed right before the exhibit opening.
Vasilii had heard of ethics commission,
but doesn't know of an artist who has been a victim of it.
Awaiting II, oil on canvas,
by Vasilii Slonov
stanislav
roganov
When one
has personal connections it's possible to exhibit in offices and halls of business
ventures, banks etc. In these cases the personal taste of the owner determines
the content of an exhibition. For example, he may say: "I don't want nudes." In
other respects there is no control. Stanislav is unaware of any public control
and has never come across it.
The
upholder of the law
At
last I found the man that is a strong advocate of ethics control but who is scarcely
heard of in artistic circles. His name is Vladislav Zhukovskii, a leading actor
of Krasnoyarsk Pushkin Theater and a regional politician - a deputy of Municipal
Council - in one. What I want to say here is, he is not a 'usual man from the
street' but a person that had, and has to do with power. During the time of the
previous Governor, he was head of a commission that was responsible for observing
the law regulating distribution of products containing erotic material. His name
made quite a noise in the city - as a chief struggler for public morals against
porn etc., and I was eager to receive firsthand information on the control issue.
I recorded a half-hour speech by
him, and found the ground of why he is unknown among artists. It's very simple:
the activity of the commission was concentrated solely on circulation of video
and magazines that might qualify as of erotic nature and consequently are a subject
to scrutiny by the law. Regarding art exhibitions, there was a phrase that cleared
everything and stopped any further questions: "It is not technically possible
to make a judgment of the expertise of painting exhibitions. First of all, nobody
inform us of the events..."
The
lack of public control over artistic exhibitions may give an impression of total
freedom. In fact, there are a couple of places where decision makers are sophisticated
enough or want more publicity, and they may admit pieces of art with on-the-brink
content. I have however two thoughts about what the implications of the current
situation may be.
First,
the ethics control may be just a matter of time. If police were better paid and
had less work with hard crimes, it would, perhaps be interested in smaller law
violations. It may be that society itself has enough other problems without trying
to romp with a handful of artists.
Second,
the exhibitors are mostly normal average people who do not have art revolution
in mind. The owners of exhibition halls do not want problems, even if the problems
are inventions of the mind and only loom on the horizon. As such, the exhibitors
might be even harder censors, given they need no excuse or explanations. They
can just say: "We don't want it because... we don't want it."
Vladimir
Gavrikov
gavrikov@online.ru
