2015 Russian Art ca. 1700–1900

Russian icon painting of the modern era has not been researched for a long time because of historical and economic reasons, but today it becomes interesting for scholars. Nevertheless, interaction between icon painting and the Art Nouveau style is still unexplored. This impedes attribution of many icons, a substantial number of works of art remain in the shadows. This work delves into the history of searching for the way of icon painting renewal through introducing the Art Nouveau style into it. This required:
• to define the role of the Art Nouveau style in Russian icon painting, its criteria and possibility of adoption by icon painting; measure of interaction;
• to describe the role of painters and scientists in this process and evaluate the changes;
• to apply the developed criteria to individual works of art.
Publications on this theme are limited. We can only point out the growing interest at the turn of the 20th century to the situation in icon painting and the problems of national and religious expectations. Among contemporary works of special notice are those by O. Tarasov, V. Putsko, V. Gusakova. Close to the topic are works by D. Sarabianov, V. Turchin, G. Sternin, T. Borisova.
This paper defines criteria of the Art Nouveau style in Russian icon painting, introduces an attempt to separate “icon” and “religious painting”, describes the circle of painters and icon painters who created “icon of the modern style”. Alongside with this, the article offers an attribution of icons from the private collection.
So far as this work is just the beginning of systematic research of the theme it proposes further development of specified directions.
Materials of this research can be used while writing research works, reading the course on Russian culture and art and in arranging museum expositions. Besides, provisions made in the work could be useful in attribution of icons of the Art Nouveau style.

 PDF

Powerful red brick housing manufactories — a memorable integral part of the historic part of almost any city of Russia. In the second half of the 19th century a number of preconditions for active development of the industry was established. This period, marking the country’s transition from an agrarian to an industrial economy, was given the name — “industrial revolution”. Indeed, textile, food and metallurgical industries began to evolve rapidly across the country. Every factory developed thanks to the work of generations of dynasties of local businessmen — industrialists, such as the Morozovs, Demi­dovs, Alekseevs, Ryabushinskys, Prokhorovs, Strogonovs and many others.
At the beginning of the 21st century these factories did not meet industrial demands for technological equipment and the volume of production any more. After the withdrawal of the remaining industries large areas in the city center became appealing for developers. As a result former factories underwent a conversion.
The industrial heritage of the end of the 19th — beginning of the 20th centuries has a lot of particular features. One of them lies in the fact that manufactures were multifunctional complexes. Buildings of industrial and social functions were built in accordance with the relief, technical process and the life of workers, creating a unique architectural ensemble. As a rule, courtyards on the territory of factory, which were used for different purposes, including working and social life, were formed. Unfortunately, many of the objects that have undergone conversion of destructive or commercial character are now deprived of such spaces. In modern practice, undeveloped area of industrial heritage is often given to a overground parking, although there are some very good examples of public use of such spaces in the world.
In this report, the author carries out analysis of configuration and potential of internal areas of manu­factories as well as of foreign and domestic projects of their use in order to systematize ways of transformation of former industrial areas in public and residential spaces.

 PDF

In Russia, the monumental painting of the 60–80s of the 19th century is experiencing a crisis, this was due to the interest of the creative intelligentsia to the people’s life and manifested in an unprecedented flowering of easel painting. Since the beginning of the 1890s the situation changed: there began the works in Vladimir Cathedral and St. Cyril’s Church in Kiev, the building of churches in Talashkino, Abramtsevo, the decoration of which was made by outstanding artists V. M. Vasnetsov, M. A. Vrubel, M. V. Nesterov, N. K. Rerih et al.
In Russia, vivid examples of monumental painting were considered Christ the Savior Cathedral in Moscow and St. Vladimir’s Cathedral in Kiev. The paintings in the Moscow church were carried out in 1860–1870s, those in Kiev — in 1885. Almost at the same time, the work on St Mary’s Cathedral polychrome in Krakow began.
The report examines the monumental painting of representatives of the era of “historicism” Jan Matejko and V. M. Vasnetsov, which become a sort of link between the 19th century and time of Secession — Symbolism and early modernism. As the critic S. K. Makovsky wrote: “Vasnetsov created a style. Even fragile and impracticable. [...] It is infinitely closer to people’s beauty, sweeter, more intimate, more truthful than „cock“ style, sung by Stasov”. Unfortunately, in the studies on creativity of Jan Matejko I have never met a phrase “mateykovsky style”, but he created it.

 PDF

The report focuses on the biography, buildings and artistic method of architect Pavel Fedotovich Alyoshin (1881–1961). His heritage has been studied unevenly and insufficiently: the most researches deal only with his most famous works (F. G. Bazhanov and A. P. Chuvaldina Trade-Industrial partnership house in Saint Petersburg, N. V. Kovalevsky mansion and the building of the Pedagogical Museum in Kiev), certain aspects are covered in articles and books in the Ukrainian language while Russian-language publications about his projects and activity are quite rare.
Research, dedicated to the personality of the architect and his heritage, seems important because more than forty years of Alyoshin’s professional activity reflected the changes that took place in architecture and art at that time. The range of genres in which he worked is very broad, he built residential and public buildings, designed streets and residential areas. In his projects Alyoshin dealt with different styles: Art Nouveau, historicism, neo-classicism and Constructivism.
A unique, holistic view of the Alyoshin’s method of work can be obtained because his extensive archive has been preserved. Drawings, descriptions of buildings, sketches, correspondence, photographs show the breadth of the architect’s interests, his proximity to the type of all-round craftsman, typical to the Renaissance and then to Art Nouveau epoch, his attention to details, engineering and technical innovations, his custom to thoroughly study the issue before the implementation of the project.

 PDF

The architecture of Rostov-on-Don at the turn of the 20th century is mainly eclectic due to the “layering” of forms of different times. New stylistic trends which are distributed in the southern cities almost simultaneously with the major cultural centers of Russia and Europe co-exist successfully with favorite old “styles” not only within a single district or a street, but also within the same building.
The architecture of Rostov-on-Don of this period is characterized by predominance of stylized forms of academic styles — Classical, Baroque and the Renaissance. This can be explained by a whole complex of reasons. The historical conditions of the towns’ formation of the southern region in the second half of the 18th and early 19th centuries — the period of classicism predominance — determined the main direction of further architectural development. Stylistic preferences of key customers — merchants, businessmen and industrialists who associated “academic styles” with respectable forms of metropolitan palatial architecture — also played an important role.
A new trend that combines features of rational modern and classical architecture appears in the architecture of Rostov-on-Don in early 20th century:
• buildings with functional space-planning, which corresponds to a rational trend, and architectural and artistic appearance, mainly formed by means of classical architecture (District Court, architect P. Y. Lyubimov, 1914);
• buildings with a progressive combined constructive structure revealed in compositions of facades and design in the style of Neoclassicism (The Sarievs’ commercial apartment building, architect A. F. Niedermeyer, 1902);
• buildings in which classical elements are geometrized and as a result transmuted into forms of rational modern style (the building of the St. Petersburg International Commercial Bank).
The interpretation of the forms of academic styles in the architecture of Rostov-on-Don is determined by the function of the building, composition of its external elevations, space-planning, system of proportioning, design and decorative properties of building materials. For example, “brick style” is an unusual interpretation of the classic order. The role of creative priorities and experience of the architect and also stylistic preferences of the customer seem to be the most important factors (Chi­rikovs’ commercial apartment building, 1914, architect L. F. Eberg).

 PDF


Carpet weaving is the oldest and the most common type of applied arts in culture of the people of the Northen Caucasus. Such a statement will not look abstract if we take into account the following facts: widely established and developed sheep breeding, providing row materials; climatic conditions which determined the need for home insulation, unemployment of female population for a few months of the year after the end of agricultural works; living in the immediate vicinity of the countries where carpet weaving was a traditional and established art (countries of near East and Transcaucasia).
Carpet weaving was ubiqutous, but in each particular district of the Northen Caucauses it had its own peculiar traditions. The art, based on old traditions, underwent significant development. Today it is the subject of study of many researchers. According to the technique, color scheme and ornamentation all rugs are divided into two large groups: first — carpets of Southern Dagestan, second — Central and Northen Dagestan. The first one is the most numerous and is subdivided into three smaller groups: carpets of Achts and Micrahs, carpets of Derbent and Tabasaransk’s carpets. The carpets in these subgroups are pile carpets, smooth unilateral sumacs, bilateral and numerous oriental rugs. The second group consists for the most part of smooth bilateral rugs, mats and felts. Quality and beauty of these rugs is achieved by a high performance technique. Carpets of Achtin and Micrah’s group have the highest density, that is 211,6 thousand nodes per one square meter. Carpets of Derbent and Tabasaran regions have less density — from 90 to 136 thousand nodes per one square meter. Short pile carpets are softer and silky. A distinguishing trait of Southern Daghestan carpets is, of course, the nature of their patterns. Pictures of Ahtin’s and Micrah’s regions count 15 main schemes and uncountable variety of versions.
Finally, material and spiritual background contributed to the specific character of carpet weaving in Dagestan, as the art of capet-weaving is based on traditional collective character of art and spiritual union of the community.


The indescribable idea of the sublime fascinated and challenged a famous 19th century artist Ivan Konstantinovich Aivazovsky whose dwelling upon this concept gave rise to countless visual responses. The paper examines the earliest known version of his piece known as “Walking upon the Sea” from 1849 that has been recently rediscovered and displayed after restoration and conservation within the State Art Collection of the Royal Compound in Serbia. The report offers the analysis of this particular image, a peculiar combination of the stormy sea at night and religious theme that embodies artist’s inner self observations, his thoughts, worldview and perceptive power of the years to come. Aivazovsky was a man of Romanticism and a visionary genius as well. He was occupied with the ideas of the infinity, great drama and of the divine that challenged viewers’ senses of space and time. “Walking Upon the Sea” is an art piece of its time, a manifest reflection of skepticism of the era of groundbreaking experiments, innovations and discoveries. Special attention is paid to the elements of the painting revealing the author’s interest in tuning viewers’ emotions and artistic devices to gain a new dramatic impact on them. Apart from this, there is an attempt to interpret his choice of a religious theme which is apparently incompatible with the romantic worldview and how it was correlated with a romantic category of the sublime. Aivazovsky will return to this theme at least twice in his later career. The paper contains the analysis of the artist’s symbolic lanuage and the means he used to set his inner eye into the core of his artworks.