Soviet monumental painting : between ideology and art

Transcription

1 Soviet monumental painting : between ideology and art Art as Ideology «The System says: Fit your expectations to our goals, otherwise...», these words of Jean- François Lyotard reflect public policy of the USSR in the culture. [1] Power and the totality of the state is provided not only through military or judiciary. State structure uses a «big» strategy, local and individual tactics, covering each. One of the areas of implementation of the "grand strategy" of the Soviet state was an art. Ideas for the Soviet state were not abstract or minor. In «The Short Course History of the CPSU(b)» catechism for the Soviet people importance of the idea was essential: «There are different kinds of social ideas and theories. There are old ideas and theories which have outlived their day and which serve the interests of the moribund forces of society. Their significance lies in the fact that they hamper the development, the progress of society. Then there are new and advanced ideas and theories which serve the interests of the advanced forces of society. Their significance lies in the fact that they facilitate the development, the progress of society; and their significance is the greater the more accurately they reflect the needs of development of the material life of society. [ ] Marx says: "Theory becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses [ital. A.S.]». [2] The communist theory is inseparable from the communist practice these words like a mantra migrate from one party document to another. Transference of the theory into practice proceeds through language, concept which in this context includes verbal, visual, behavioral, physical constructs and practices implemented in human life. Communist theory reviews language entirely in Wittgenstein`s way. «The scope of the language, covering all areas of human activity, is much broader and diverse than the scope of the superstructure. Moreover, it is almost limitless», that is how the discourse of power is verbalized in Stalin`s writings. [3] For it`s transmission the Soviet state selects a universal medium of language, in this context - the various cultural forms, including monumental art. The Soviet state thinks of art as a material force, supportive of future prosperity. Real state development program by means of art existed in the minds of political elites, which not only initiated this process, but put him in the service of all the power of the state machine. Cultural workers is entering into a convention with the government: art is a powerful transmitter of discourse. This convention was the object of public rhetoric. On Stalin's famous speech at a meeting with the creative intelligentsia in 1946, Alexander Fadeev (General Secretary of the Writers' Union, ) asked for Stalin`s advice: «[ ] how should the new life be represented in our creations: life of the future, life without blood and violence, without the tremendous difficulties our county is experiencing. In short, there is a need to talk about happiness and serenity our future life [ital. A.S.]». [4] Moreover, this «another» life implied as the life of the future and as the image of future human being placed in the realities of the present, becomes the basis of Soviet art images. Fadeev gets a Stalin`s response, it confirmes what soviet artists intuitively felt, and already transmits the scene shell of the discourse of power in arts: «[ ] the today's task for our creative soviet intelligentsia is to fully demonstrate this simple, beautiful soviet man, to reveal and to show the best traits of his nature. Today it is exactly what constitutes the general line in developing of literature and art.[ital. A.S.]». [4] After the Twentieth Party Congress art is still implied as a tool for the mind conversion and as a weapon for ideological struggle. The discouse of power formulated by L.F. Il'ichev (CPSU Central Committee, head of the Propaganda Department) on the Central Committee plenum in 1963 is unambiguous and repeats the current formula: «The Party considers art not only as an important instrument for the cognition of life, but also as an element of it`s transformation, a sharp weapon in our fight against an alien ideology». [5]

2 In the narrative of soviet art its state-backed branch dominated this is the political program. In the subjects of soviet art, we constantly see this circle of selected government priorities meaningful art: selfless fighters for the happiness of the people in theentourage of of the heroic past of the country or work people today. It should be noted, that the vector content of art, focused on creating an image of the personality of soviet man, cultivated in the arts in 1930, and this trend in 1950 began to soviet art backbone. We see that Soviet art generates the ideal image is not of the group, and individual as the basic social unity. For a general line of Soviet ideology important centers find the perfect becomes the individual. If at the «large text» soviet art works of prominent artists, The plot develops around the events of national importance, then the narrative art of the regional offices of the Union of Artists of the USSR introduced the revolutionary events of local scale these regional connotations of the "big story" was needed for a soft «redeployment» of separatist sentiment and the cultivation of the myths about specific geographical areas. After the start of «a thaw» retained prescriptive form subjects and themes of art, including monumental. However, given plots begins significantly transformed. Intention of cultura to create myth of the ideal is still relevant, revolutionary a great narrative begins to «roll up» primarily disclose imperious discourse. Power directly calls the cause of the necessary transformation of the «text» of the arts. In 1957 published the text of the program N.S. Khrushchev «For the close relationship of literature and art and life of the people». Principled position of the party paper was the idea, that literature and art belong to an extremely important role in the ideological work, «in the communist education of workers». Ibid Khrushchev is a vector of development of art and a few conventions between art and power: «The party cares about the height, high ideological and artistic mastery of literature and art. Our people need a work of literature, painting, music, reflecting the pathos of the work, understandable to the people [ ] main line of development [of art] is to literature and art have always been inextricably linked with the life of the people, truly reflected the richness and diversity of our socialist reality [italic A.S.]». [6] Khrushchev clearly indicates the problem of soviet art: construction of a new society and communist education of workers. Also in appeals to the artists sound principle for the "big story" thesis: transfer of the «center of gravity» of industrial management in place. Masters of Art are sent «in the midst of people's lives». «Art divorced from life, not able to provide transformation of life», these words were uttered L.F. Il'ichev on the meeting with writers and artists in December [7, p. 13] Work plans of the regional offices of the Union of Artists of the USSR contain the following: «1) in order to strengthen the established links artists with companies of the city and region, to collect materials for the works of fine art, studying and exploring the production, promotion of fine art to working to consolidate the enterprises artists [ ] 2) all the artists working on pieces of art dedicated to the production of subjects and having a relationship with factories or new buildings, except for collecting etude material to promote the fine arts [ ] 6) to raise awareness of the fine arts schedule performance artists, sculptors of the working people, workers, youth, and in the press, the organization of creative meetings etc.». [8] Оffices of the Union of Artists of the USSR issue a «thematic plans-guides» for the work of artists. In these the first Secretary of the Board Union of Artists Vladimir Serov again confirms the presence of the convention between the artists and the power and presence of the powerful discourse in art: «The most important, the central task of the artist should be a struggle for the high artistic quality of works, desire as much as possible to show the life areas, territories, autonomous republics, in painting, sculpture, graphic, crafts arts, talk about leading people, to sing the beautiful landscapes of our country from South to North Urals, fully reveal the remarkable features of the new

3 communist tomorrow. [ ]And everything that moves away from this problem - empty formalist art. Practical work will show that soviet artists - active passionate champions of a new communist society [...] The Communist Party sees to artists of his loyal and trusted aides in the aesthetic education, in shaping the spiritual image of man of the future [italic A.S.]». [9] In the preliminary text of the brochure of the problem of fine art are identified as follows: reflected the people's struggle to build communism, people's life in all its manifestations, the struggle for peace and friendship between peoples. In the opinion of management it was possible to implement the works in historical and historico-revolutionary theme. But it was also noted that the current theme is the general. The most important task of art - show «people's struggle to build communism» during the 1960's thinking in addressing the means of art as the cultivation and glorify the idea of working: «Painters, sculptors and graphics are required to capture the artistic works (portraits, pictures, graphic) great pioneering movement of modernity brigades of communist labor movement in the town and village, to show people new construction projects and the virgin state farms, showing unprecedented feat of our scientists, who opened the road to humanity in the cosmos». [10] During the period of «stagnation», the state continues to address the powerful medium of art discourse, but his tone changed to a less categorical and politically engaged. Recognition of the art medium of power is not total, including within the institutionally legitimate union creators. The problem of external compulsion to broadcast the creator of the powerful discourse is actually leading the line of the story of Ilya Ehrenburg's «The Thaw». Words of one of the heroes of the story artist Vladimir Pukhov, Ehrenburg was ever-present problem of the creative artist's identity this time. Pukhov in a burst of candor criticizes himself for his commitment to policy orders from above topics. [11] However, as talks Pukhov, «the era of no-argue». The relevance of this issue shows a broad debate on the pages of periodicals, including literature, which appeared shortly after the story. [12] Signals, indicating that the convention "art - a medium power" is not respected, and, moreover, is subjected to ridicule, there were many. Conventional breaks were two-sided. If the creators did not suit claims the power of art and use art as a powerful medium of discourse, that the authorities sought to encourage artists to a more coherent and sincere implementation of the powerful discourse. Artists, as it turned out, was not «active and passionate champions of a new communist society». In the 1960's, even within the protocol events are starting to talk about the banality of official art. Monumental art was conceived by one of the main mediums of ideology. This situation arose in the early years of soviet power «The plan of monumental propaganda», signed by Lenin, in fact, approved the special situation of monumental art. Throughout the soviet period, the situation continued and monumental art had a strong economic support from the state. Art as Art State, affecting the arts through the Artists' Union and the Academy of Fine Arts, in an open form posits a formal unification of the language of art. Alexander Gerasimov, the first chairman of the Organizing Committee of the Union of Soviet artists, in his paper «The Soviet art and tasks of the Academy of Arts USSR» denotes both the formal «standards» for works of art: «[ ]Socialist realism is the only method by which to guide our artists». [13, p. 19]. «Canonization» of socialist realism is in the charter of the Union of Artists, adopted on 1- Union Congress of the USSR Union of Artists in 1957: «Socialist realism is the highest stage in the development of world art». [14] The concept of socialist realism explained: «One of the most important qualities of socialist realism is asserting his character, in contrast to the critical realism of the XIX century. Soviet art protects and celebrates the socialist system as the most progressive social order, leading people to a happy life. Precious quality of the art of socialist realism is the ability to see the surrounding reality in a new, more is not a typical day, but tomorrow they will probably [italic A.S.]». [13, p. 19]

4 Thus, it becomes clear that the realistic method had expressed an idealistic tone. Trends in art to the idealizes connotations were veiled in the powerful discourse. Authorities appealed to the idea of beauty: «Communism and beauty - inseparable». [15] However, the method of «socialist realism» in the view of contemporaries already in 1950 required a major transformation. Going awareness of the backwardness of art is to think an educated and enlightened elite art. In the first half of 1950's artists are beginning to question the universality and relevance of the language of soviet art. How ironic that the first inner critic of soviet art to become a famous soviet sculptor Vera Mukhina. In her report «Monumental and decorative sculptural solutions in the ensemble of the city» in February 1951 at a conference on the monumental and decorative art at the Art Academy of the USSR sounded harsh criticism of the restrictions in the form, which resulted from the simplified understanding of realism. These restrictions, according to a well-known sculptor, destroying the quality of monumentality and decorative. [16] Doubts about the artists in the contemporary artistic language captures the «Note by the Department of Science and Culture of the Central Committee «On the state of Soviet Art» from July 6, Department of Science and Culture states «formalist revival sentiment». The document shows the epithets used in the medium of artists in relation to the works of masters of the Soviet art of realist artists Boris Johanson, Basil Efanova, Gavriil Gorelov, Fyodor Reshetnikov, Alexey Grits, Alexander Laktionov «official», «regulated» and «dried» art. [17] In internal documents, the problem of backwardness of the Soviet art refers not renowned masters, and nameless visitors to art exhibitions troubled Central Committee not less than the discontent in the ranks of members of creative unions. As mentioned earlier document as anxiety symptoms are excerpts from the book reviews of exhibitions of Indian and Finnish art, organized in Moscow in 1953: «As though to breathe fresh air. Need to and we showed people the work of artists of various tendencies [...] Give us Gauguin, Monet, Marquet, etc., etc., we do not need Gerasimov, Sokolov, Scalia, etc. Give us art!».[17] It became clear that there are enough demands of society and artistic elite to include the soviet culture and art in a modern cluster, it finds expression in the enthusiasm for the art of european modernism. Then begins the massive transformation of the powerful discourse in the formal qualities oа soviet art and gain a theoretical and, more precisely, the critical foundation of the soviet art. In 1957 is making serious efforts to ensure the theoretical basis of Soviet art: the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences were invited to consider strengthening the leadership of the Institute of History of Art, began to publish art magazines «Decorative Arts of the USSR» (1957) and «Artist» (1958). Then in mid 1950 formed by the unification of isolated before socialist realism and modernism. Already during the second half of the first half of 1960 within the official cultural policy initiated and made exhibitions and other events associated with the work of modernists in Europe and America. In 1954 in Moscow an exhibition of returning to the USSR after two decades of exile Stepan Erzya; Museum of Fine Arts. A.S. Pushkin is a new exhibition, which have been shown works by french impressionist Auguste Renoir, Claude Monet, Edgar Degas. There in an exhibition of Pablo Picasso. In 1958 the exhibition of American art, on which were displayed works of abstract expressionists. In 1959, in Leningrad, the exhibition of british art, in which the soviet viewers first saw the work of John Constable, William Turner, the Pre-Raphaelites, Surrealists and Abstract. In the magazine «Art» published articles on contemporary art in Italy, Mexico, Czechoslovakia. Moreover, in 1958 at the International Workshop of Plastic Arts at the VI World Festival of Youth and Students David Siqueiros awarded the gold medal of the competition if anyone does not know Anatoly Zverev. According to eyewitnesses, the acclaimed master of modernism Siqueiros shocked manner of work Zvereva: he as Pollock spread his canvas on the ground and began to throw out the red and green paint from buckets and overclock it with a brush.

5 The above mentioned transformation of the powerful discourse were related to the need for change in language arts. The new language of art has been legitimized. And the art begins to actively involve in the range of artistic techniques new tools that are close to the language of modernism. Of course, consideration of soviet art in the second half of the first half of 1980 may seem a rather bold idea, especially given the attitude in this period to modernism in the Soviet Union. In soviet aesthetics and art criticism term modernism was negative character. Basically it was the position of the conservative direction with respect to all innovative, it was determined the party-class ideological. But if you analyze the processes of art is not a formal conceptual positions and apply to the essence of things, the Soviet art have expressed typological characteristics of modernism. As the main characteristics of modernism indicate an aesthetic strategy for the autonomy of art, his principled independence from non-artistic contexts - social, political, religious. This is a continuation strategy for developing autonomy and formal qualities. Modernism ultimately blurs, and sometimes completely abandons the principle of mimesis in art, focuses on the art form, understood as the essential foundation of art and the identity of its content. The result is absolutization visual representation works as a fundamentally new quantum existence. A number of phenomena of Soviet art can be viewed from the standpoint of its inclusion (albeit with a delay of a decades) in the world the artistic process. Erosion of the principles of realism is in monumental art. This shift in emphasis from the narrative and the plot began to «play with form»: energy, silhouette, abstract tectonics composition, clear strict rhythm, a serious attitude toward color as receiving broadcast psychology etc. In the Soviet monumental art is diminishing narrative so characteristic of realistic discourse of art and the realization of the artistic image, primarily through formal techniques (composition, shape, tone, color). [18] Changes in direction of development of monumental art artists notice. V.K. Zamkov - a famous soviet artist of monumental art in the pages of «Decorative Arts of the USSR» notes crisis of meaning arts: «First of all, the proliferation of monumental works and its adverse effects [which give rise to] a growing number of poor quality and direct schlock disguised as monumental art [...]today's monumental art away from his high moral educational purpose in our society [...]». [19, p. 30] Crisis, manifested in the dominance of form over content, notes and other famous artists O.P. Filatchev: «If the monumental painting (as always) - it is a great idea of a civic, ethical elevation, psychology, glow of the human spirit, then from this point of view today monumental art is undoubtedly in crisis. Monumental art degenerates now in decorative art. Formal party dominates the psychological [ ] sensual expression pushed decorative magnificence, delight found the methods [ ]». [19, p. 30] This loss of the primacy of content and the socialist discourse of monumental art in favor of form was largely legalized. On legalization of transformation of monumental art suggests an official translator and interpreter of meanings «Great Soviet Encyclopedia». The second edition ( ) notes that «Monumental art the art, wherein the grandeur and significance of the ideological content [...] subject to large public problems [...]arises from the need for propaganda and promotion of significant and social ideas that underlie the monumental works. Where these ideas are lost, the product loses the quality of monumentality». [20] In the third edition BSE ( ) gives a different definition: «Monumental art form of Fine Arts, covers a wide range of products produced in a specific architectural environment and relevant to her own ideological character, visual and architectonic systems. [...]A number of works of monumental art does not bear a high burden of ideological and usually plays a role in the architecture of the accompaniment, decorative organizes the surface of walls, ceilings, facades». [21] In the definition of monumental art in the 1970's partly changing role of art content, and

6 provides guidance on the absolute prevalence of characteristics associated specifically with the shape of the product. Similarly, transformed the notion of monumental art in scientific literature. V.P. Tolstoy, one of the greatest explorers of monumental art in the book «Soviet monumental painting» (1958) gives a definition: «The most common symptom for all branches of Fine Arts, united in the monumental art is their immediate, physical relationship with a particular architectural construction or organized space, they participate in shaping the environment, expressing the spirit and character of the epoch». [22] In 1981 this scientist different accents in a characteristic monumental art. In his book «On the fundamental concepts of monumental art» (1981) V.P. Tolstoy notes that «[...]essential quality of monumental art, among other spatial arts the ability of a meaningful relationship between man and the construction, but in terms of philosophy between mankind and his environment». [23] V.P. Tolstoy is absolutely clear is marked by the art of modernism «removal» of the social context and the output under this definition in the global scope of the ontological. These theoretical positions can be seen in the monumental works of art: images Merperta Dmitry, Victor Elkonin, Boris Talberg, Yuri Korolev, Rudolph Ponomarev, Nikolay Andronov. In these works can be identified quite clearly the formal qualities of modernism. Artists realize the principles of self-sufficiency of form, claim to be self-sufficient artistic space, absolutization visual representation works as a fundamentally new quantum being, an appeal to archetypes (even though the Soviet era), «withdrawal» or ultimate secularization of social or ideological context. Required ideological discourse connection with specific characters, images or scenes in this case can be regarded as a condition of the state order. Typically the master of monumental art are on the path of generalization and stylized forms, to the extent that was possible to pass a sketch exhibition committee. In the Soviet monumental art begin to use formal methods, characteristic for europeanamerican modernism: installation as a principle of composition, concise and stylized figure, the conventionality of form and perspective, tonal concise solution, the symbolism of color. This is the predominant form of interest in the problems expressed in a variety of techniques used by artists: stained glass, mosaic, tapestry, sgraffito, painting. Already in the in soviet art are endless fragmentation of the «big story». This is clearly seen in the formal codes that are used and cultivated in soviet art. State begins to feel the difficulty of making a «large narrative», even its update by updating the language ceases to «work». Should also be noted that soviet art during this period in parallel are in a situation of two different branches - modernist and postmodernist. In favor of the availability of post-modern phenomena of soviet art suggests the situation is the collapse of the myth of the totality of the state in Soviet art. In the 1970's to replace the «big story» in the art that implements the installation of soviet ideology, there are dozens of small. «Read» these units can be in a range of phenomens. Soviet art criticism of the late the first half of 1980 actually constitutes a completion of the «big story». The rhetoric of critical and scientific texts of soviet art history of this time tells us that at this time of art is taking a special «multi-layered», differentiation, complexity, freedom and fullness. Later, soviet art because of the specific ideological restrictions develops a postmodern language of art in several truncated «format». Language of late Soviet art is the intertext and hypertext. In early 1980 the magazine «Decorative Arts of the USSR» from room to room were discussions about the «old style». Intertext of the soviet art of this period is associated primarily with reference to the historical layers as in the narrative, and in the language works. In the art of the late 1960's begins the situation of reception of art of past ages: return to detailed, descriptive style of classical realism, motifs of symbolism and expressionism, appeal to the Italian

7 Quattrocento, art of the Netherlands of the XV century and ancient icon. This Inertekst was absolutely legitimated under the powerful discourse. These trends are reflected in the works of monumental Irina Lavrova, Igor Pchelnik, Oleg Filatchev. Artists of the Soviet monumental painting in his works begin to build hypertexts. They are in search of form and narrative to the visual appeal «codes» of medieval art and Renaissance art. Summing up the excursion into the Soviet monumental art of can be summarized that the art is the translator of domineering discourse this is reflected in the themes, and simultaneously realizes trends of modernist and postmodernist language arts. Notes 1. Lyotard J.-F. Postmodern Condition (1998). Translated from the french NA Shmatko. St. Petersburg: Aletheia 2. A Short course on the history of the CPSU (b) (1938). Retrieved February 2, 2001 from History of the CPSU(b). New York: International Publishers, from 3. IV Stalin Marxism and Problems of Linguistics: about Marxism in linguistics. Retrieved February 11, 2011 from: 4. IV Stalin Speech at a meeting with the creative intelligentsia in Retrieved January 8, 2001from 5. «Pravda» on June 19, NS Khrushchev. For the close relationship of literature and art with life of the people. A concise summary of speeches at a meeting of writers in the CPSU Central Committee May 13, 1957, at the reception of writers, painters, sculptors and composers, May 19, 1957, at Party activists in July Retrieved January 2, 2011 from 7. Il'ichev LF Art belongs in the people (1963). Moscow: Goslitizdat 8. State Archive of Perm Region. Fund P Inventory 1. Folder Zone exhibition. Socialist Urals. Subject directory (1962). Lenigrad: Artist of the RSFSR. 10. State Archive of Perm Region. Fund P Inventory 1. Folder Ilya Ehrenburg. Thaw. Story. ( ). Retrieved December 30, 2010 from ( 12. Note by the Department of Culture of the Central Committee with the consent of the Secretaries of the CPSU Central Committee «On the incompatibility of the views of IG Ehrenburg with ideology and politics of the CPSU in the field of literature and art» of January 4, 1956 Retrieved December 31, 2010 from <<< >> 13. USSR Academy of Arts. The first and second session November May (1948) Moscow: Academy of Arts of USSR 14. Proceedings of the First All-Union Congress of Soviet Artists. February 28 - March 7, (1958). - Moscow: Soviet Artist 15. Mozhuhovskaya EV Place and role of art in communist upbringing. (1963). Moscow: Academy of Arts of USSR 16. Mukhina, VI Literary and critical heritage. Vol. 1. (1960). Moscow 17. Note by the Department of Science and Culture of the Central Committee "On the state of Soviet art" July 6, 1954 Retrieved December 30, 2010 from 18. In this approach, the phenomenon of hospitality Soviet monumental art discussed in the

8 following article: AA Suvorov. Soviet monumental art as a revision of modernism. Creativity Rudolph Ponomarev. / / Russian world. Collected materials Russian scientific-practical conference «The historical memory of the fatherland and the Russian world» June 26, 2009 Perm. (2009) Perm. P Magazine «Decorative Arts of the USSR» July Great Soviet Encyclopedia. 2 nd edition. T. 28. ( ). Moscow: Soviet Encyclopedia 21. Great Soviet Encyclopedia. 3rd edition. T. 16. ( ). Moscow: Soviet Encyclopedia 22. Tolstoy VP Soviet monumental art. (1958). Moscow: Arts 23. Tolstoy VP Fundamental concepts of monumental art. / / Soviet art studies-80. Vol. 2. (1961). Moscow: Soviet Artist Bibliography 1. Bazaryants B. Painter, space, environment: The monumental art and its role in shaping the spiritual and the physical environment of man. (1983). Moscow 2. Voronov NV. Vladimir Konstantinovich Zamkov. (1983). Leningrad 3. Groys Boris. Communist postscript/ Translated from german by A. Fomenko. (2007). Moscow: Ad Marginem 4. Kostina AV. Boris Thalberg monumental art. Painting. Schedule. (1982). Moscow 5. Irina Lebedeva, Irina Lavrova, Igor Pchelnikov: Monumental art. Painting. Schedule. (1985). Moscow 6. Monumental art of the USSR. Album. Compiled by VP Tolstoy. (1978). Moscow 7. Murina E. Problems of synthesis of the spatial arts. (1982). Moscow 8. Mukhina VI. Literary and critical heritage. Vol. 1. (1960). Moscow 9. Nikich GA. Victor Elkonin: The monumental painting. (1985). Moscow. 10. Tolstoy VP. Soviet monumental art. (1958). Moscow: Arts

9 Soviet monumental painting : between ideology and art Ideas for the Soviet state were not abstract or minor. The communist theory is inseparable from the communist practice these words like a mantra migrate from one party document to another. Transference of the theory into practice proceeds through language, concept which in this context includes verbal, visual, behavioral, physical constructs and practices implemented in human life. The Soviet state thinks of art as a material force, supportive of future prosperity. Real state development program by means of art existed in the minds of political elites, which not only initiated this process, but put him in the service of all the power of the state machine. After the Twentieth Party Congress art is still implied as a tool for the mind conversion and as a weapon for ideological struggle. In the narrative of soviet art its state-backed branch dominated this is the political program. In the subjects of soviet art, we constantly see this circle of selected government priorities meaningful art: selfless fighters for the happiness of the people in theentourage of of the heroic past of the country or work people today. In 1957 published the text of the program N.S. Khrushchev «For the close relationship of literature and art and life of the people». Principled position of the party paper was the idea, that literature and art belong to an extremely important role in the ideological work, «in the communist education of workers». Monumental art was conceived by one of the main mediums of ideology. This situation arose in the early years of soviet power «The plan of monumental propaganda», signed by Lenin, in fact, approved the special situation of monumental art. Throughout the soviet period, the situation continued and monumental art had a strong economic support from the state. However, the method of «socialist realism» in the view of contemporaries already in 1950 required a major transformation. Going awareness of the backwardness of art is to think an educated and enlightened elite art. In the first half of 1950's artists are beginning to question the universality and relevance of the language of soviet art. How ironic that the first inner critic of soviet art to become a famous soviet sculptor Vera Mukhina. In her report «Monumental and decorative sculptural solutions in the ensemble of the city» in February 1951 at a conference on the monumental and decorative art at the Art Academy of the USSR sounded harsh criticism of the restrictions in the form, which resulted from the simplified understanding of realism. These restrictions, according to a well-known sculptor, destroying the quality of monumentality and decorative. Summing up the excursion into the Soviet monumental art of can be summarized that the art is the translator of domineering discourse this is reflected in the themes, and simultaneously realizes trends of modernist and postmodernist language arts. Anna Suvorova Art History and Theory PhD Address: 44-41, Elkina Str., Perm RUSSIA Phone: suvorova_anna@mail.ru Date of birth: 3 August 1977 EDUCATION , Repin State Academic Institute of Painting, Sculpture and Achitecture, Russia. WORK EXPERIENCE to present, Perm State Institute of Arts and Culture, Russia , Perm Art Gallery, Russia

10 LANGUAGES English - conversational German - very good PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS Art critics and art historians Association (AIS)