The works of the Symbolist Art in Russia were very intriguing because there were so many styles used in the works assigned. The use of vibrant colors, cubism, and depictions of beautiful landscape contributed to the variety of works. Although, the illustrations of Pushkin’s “The Bronze Horseman, caught my eye because we read it earlier in class.

There are three illustrations of “The Bronze Horseman” by Benois that similarly display the themes of Pushkin’s story. First, the bronze horseman in the illustrations is depicted much larger than Yevgeny and seems oversized in the image. This represents the Russian state and the power it possesses. Second, there is a storm in every image showing the natural disaster theme of the story. Third, the symbols of black and white signify the love and death in the story. Yevgeny looses the love of his life and in turn this leads him down a path to his death.

The 1904 illustration seems to be distinct from the other two due to the simplicity of the work. Yevgeny and the Bronze Horseman are the only parts of the illustration with fine detail. Also this illustration is set right at the start of the chase whereas the other two depict Yevgeny being chased by the horseman.  The last illustration also stood out to me due to the coloring while still having the contrast between light and dark colors. I would be interested to know when this work was composed because it has the most detail with the shadows and sun. I couldn’t figure out the symbol of the sun. What does the sun symbolize and how do the shadows contribute to that?

Natalia Goncharova’s art is trailblazing, even for the avant-garde art scene. She is unique in that she is a woman, as women did not reach the levels of fame she did in art. However, I found her style and boldness in the artworks to be quite intricate. Goncharova was known for her radical art in the Jack of Diamonds group, and her pieces often were fragmented reflections of Russian society. However, the work that struck meetups the most was her self-portrait, painted in 1907.

Titled Self-Portrait with Yellow Lillies, the piece does not seem as bold as her other pieces, yet it holds skill that is distinctive of expressionism. Her self-portrait is reminiscent of those done similarly by the artist Vincent van Gogh, who was known for his bold expressionist self-portraits. The way Goncharova painted herself looking directly at the viewer gives off extreme confidence. She framed herself as a creator in this painting–this is obvious by the unfinished pieces behind her. Both her confidant gaze and the works behind Goncharova indicate that she is very proud of her art and not at all worried about backlash. She seems calm and in control of her surroundings. 

The colors Goncharova chose to use in her self-portrait are telling of additional details. Again, she is bold and bright in her usage of colors. The brightness, rather than overpowering the portrait, adds a dynamic nature and emotion. The pink and orange tinges brightening her face make her look, in a way, imperfectly perfect, as viewers can connect with the confidence this painted flush adds. The flower bouquet Goncharova holds is especially eye-catching. The glowing oranges, reds, and yellows in the flowers are especially stunning. The flowers are like a torch, lighting up the piece. The bold colors she chose are again similar to Van Gogh’s bright color choices. 

The influence of expressionism in avant-garde art seems to be a popular choice in Russia, and across Western Europe. I think it would be interesting to cover both expressionism and impressionism in European art, and how Russian avant-garde artists incorporated that style and made it their own.

Upon initial musical and visual analysis of “The Rite of Spring” from the 1940 film Fantasia, the score, composed by Igor Stravinsky, is deeply suspenseful and enhances the intensity of the plot. The crescendos and suspenseful build up interspersed with more peaceful tunes that break up the intensity work to create a sense of tension and conflict. The audio also pairs well with the visuals to convey this intensity with images of bubbling lava, extreme weather (such as pouring rain and lightning), dinosaurs battling, and the crash of a comet. Although the dinosaurs and the landscape are animated cartoons, the landscape is greatly detailed and utilizes colors of dark red and bright orange to illustrate both the volcano at the beginning and the comet at the end, and colors of dark blue, purple, and grey during the storm while the dinosaurs are fighting in the middle of the scene. The change in color schemes manages to seamlessly convey the transition from the creation of life to the destruction as the comet destroys the dinosaurs. Finally I think it is interesting to examine the historical context of “The Rite of Spring” . Upon background research, Stravinsky originally composed “The Rite of Spring”  as a ballet and orchestral work and was regarded as radical and avante-garde when first introduced to the Parisian ballet scene. Given the sophistication and radical meaning of “The Rite of Spring” , which was conceived as a spring ritual in which a girl is sacrificed by dancing herself to death, it is surprising that this piece is used in a Disney animated film. Stravinsky himself claimed to have distaste for this adaptation of the music. Yet the intensity of “The Rite of Spring” and themes of life and destruction in Fantasia complement each other well, even in the light of the piece’s history

When looking at the pieces of Avant-garde art, I was struck at the dramatic differences and evolution that had taken since the itinerants we had discussed just last week.  In particular, Malevich’s work stood out to me as a rather drastic retreat from previous art we have analyzed so far throughout the course.

Malevich’s treatment of the peasants in this pantings interested me in particular.  Coming from exploring Repin’s paintings which so masterfully capture the individuality, depth, and complexity of the peasantry, it is shocking to see those elements stripped away from the peasants in Malevich’s paintings. The figures depicted throughout paintings of the peasantry are faceless and appear more as a series of shapes than people. Additionally, they are stiff, standing still against an abstract backdrop which gives little insight into their experience or conditions. Furthermore, they are not depicted working–they are simply impersonal objects on a canvas.  This is such a difference from Repin and his “Barge Hauler” painting which highlights the emotions and individuality of each each peasant. In fact, there is not really a way to tell which class the subject is the the exception of the painting’s title. It this stripping away the peasant’s identity or revealing a simple equality inherent in man kind?

I think it would also be interesting to discuss the minimal works and their context/ significance as pieces of art such as “Red square” and “black cross” are intriguing especially since they are not most people think of while pondering pieces of art.

A work that is at the upmost importance for all of Russian Avante Guarde art is Malevich’s Black Square, which’s perhaps is one of the most famous works of the period. At first glance, one might be puzzled at the piece’s significance or importance—it is literally just a black painted square. But, something that is important to keep in mind with the futurist is that all work needs to be understood with in the historical web of other work. Although some of the pieces may not be as impressive technically as for say Repin, the historical meaning and overarching social critique that the work contains elevates futurist art.

Malevich’s Black Square encapsulates that mantra perfectly. The entirety of the pieces meaning is from its historical context, specifically the Russian tradition of Icon painting. At the exhibition, the painting was placed high in the corner of the room, in the spot traditionally meant for the Icon. By placing a black square there, it is as if Malevich is restarting the artistic Russian tradition, replacing centuries of religious depiction with just the color black. When doing research on the painting, art historian Philip Shaw at the Tate Modern notes the distinct viewing experience of the work: “The experience of viewing the painting thus involves a feeling of pain brought about by the breakdown of representation followed by a powerful sense of relief, even elation, at the thought that the formless or massive can nevertheless be grasped as a mode of reason. In other words, the failure of the black square to represent this transcendent realm serves ‘negatively’ to exhibit the ‘higher’ faculty of reason, a faculty that exists independent of nature.”

I have some unresolved questions about Malevich’s work, perhaps that could be best explored in further discussion of the class or on this bog. By painting the canvas black is Malevich covering up the past traditions? Or by doing so is he allowing space for new artistic growth?

When browsing through the selected painter and artists, I was particularly struck by Kustodiev and his story. Aside from overcoming the debilitating tuberculosis and remaining mentally optimistic, his paintings captivated me because of their busy nature and distinctness. Interestingly, Kustodiev painted both an artist’s and a merchant’s wife, but the divergence of expression for a seemingly identical subject was, for me, noteworthy. Firstly, I was struck by the difference in pallet of the two paintings. The artist’s wife sits in a darker frame with some flora behind her. She is wearing a dark gown, but both the dress and the setting around her have some accents of lighter colors. There appears to be some smudging of paint, especially in the background, but more deliberate brush strokes are also visible in the linear parts of the illustration (the railings, dog’s limbs, and table cover).

The picture of the merchant’s wife is very antithetical to the artist’s. The setting is much more ornate: her dress is more sophisticated; the bowl and chalices being used are very elaborate; the food she is eating is clearly expensive, and the background is much more active. Additionally, she is not making eye contact with the viewer while the artist’s wife was.

The striking distinctions between the portraits of the wives must indicate how Kustodiev feels about the two classes. The artist’s wife, and by extension the artist, is much more pensive and introspective. Despite the dog looking at her, she maintains visual contact with the viewer. She is lightly smirking, but the mundane around her elicit a sense of relaxation and thought in her. The merchant’s wife, on the other hand, is looking off to the side. She is clearly much more captivated by what is going around her—the delicious food, pretty background, and happy cat have her attention. Her demeanor and way of holding the item in her hand illustrate her bliss and almost carefreeness, juxtaposing the pensive and thoughtful artist’s wife. I do not think he is criticizing either, but Kustodiev is definitely drawing a distinction.

Upon reading Blok’s poetic works, I thought it would be interesting to compare and contrast Blok’s two pieces on Russia. I noticed that both poems personify Russia as a female for different effects. The two poems have very distinct tones, especially regarding how they view the personified Russia. The 1906 poem carries a sense of awe and mysticism with ever stanza until the narrator wakes from his dream. The Russian landscape is something ripped from a fairy tale and reminds me of “The Snow Queen.” After the 6th stanza, the poem, still carrying a mystic mood, turns somber. This contrast shows a different world that is far grimmer. The narrator reveals his “nakedness” compared to the gowned Russia. I feel like this tone shift shows the duality of the country as both a fairytale-like land, but also an unstable mess that carries sadness and many existential questions with it. The 1908 Russia poem shows a far more tattered Russia that seems to be a continuation of the second half of the 1906 poem. We see female Russia have the same fate as the girl with the faithless lover in the 1906 poem. The 1908 Russia is used and dilapidated and lacks much of the hope of the first one. This Russia endures, but not to the same standard as it used to have. Russia’s “pure” and “pristine” attributes are far less apparent. I hoped to gain greater insight from comparing these two works, but I’m a little stuck. It would be interesting to hear others’ thoughts on this.

The beginning of Blok’s A Puppet Show lays the foundation for Pierrot’s romanticism of Columbine, his supposed bride. The three mystics contribute to this dramatization, their back and forth dialogue of one-liners gives the reader, and more so the in-person viewer of the play, a sense of suspense before her ultimate appearance. The author’s interjections provide a brief sense of relief for the reader, but interestingly, these breaks are significantly shorter than build-up by the three mystics and Pierrot. While this gives us a sense of a break, its brief nature does not allow us to fully reset. Finally, the mystics proclaim Columbine arrives and Pierrot leads her to the center of the stage. The Chairman warns Pierrot that death has arrived, but Pierrot scoffs at the advice, minimizing the concern as fantasy. Even the author is in agreement, exclaiming that likening her braids to a scythe is defamation. Pierrot ironically says that he is either “an unfortunate madman”, or that he is “misunderstood”. It turns out he was in fact unfortunate, and the youthful Harlequin steals Columbine from him; Pierrot results to sulking.

What made the build-up to this climax significant was its avoidable nature. Pierrot was blinded by the prospect of uniting with Columbine, so infatuated with the idea of her that he refused to listen to others. He was self-aware of his controversial position, noting he was “alone” in his opinion. However, as everyone around him warned the hopeless romantic, he let his appearance distort the true reality.