The main idea of ​​the art world. L.S. Bychkova

HISTORICAL SUMMARY "World of Art", Russian art association. It took shape in the late 1890s. Petersburg on the basis of a circle of young artists and art lovers headed by A. N. Benois and S. P. Diaghilev. As an exhibition union under the auspices of the magazine "World of Art" in its original form existed until 1904; in an expanded composition, having lost their ideological and creative unity, in the majority of the masters of “M. and." was a member of the Union of Russian Artists. In addition to the main core (L. S. Bakst, M. V. Dobuzhinsky, E. E. Lancers, A. P. Ostroumova-Lebedeva, K. A. Somov), “M. and." included many Petersburg and Moscow painters and graphic artists (I. Ya.Bilibin, A. Ya.Golovin, I.E. Grabar, K.A.Korovin, B.M. Kustodiev, N.K. Roerich, V.A. and etc.). In the exhibitions “M. and." participated M. A. Vrubel, I. I. Levitan, M. V. Nesterov, as well as some foreign artists.

JOURNAL "WORLD OF ISSUES" The art association "World of Art" announced itself with the release of the magazine of the same name at the turn of the XIX XX centuries. The publication of the first issue of the magazine "World of Art" in St. Petersburg at the end of 1898 was the result of ten years of communication between a group of painters and graphic artists headed by Alexander Nikolaevich Benois ().

THE IDEA BASIS The main idea of ​​the unification was expressed in the article by the outstanding philanthropist and art connoisseur Sergei Pavlovich Diaghilev () “Difficult questions. Our imaginary decline. " The main goal of artistic creation was declared to be beauty, and beauty in the subjective understanding of each master. This attitude to the tasks of art gave the artist absolute freedom in choosing themes, images and means of expression, which was quite new and unusual for Russia.

Collaboration with the Symbolist writers was of great importance for the masters united around Benoit and Diaghilev. In the twelfth issue of the magazine in 1902, the poet Andrei Bely published an article "Forms of Art", and since then the largest Symbolist poets have regularly appeared on its pages.

ALEXANDER BENOIS Benois's best graphic works; among them are especially interesting illustrations to the poem by Alexander Pushkin "The Bronze Horseman" (gg.). Petersburg became the main "hero" of the entire cycle: its streets, canals, architectural masterpieces appear either in the cold severity of thin lines, or in the dramatic contrast of bright and dark spots. At the climax of the tragedy, when Eugene runs from the formidable giant, the monument to Peter, galloping behind him, the master paints the city with dark, gloomy colors.

LEON BAKST The design of theatrical performances is the brightest page in the work of Lev Samuilovich Bakst (real name Rosenberg;). The most interesting of his works are associated with opera and ballet performances of "Russian Seasons" in Paris. a kind of festival of Russian art, organized by Diaghilev.

LEON BAKST Especially remarkable are the sketches of costumes, which have become independent graphic works. The artist modeled the costume, focusing on the dancer's system of movements, through lines and color he tried to reveal the pattern of the dance and the nature of the music. In his sketches, the sharpness of the vision of the image, a deep understanding of the nature of ballet movements and amazing grace are striking.

THE WORLD OF ISSUES AND ROCOCO One of the main themes for many of the World of Art masters was the appeal to the past, the longing for the lost ideal world. Favorite era was the 18th century, and above all the Rococo period. The artists not only tried to revive this time in their work, they drew the public's attention to the authentic art of the 18th century, actually rediscovering the work of the French painters Antoine Watteau and Honore Fragonard and their compatriots Fyodor Rokotov and Dmitry Levitsky.

KONSTANTIN SOMOV Rococo motifs manifested themselves with particular expressiveness in the works of Konstantin Andreevich Somov (). He early became involved in the history of art (the artist's father was the curator of the Hermitage collections). After graduating from the Academy of Arts, the young master became an excellent connoisseur of old painting.

KONSTANTIN SOMOV Somov brilliantly imitated her technique in his paintings. The main genre of his work could be called variations on the theme of the "gallant scene". Indeed, on the artist's canvases, the characters of Watteau, the ladies in magnificent dresses and wigs, the actors of the comedy of masks, seem to come to life again. They flirt, flirt, sing serenades in the park alleys, surrounded by the caressing glow of the sunset light.

KONSTANTIN SOMOV Somov managed to express his nostalgic admiration for the past with particular subtlety through female images. The famous work "Lady in Blue" (gg.) Portrait of a contemporary of the master artist E. Martynova. She is dressed in old fashion and is depicted against the backdrop of a poetic landscape park. The painting brilliantly imitates the Biedermeier style. But the obvious morbidity of the heroine's appearance (Martynova soon died of tuberculosis) evokes a feeling of acute melancholy, and the idyllic softness of the landscape seems unreal, existing only in the artist's imagination.

NIKOLAI RERICH Russian artist, philosopher, mystic, scientist, writer, traveler, archaeologist, public figure, freemason, poet, teacher. Creator of about 7000 paintings (many of which are in famous galleries around the world) and about 30 literary works, author of the idea and initiator of the Roerich Pact, founder of the international cultural movements "Peace through Culture" and "Banner of Peace".

NICHOLAS ROERICH Art will unite humanity. Art is one and indivisible. Art has many branches, but the root is one ... Everyone feels the truth of beauty. The gates of the sacred source must be open to all. The light of art will illuminate countless hearts with new love. At first, this feeling will come unconsciously, but after that it will purify all human consciousness. How many young hearts are looking for something beautiful and true. Give it to them. Give art to the people where it belongs.

CONTROL QUESTIONS (CONT'D) 7 - WHO WRITTEN THE PORTRAIT OF ZINAIDA HIPPIUS? 8 - WHO IS FAMOUS FOR WORKS RELATED TO OPERA AND BALLET STATIONS? 9 - WHO CALLED "THE RAINBOW SINGER"? 10 - WHO EARNED THE REPUTATION OF A SELLER, GURU? 11 - CALL ROSENBERG'S PSEUDON.

"The world of art" "The world of art"

(1898-1904; 1910-1924), an association of St. Petersburg artists and cultural figures (A.N. Benoit, K. A. Somov, L. S. Bakst, M.V. Dobuzhinsky, HER. Lancer, AND I. Golovin, AND I. Bilibin, Z. E. Serebryakova, B. M. Kustodiev, N.K. Roerich, S. P. Diaghilev, D.V. Filosofov, V.F. Nouvel, and others), who published the journal of the same name. Writers and philosophers D. S. Merezhkovsky, N. M. Minsky, L. I. Shestov, V. V. Rozanov collaborated with the magazine. With its programmatic literary and visual material, its desire to lead the artistic movement of the era, the "World of Art" was a new type of periodical for Russia. The first issue was published in November 1898. Each magazine, from the cover to the typeface, was a complete work of art. The publication was subsidized by well-known patrons of the arts S.I. Mamontov and Princess M.K. Tenisheva, his ideological orientation was determined by the articles of Diaghilev and Benois. The magazine was published until 1904. Thanks to the activities of the world of art, the art of book design is also experiencing an unprecedented flourishing.

The commonwealth of artists, who later formed the core of the association, began to take shape at the turn of the 1880s-90s. The World of Art association was officially formed only in the winter of 1900, when its charter was drawn up and a management committee was elected (A.N. Benois, S.P.Dyagilev, V.A. Serov), and existed until 1904. Consciously entrusting themselves with the mission of reformers of artistic life, the World of Artists actively opposed academicism and later Wanderers... However, they always remained close, according to Benoit, "the deposits of genuine idealism" and "humanitarian utopia" of the 19th century. In prior art, the world of art valued tradition above all else. romanticism considering it a logical conclusion symbolism, to the formation of which in Russia they were directly involved.

With their heightened interest in foreign art, many of the world of art have earned a reputation in the literary and artistic environment as Westernizers. The magazine "World of Art" regularly introduced the Russian public to easel and applied types of art by foreign masters, both old and modern (English Pre-Raphaelites, P. Puvis de Chavannes, artists of the group " Nabis" and etc.). In their work, the World of Artists were guided mainly by German artistic culture. In Russian history, they were attracted by the epoch of the 18th century, its customs and mores. In the culture of the 18th - first third of the 19th century. The World of Artists were looking for a poetic key to unraveling the secrets of all subsequent Russian history. They were soon dubbed "retrospective dreamers." Artists possessed a special ability to feel the poetic aroma of bygone eras and to create a dream of the "golden age" of Russian culture. Their works convey to the viewer the exciting charm of festive, theatrical life (court ceremonies, fireworks), accurately recreate the details of toilets, wigs, flies. Artists paint scenes in parks where sophisticated ladies and gentlemen coexist with the characters of the Italian comedy del arte - the Harlequins, Columbines and others (K. A. Somov. "Harlequin and Death", 1907). Fascinated by the past, they combine the dream of it with sad melancholy and irony, realizing the impossibility of returning to the past (K. A. Somov. "Evening", 1902). The characters in their paintings do not resemble living people, but dolls playing a historical performance (A. N. Benois. The King's Walk, 1906).

Exhibiting works of old masters at their exhibitions, the world of art at the same time tried to attract to them those painters, sculptors and graphic artists who had a reputation for pioneers of new paths in art. Five exhibitions of the World of Art magazine took place in St. Petersburg in 1899-1903. In addition to painting and graphics of the world of art, the expositions presented the works of the greatest Russian masters of the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. (M. A. Vrubel, V. A. Serova, K. A. Korovin, F. A. Malyavina and etc.). A special place at exhibitions was given to products arts and crafts, in the works of which the members of the association saw a manifestation of "pure" beauty. A significant event in artistic life was the grandiose Historical and Art Exhibition of Russian Portraits, organized by Diaghilev in the halls of the Tauride Palace in St. Petersburg (1905).
In 1910, exhibitions under the title "The World of Art" reappeared (continued in Russia until 1924; the last exhibition under this name was held in 1927 in Paris, where many of the World of Artists emigrated after the revolution). However, they were united with the previous exhibitions only by the name. The founders of the association ceded their leading role in the artistic life to the next generation of painters. Many people of the world of art have joined the new organization - Union of Russian Artists, created on the initiative of Muscovites.

(Source: "Art. Modern Illustrated Encyclopedia." Edited by Prof. AP Gorkin; Moscow: Rosmen; 2007.)

See what the "World of Art" "is in other dictionaries:

"World of Art"- "World of Art", art association. It took shape in the late 1890s. (the charter was approved in 1900) on the basis of a circle of young artists, art critics and art lovers ("society of self-education"), headed by A. N. Benois and ... ...

Russian Art Association. It took shape in the late 1890s. (officially in 1900) on the basis of a circle of young artists and art lovers headed by A. N. Benois and S. P. Diaghilev. As an exhibition union under the auspices of the Mir magazine ... ... Art encyclopedia

- "World of Art", Russian art association. It took shape in the late 1890s. (officially in 1900) in St. Petersburg on the basis of a circle of young artists and art lovers headed by A. N. Benois and S. P. Diaghilev. As an exhibition union under ... ...

1) art association. It took shape in the late 1890s. (the charter was approved in 1900) on the basis of a circle of young artists, art critics and art lovers ("society of self-education"), headed by A. N. Benois and S. P. Diaghilev. How … Saint Petersburg (encyclopedia)

"World of Art"- "World of Art", illustrated literary and art magazine of the association "World of Art" and (until 1903) Symbolist writers. It was published in 1899-1904 (up to 1901, once every 2 weeks, from 1901 on a monthly basis). Publisher M. K. Tenisheva and S. I. Mamontov (in ... Encyclopedic reference book "St. Petersburg"

Art World: Art World (Sociology) is a multitude of people engaged in artistic creation or the creation, consumption, storage, distribution, criticism of works of art. World of art (organization) artistic ... ... Wikipedia

- "World of Art", literary and art illustrated magazine, organ of the association "World of Art" and Symbolist writers. It was published in 1898/99 1904 in St. Petersburg (until 1901, once every 2 weeks, from 1901 on a monthly basis). Publishers in 1899 princes M.K. ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Literary and art illustrated magazine, organ of the World of Art and (until 1903) Symbolist writers. It was published in 1898/99 1904 in St. Petersburg. Publishers M. K. Tenisheva and S. I. Mamontov (in 1899), then S. P. Diaghilev (chief ... ... Art encyclopedia

- "WORLD OF ART", a Russian art association (1898 1924), created in St. Petersburg by A. N. Benois (see BENOIS Alexander Nikolaevich) and S. P. Diaghilev (see DYAGILEV Sergey Pavlovich). Putting forward the slogans of "pure" art and "transformation" ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

Russian Art Association (1898 1924), founded in St. Petersburg by A. N. Benois and S. P. Diaghilev. Putting forward the slogans of pure art and the transformation of life with art, representatives of the World of Art rejected both academicism and ... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

- "WORLD ISKUSSTVA" art illustrated magazine, published in St. Petersburg from 1899 to 1904. In 1899, the publishers of the magazine were Prince. M. K. Tenisheva and S. I. Mamontov, editor S. P. Diaghilev. The latter, starting from 1900, becomes the only one ... ... Literary encyclopedia

Books

• World of Art. 1898-1927, GB Romanov, This publication is dedicated to the 30-year period in the history of the "World of Art" association. The publication contains portraits, biographies and works of artists. When preparing this encyclopedia for ... Category: History of Russian art Publisher:

The World of Art Association, which embodied the artistic ideals of Symbolism and Art Nouveau, played, contrary to its own aspirations, a significant role in the formation of the avant-garde. Despite the opposition that existed between the world of art and the avant-garde (the most striking example is the newspaper polemics of A.N. Benois and D.D. Burliuk), the relationship between the two phenomena at the historical and artistic level is obvious.

The acquaintance of Russia with contemporary Western art was carried out thanks to the activities of the world of art. The process began back in 1897-1898, when SP Diaghilev organized exhibitions of English, German, Scandinavian and Finnish artists.

The next step of the World of Art was more daring. In 1899, the first international exhibition of the editorial office of the magazine was held, at which works of famous European artists appeared. Although the organizers of the exhibition continued to take a half-hearted position in relation to contemporary world painting, the general composition of invited foreign artists turned out to be quite diverse. From the French impressionists, the choice fell on Claude Monet, Auguste Renoir and Edgar Degas; there were also other masters, in one way or another close to modernism, academism and realism. There were no works by Paul Cézanne, Vincent van Gogh and Paul Gauguin at the exhibition. The English group was represented by Frank Brangwin and American James Whistler. There were works by German (Franz von Lenbach and Max Liebermann), Swiss (Arnold Böcklin) and Italian (Giovanni Boldini) artists. Despite the well-known one-sidedness of the selection, dictated by a certain orientation of the "World of Art", whose members - by their own admission - "overlooked" the Impressionists, Cézanne, Gauguin and other most significant masters of the late 19th century, this exhibition marked a decisive breakthrough into the territory of new European art.

As for the masters of the "World of Art" themselves, they just at the same time began to win certain positions on European exhibition grounds. In the mid-1890s, Benoit received an offer from one of the leaders of the Munich Secession to organize a special Russian section at one of the exhibitions. Throughout the 1900s, the process of penetration of Russian artists to foreign exhibitions took place. In Germany, KASomov became one of the most popular Russian artists, who exhibited at the Vienna and Berlin Secessions in 1901-1902, his personal exhibition took place in Hamburg in 1903, and the first monograph about him was published in 1907 in Berlin. Another leader of the "World of Art", LS Bakst, since the end of the 1890s took part in the Munich Secession, in 1904 he exhibited in Paris, showing his work at the Grand Palais; success came to him in the 1910s, after participating in the Diaghilev enterprise and personal exhibitions in Paris and London.

At the same time, along with the world of art, works by artists of the latest trends began to appear at their exhibitions. In February – March 1906, even before the official creation of the World of Art society in 1910, Diaghilev organized an exhibition under the same name. It was attended by M.F. Larionov, brothers V.D. and N.D. Milioti, N.N. Sapunov, A.G. Yavlensky.

In the early 1910s, World of Art demonstrates a certain openness to new art. So, after the success of the Jack of Diamonds in 1910, some of its representatives turned out to be exhibitors of the World of Art exhibitions (P.P. Konchalovsky, A.V.Lentulov, I.I.Mashkov, A.A. Morgunov, V.V. Rozhdestvensky , R.R. Falk, Burliuk brothers). In 1910–1911, the participants in the World of Art exhibitions were N.S. Goncharova, Larionov, P.V. Kuznetsov, M.S. Saryan, G.B. Yakulov. The press was indignant about this. “Having declared themselves leftists and raising the Diaghilev banner of the“ World of Art ”, the participants of the reporting exhibition… invited…“ anarchists ”” (Early morning. 1911. No. 47. February 27, p.5). There is no “World of Art”, but instead of it there is “Jack of Diamonds” with a tiny pale branch “World of Art”. Guests<...>settled down as at home, with such a swagger that the owners almost did not have a place "(S. Glagol. World of art // Capital rumor. 1911. No. 217. December 5. P.3).

Only Goncharova, Larionov and Yakulov participated in the Moscow exhibition "The World of Art" (November – December 1912) (they were also exhibited at the St. Petersburg exhibition in January – February 1913). Diamonds Mashkov and Lentulov refused to participate by the decision of the general meeting of the "Jack of Diamonds". The Moscow exhibition "The World of Art" (December 1913 - January 1914) brought together a greater number of left-wing artists: NI Altman and AV Shevchenko were added to Goncharova, Larionov and Yakulov. VE Tatlin exhibited "Picturesque Relief" without agreement with the organizers.

The composition of the futurists (as the criticism of the left artists called it) at the exhibitions of the "World of Art" in 1915-1916 changed somewhat: in 1915 the left were represented by the names of L.A. Bruni, P.V. Miturich and N.A. Tyrsa, and in 1916 - K.L.Boguslavskaya, Konchalovsky, Mashkov, V.M. Khodasevich and Yakulova.

In March 1916 Konchalovsky and Mashkov left the Jack of Diamonds and became members of the World of Art society. In the same year, Goncharova joined the society. These facts testified to the assimilation of the once opposing artistic directions. The process continued throughout the next two exhibition seasons (1917-1918): in addition to Konchalovsky and Mashkov, works by S.I. Dymshits-Tolstoy, L.M. Lisitsky, S.A. Nagubnikov, A. F. Sofronova.

In May 1917 "World of Art" entered the central federation of the Trade Union of Artists-Painters of Moscow. In 1918 the society enlarged its ranks with the former tambourists A.V. Kuprin, Lentulov, A.I. Milman, Rozhdestvensky, Falk and practically became the center of Moscow Sezannism. P. Kuznetsov was elected chairman of the World of Art in 1918, and Mashkov, Milman and Lentulov were included in the leadership of the society.

In the summer of 1921, the Diamonds reunited under the banners of the "World of Art" - the exhibition of the society was open until November and brought together artists of various trends. In addition to the traditional Diamonds nucleus, the Inkhukovites A.A. Vesnin, A.D. Drevin and N.A. Udaltsova, as well as V.V. Kandinsky and Shevchenko were exhibited.

On this occasion, Falk wrote to Kuprin: “Much has changed in our society [The World of Art”]. Thanks to the efforts of Ilya Ivanovich [Mashkov] and [PV] Kuznetsov, it lost its intended appearance. A lot of new members entered, held by them fuchs, like various students of Kuznetsov, Bebutov, etc. Mashkov wants to become a member of his wife, etc. In general, the atmosphere begins to deteriorate greatly "(RGALI. F.3018. Op.1. Unit. Xr. 147. L. 6).

The next Moscow exhibition (January 1922) testified to the crisis state of the World of Art. Falk informed the same addressee: “I have a melancholy feeling from the exhibition. It seems to me that pathos is necessary in art, but this is not. Everything<...>we are some kind of sweet and sour, not hot and not cold. The revolution reacted very hard on us, very much pressed us to the ground and made us everyday ”(RGALI. F.3018. Op. 1. Unit. 147. L. 10-11).

In the last exhibition of the society, which opened in Paris in June 1927, none of the avant-garde artists participated.

L.S. Bychkova

World of Artists in the world of art*

The artistic association and the magazine "World of Art" are significant phenomena in the Russian culture of the Silver Age, vividly expressing one of the essential aesthetic trends of their time. The Commonwealth of the World of Art began to take shape in St. Petersburg in the 90s. XIX century. around a group of young artists, writers, and art workers striving to renew the cultural and artistic life of Russia. The main initiators were A. N. Benois, S. P. Diaghilev, D. V. Filosofov, K. A. Somov, L. S. Bakst, later M. V. Dobuzhinsky and others. friends connected by the same culture and common taste ”, in 1899 the first of five exhibitions of the magazine was held, the association itself was officially registered in 1900. The magazine existed until the end of 1904, and after the revolution of 1905 the official activity of the association ceased. In addition to the members of the association, many outstanding artists of the turn of the century were involved in the exhibitions, who shared the main spiritual and aesthetic line of the "World of Art". Among them, first of all, one can name the names of K. Korovin, M. Vrubel, V. Serov, N. Roerich, M. Nesterov, I. Grabar, F. Malyavin. Some foreign masters were also invited. Many Russian religious thinkers and writers were also published on the pages of the magazine, who in their own way stood up for the "revival" of spirituality in Russia. This is V. Rozanov,

* The article uses materials from research project No. 05-03-03137a, supported by the Russian Foundation for Humanities.

D. Merezhkovsky, L. Shestov, N. Minsky and others. The journal and the association in their original form did not last long, but the spirit of the World of Art, its publishing, organizational, exhibition and educational activities left a noticeable mark on Russian culture and aesthetics. and the main members of the association - the world of art - have retained this spirit and aesthetic preferences practically throughout their entire life. In 1910-1924. The "World of Art" resumed its activity, but already in a very expanded composition and without a sufficiently clearly oriented first aesthetic (essentially aesthetic) line. Many of the representatives of the association in the 1920s. moved to Paris, but there, too, they remained adherents of the artistic tastes of their youth.

Two main ideas united the participants of the World of Art into an integral community: 1. The desire to return to Russian art the main quality of art artistry, to free art from any tendentiousness (social, religious, political, etc.) and direct it into a purely aesthetic channel. Hence, the slogan l'art pour l'art, popular among them, although old in culture, rejection of the ideology and artistic practice of academism and itinerant movement, a special interest in romantic and symbolist tendencies in art, in the English Pre-Raphaelites, French Nabids, in Puvi's painting de Chavannes, Böcklin's mythology, Jugendstil's aestheticism, Art Nouveau, but also to the fairy-tale fiction of E.T.A. Hoffmann, to the music of R. Wagner, to ballet as a form of pure artistry, etc .; a tendency to include Russian culture and art in a wide European artistic context. 2. On this basis - romanticization, poeticization, aestheticization of the Russian national heritage, especially of the late, 18th - early 19th centuries, oriented towards Western culture, in general, interest in post-Petrine culture and late folk art, for which the main members of the association received the nickname in artistic circles "Retrospective dreamers".

The main trend of the "World of Art" was the principle of innovation in art based on a highly developed aesthetic taste. Hence the artistic and aesthetic predilections, and the creative attitudes of the world of art. In fact, they created a solid Russian version of that aesthetically sharpened movement at the turn of the century, which gravitated towards the poetics of neo-romanticism or symbolism, towards the decorative and aesthetic melodiousness of the line and in different countries bore different names (Art Nouveau, Secession, Jugendstil), and in Russia it received the name of the style " modern ".

The participants in the movement themselves (Benoit, Somov, Dobuzhinsky, Bakst, Lanceray, Ostroumova-Lebedeva, Bilibin) were not great artists, did not create artistic masterpieces or outstanding works, but wrote several very beautiful, almost aesthetic pages in the history of Russian art, actually showing the world that Russian art is no stranger to the spirit of nationally oriented aestheticism in the best sense of this unfairly belittled term. Typical for the style of most of the world of art were exquisite linearity (graphic quality - they brought Russian graphics to the level of an independent art form), subtle decorativeness, nostalgia for the beauty and luxury of past eras, sometimes neoclassical tendencies and intimacy in easel works. At the same time, many of them gravitated towards the theatrical synthesis of arts - hence the active participation in theatrical performances, Diaghilev projects and "Russian seasons", an increased interest in music, dance, modern theater in general. It is clear that most of the world of art were wary, and as a rule, sharply negatively related to the avant-garde movements of their time. The "World of Art" sought to find its own innovative path in art, an alternative path of the avant-garde artists, firmly connected with the best traditions of art of the past. Today we see that in the twentieth century. the efforts of the World of Artists practically did not receive any development, but in the first third of the century they contributed to the maintenance of a high aesthetic level in domestic and European cultures and left a good memory in the history of art and spiritual culture.

Here I want to dwell on the artistic attitudes and aesthetic tastes of some of the main representatives of the "World of Art" and artists who actively joined the movement in order to reveal the main artistic and aesthetic tendency of the entire movement, in addition to what is well shown by art critics based on the analysis of artistic creation the world of art themselves.

Konstantin Somov (1869-1939) in the "World of Art" was one of the most refined and sophisticated aesthetes, nostalgic for the beauty of classical art of the past, until the very last days of his life, looking for beauty or its traces in contemporary art and, to the best of his ability, tried to create this beauty. In one of his letters, he explains to A. Benois why he cannot in any way participate in the revolutionary movement of 1905, which swept the whole of Russia: “... I am first of all madly in love with beauty and I want to serve it; loneliness with a few and what's in

the soul of a person is eternal and impermanent, I value above all. I am an individualist, the whole world revolves around my “I” and I, in essence, do not care what goes beyond this “I” and its narrowness ”(89). And to the complaints of his correspondent about the upcoming "rudeness" he consoles him with the fact that there is enough of it at all times, but beauty is always preserved next to him - it is enough for any system to "inspire poets and artists" (91).

In beauty Somov saw the main meaning of life and therefore all its manifestations, but especially the sphere of art, he considered through aesthetic glasses, however, of his own, rather subjective production. At the same time, he constantly strived not only to enjoy aesthetic objects, but also to develop his aesthetic taste. Already a forty-year-old famous artist, he does not consider it shameful to attend I. Grabar's lecture on aesthetics, but the main aesthetic experience throughout his life is acquired by him when communicating with art itself. In this, until the last days of his suddenly cut short life, he was tireless. From his letters and diaries, we see that his whole life was spent in art. In addition to creative work, constant, almost daily visits to exhibitions, galleries, museums, workshops of artists, theaters and concert halls. In any city he went to, the first thing he did was to run to museums and theaters. And we find a brief reaction to almost every such visit in his diaries or letters. Here, in January 1910 he was in Moscow. “I get tired for the day, but nevertheless I go to the theater every evening” (106). And the same records until the last years of his life in Paris. Almost every day there are theaters, concerts, exhibitions. At the same time, he visits not only what he knows beforehand that he will receive aesthetic pleasure, but also much that cannot satisfy his aesthetic need. He professionally follows events in artistic life and looks for at least traces of beauty.

And he finds them almost everywhere. He does not forget to mention the beauty of the landscape, which he discovers in France, and in America, and in London, and in Moscow during the Soviet period; about the beauty of Chartres Cathedral or the interiors of houses and palaces that he had to visit in different countries of the world. However, he enjoys the beauty of art with special and constant love. At the same time, with the same passion, he listens to music, opera, watches ballet and theatrical performances, reads fiction, poetry and, of course, does not miss a single opportunity to see painting: both the old masters and his contemporaries. And with every contact with art, he has something to say. Moreover, often his judgments, although rather subjective, turn out to be

accurate and accurate, which is further emphasized by their laconicism. The general impression, a few specific remarks, but even from them we feel well the level of Somov's aesthetic consciousness, and the spirit of the atmosphere of the Silver Age, in which this consciousness took shape.

“In the evening I was at a concert by Koussevitsky. The Bach Mass was going on. A composition of extraordinary beauty and inspiration. The execution was excellent, very harmonious ”(1914) (138). I am completely delighted with the performance of the New York Philharmonic Orchestra under the direction of Toscanini: “I have never heard anything like it in my life” (Paris, 1930) (366). On the performance of the Mass by the papal choir in Notre Dame: “The impression of this choir is unearthly. I have never heard such harmony, purity of voices, their Italian timbre, such delightful treble ”(1931) (183). On the performance by the Basel choir of Mozart's opera "Idomeneo": "She turned out to be absolutely brilliant, unmatched beauty" (Paris, 1933) (409), etc. etc. Already in old age, he spent four evenings in the theater gallery, where the Bayreuth troupe performed Wagner's tetralogy. It was not possible to get other tickets, and each performance was 5-6 hours long. The end of June, in Paris, the heat, "but still great pleasure" (355).

Somov attended ballet with even greater enthusiasm throughout his life. Especially the Russian, whose best forces were after the 1917 revolution in the West. Here there is both aesthetic pleasure and professional interest in the decoration, which was often (especially in the early Diaghilev performances) performed by his friends and colleagues from The World of Art. In ballet, music, theater, and in painting, naturally, Somov is most delighted by the classics or refined aestheticism. However, the first third of the twentieth century did not boil at all with this, especially in Paris. The avant-garde tendencies were gaining more and more strength, all directions of the avant-garde flourished, and Somov all this looks, listens, reads, tries to find traces of beauty in everything, which are not always found, therefore he often has to give sharply negative assessments of what he saw, heard, read.

Everything that gravitates towards the aestheticism of the beginning of the century especially attracts the attention of the Russian artist, and avant-garde innovations are not absorbed by him in any way, although one feels that he is striving to find his own aesthetic key to them. It turns out very rarely. In Paris, he attends all Diaghilev performances, often admires dancers, choreography, is less satisfied with the scenery and costumes, which in the 1920s.

already done often by the Cubists. “I love our old ballet,” he admits in a letter from 1925, “but this does not prevent me from enjoying the new one. Choreography and great dancers, mostly. I can't stomach the scenery by Picasso, Matisse, Derain, I love either illusion or magnificent beauty ”(280). In New York, he walks "to the back rows of the gallery" and enjoys the performance of American actors. I watched many plays and concludes: “I have not seen such a perfect game and such talents for a long time. Our Russian actors are much lower ”(270). But he considers American literature to be second class, which does not prevent, he notes, the Americans themselves from being satisfied with it. I am delighted with individual pieces by A.France and M.Proust.

In contemporary visual arts, Somov most of all likes many things of his friend A. Benois: both graphics and theatrical scenery. He is delighted with Vrubel's paintings and watercolors - “something incredible in terms of brilliance and harmony of colors” (78). He was impressed by Gauguin in the Shchukin collection; somehow praised the colorful (popular) range of colors in one of the theatrical works of N. Goncharova, although later, based on her still lifes, he speaks of her as stupid and even idiotic, “judging by these stupid things of hers” (360); noted in passing that Filonov had "great art, albeit unpleasant" (192). In general, he is stingy with praise for his fellow painters, sometimes he is sarcastic, acrimonious and even rude in reviews of the work of many of them, although he does not praise himself either. Often expresses dissatisfaction with his work. Often he informs his friends and relatives that he tears up and destroys sketches and sketches that he does not like. And he does not like many finished works, especially those already exhibited.

Here are Somov's almost randomly chosen judgments about his works: “I began to paint in the 18th century, a lady in purple on a park bench of an English character. Extremely trite and vulgar. Not capable of a good job ”(192). “I began another vulgar drawing: the marquise (damned!) Is lying on the grass, at a distance, two are fencing. Until 9 pm he painted. Disgusting came out. Tomorrow I will try to paint. My soul felt sickening ”(193). About their works in the Tretyakov Gallery (and the best took there, including the famous "Lady in Blue"): "What I was afraid of, I experienced:" I did not like the Lady in Blue, like everything else of mine ... " (112). And such statements are not uncommon with him and show the special aesthetic exactingness of the master to himself. At the same time, he knows the minutes of happiness from painting and is convinced that "painting, after all, but delights life and sometimes gives happy moments" (80). He is especially strict with his colleagues in the shop and, before

everything, to any elements of avant-garde art. He, like most of the world of art, does not understand and does not accept it. This is the artist's inner position that expresses his aesthetic credo.

Somov's strict aesthetic eye sees flaws in all his contemporaries. It goes to Russians and French alike. Of course, we are not always talking about the work of this or that master as a whole, but about specific works seen at a particular exhibition or in a workshop. For example, he expresses the "merciless truth" to Petrov-Vodkin about his painting "Attack", after which he wanted to "shoot himself or hang himself" (155-156). At one of the exhibitions in 1916: "Korovin's sprinkle"; Mashkov's painting is “beautiful in color, but somehow idiotically stupid”; the works of Sudeikin, Kustodiev, Dobuzhinsky, Grabar are not interesting (155). At the 1918 exhibition: “Grigoriev, remarkably talented, but a bastard, stupid, cheap pornographer. Something I liked ... Petrov-Vodkin is still the same boring, stupid, pretentious fool. The same unbearable combination of unpleasant clean blues, greens, reds and brick tones. Dobuzhinsky is a terrible family portrait and little else ”(185). Throughout his life, he had one attitude to Grigoriev - “talented, but frivolous, stupid and narcissistic” (264). On the first performance of The Stone Guest by Meyerhold and Golovin: “Frivolous, very pretentious, very ignorant, heaped up, stupid” (171). Yakovlev has many wonderful things, but “the main thing he still does not have - mind and soul. Nevertheless, he remained an external artist "(352)," there is always some superficiality and haste in him "(376).

Even more goes from Somov to Western artists, although his approach to everything is purely subjective (like almost any artist in his field of art). So, in Moscow, at the first meeting with some of the masterpieces in the Shchukin collection: “I really liked Gauguin, Matisse is not at all. His art is not art at all! " (111). Cezanne's painting was never recognized for art. In the last year of his life (1939) at the exhibition of Cezanne: “Except for one (and maybe three) beautiful still lifes, almost everything is bad, dull, without valers, stale paints. The figures and his naked "bathing" are downright nasty, mediocre, inept. Ugly portraits "(436). Van Gogh, with the exception of certain things: "not only not brilliant, but also not good" (227). Thus, almost everything that goes beyond the refined world of art aestheticism that underlies this unification is not accepted by Somov and does not give him aesthetic pleasure.

He speaks even more sharply about the avant-garde artists, whom he met in Moscow and then regularly saw in Paris, but the attitude towards them was constant and almost always negative. About the exhibition "0.10", where, as you know, Malevich first exhibited his Suprematist things: "Absolutely insignificant, hopeless. Not art. Terrible tricks to make noise ”(152). At the 1923 exhibition at the Academy of Arts on Vasilievsky: "There are many leftists - and, of course, a terrible abomination, arrogance and stupidity" (216). Today it is clear that at such exhibitions there was a lot of "arrogance and stupidity", but there were also many works that have now entered the classics of the world avant-garde. Somov, like most of the world of art, unfortunately, did not see this. In this sense, he remained a typical adherent of traditional painting, but understood in his own way. He also did not read the Peredvizhniks and academicians. In this, all of the World of Art were united. Dobuzhinsky recalled that they were generally not very interested in the Itinerants, "they treated their generation with disrespect" and never even talked about them in their conversations.

However, not everything in the vanguard of Somov is sharply denied - where he sees at least some traces of beauty, he treats his antagonists with condescension. So, he even liked the cubist sets and costumes of Picasso for Pulcinella, but the curtain of Picasso, where “two huge women with arms like legs and legs like an elephant, with bulging triangular tits, in white chlamyds are dancing some wild dance ", he described succinctly:" Disgusting! " (250). He saw the talent of Filonov, but treated his painting very coldly. Or he highly appreciated S. Dali as an excellent draftsman, but on the whole he was indignant at his art, although he watched everything. About the illustrations of the meter of surrealism for Lautréamont's “Songs of Maldoror” in some small gallery: “All the same, the same ones hanging down an arshin ..., half-rotten legs. Beefsteaks with bones on the human thighs of his wild figures<...>But what a brilliant talent Dali is, how superbly he draws. Is he pretending at all costs to be unique, special, or genuine erotomania and mania? " (419). Although, paradoxically, he himself, which is well known from his work, was no stranger to eroticism, true aesthetic, cutesy, crinoline. Yes, and something pathological often attracted him. In Paris I went to the Musée patologique, where I looked ... wax dolls: diseases, wounds, childbirth, fetus, monsters, miscarriages, etc. I love these museums - I also want to go to musée Grèvin ”(320)

The same goes for literature, theater, music. Everything avant-garde in one way or another repulsed him, offended his aesthetic taste. For some reason he especially disliked Stravinsky. Scolds his music often and on every occasion. In literature, Bely outraged him. “I read Andrei Bely's Petersburg — disgusting! Tasteless, foolish! It is illiterate, lady-like and, most importantly, boring and uninteresting ”(415). By the way, “boring” and “uninteresting” are his most important negative aesthetic assessments. He never said this about Dali or Picasso. In general, he considered all avant-gardeism to be some kind of bad trend of the time. “I think that today's modernists,” he wrote in 1934, “in 40 years will completely perish and no one will collect them” (416). Alas, how dangerous it is to make predictions in art and culture. Today these "modernists" are paid fabulous money, and the most talented of them have become classics of world art.

In the light of the grandiose historical twists and turns in the art of the twentieth century. Many of the sharply negative, sometimes rude, extremely subjective assessments of the work of avant-garde artists by Somov seem to us unfair and seemingly even somehow belittling the image of a talented artist of the Silver Age, a refined singer of poetics, extremely idealized by him, crinoline-gallant XVIII century, nostalgic for the exquisite, aesthetics invented by him. However, in this artificial, sophisticated and surprisingly attractive aestheticism, the reasons for its negative attitude towards avant-garde searches and experiments with form are rooted. Somov especially keenly caught in the avant-garde the beginning of a process directed against the main principle of art - its artistry, although among the masters he criticized at the beginning of the 20th century. he was still felt rather weakly, and painfully experienced it. The refined taste of the esthete reacted nervously and sharply to any deviations from beauty in art, even in his own. In the history of art and aesthetic experience, he was one of the last and consistent adherents of "fine arts" in the truest sense of the concept of classical aesthetics.

And at the end of the conversation about Somov, one of his extremely interesting, almost Freudian and very personal confessions in his diary dated February 1, 1914, revealing the main aspects of his work, his gallant, cutesy, crinoline, mannerist 18th century. and to some extent opening the veil over the deep unconscious, libidinal meaning of aesthetics in general. It turns out that in his paintings, according to the artist himself, his innermost intimate-erotic intentions, his sensually heightened

Ego. “The women in my paintings languish, the expression of love on their faces, sadness or lust are a reflection of myself, my soul<...>And their broken postures, their deliberate ugliness - a mockery of themselves and at the same time of eternal femininity contrary to my nature. It is, of course, difficult to guess me without knowing my nature. This is a protest, a shame that I myself am in many ways like them. Rags, feathers - all this attracts me and attracted me not only as a painter (but there is also self-pity). Art, his works, favorite paintings and statues for me are most often closely related to gender and my sensuality. I like what reminds me of love and its pleasures, even if the plots of art did not speak directly about it at all ”(125-126).

An extremely interesting, bold, frank confession, which explains a lot in the work of Somov himself, and in his artistic and aesthetic predilections, and in the refined aesthetics of the World of Art as a whole. In particular, one can understand his indifference to Rodin (he has no sensuality), or his passion for ballet, endless enthusiasm for outstanding dancers, admiration even for the aging Isadora Duncan and sharp criticism of Ida Rubinstein. However, all this cannot be covered in one article and it is time to move on to other, no less interesting and gifted representatives of the "World of Art", their views on the artistic situation of their time.

Mstislav Dobuzhinsky (1875-1957). Dobuzhinsky's aesthetic preferences, which began to manifest themselves even before he entered the circle of the world of art, well reflect the general spiritual and artistic atmosphere of this association, a partnership of like-minded people in art who sought to "revive", as they believed, artistic life in Russia after the dominance of academics and itinerants on the basis of close attention to the actual artistry of the visual arts. At the same time, all the World of Artists were patriots of St. Petersburg and expressed in their art and in their passions a special St. Petersburg aestheticism, which was significantly different in their view from Moscow.

Dobuzhinsky was a particularly striking figure in this regard. From childhood he loved St. Petersburg and became in fact a refined, refined singer of this unique Russian city with a pronounced Western orientation. Many pages of his "Memoirs" breathe great love for him. On his return from Munich, where he studied in the workshops of A. Azhbe and S. Holloshi (1899-1901) and where he became well acquainted with the art of his future friends and colleagues in the first issues of the magazine "World of Art", Dobuzhinsky with particular poignancy

felt the peculiar aesthetic charm of St. Petersburg, its modest beauty, its amazing graphics, special color atmosphere, its vastness and roof lines, the spirit of Dostoevsky that permeates its spirit, the symbolism and mysticism of its stone labyrinths. In me, he wrote, “a kind of familiar feeling for the monotonous state buildings, amazing Petersburg prospects, which had lived since childhood, was reinforced in a new way, but now I was pricked even more sharply from the inside of the city.<...>These rear walls of houses are brick firewalls with their white stripes of chimneys, a flat line of roofs, as if with fortified battlements - endless pipes - sleeping channels, high black stacks of firewood, dark wells of courtyards, blank fences, wastelands ”(187). This special beauty bewitched Dobuzhinsky, who was under the influence of Munich Art Nouveau (Stuck, Böcklin), and in many ways determined his artistic face in The World of Art, where he was soon introduced by I. Grabar. “I gazed intently at the graphic features of St. Petersburg, peered at the brickwork of the bare, unplastered walls and at their 'carpet' pattern, which of its own accord formed in the unevenness and stains of the plaster” (188). He is captivated by the ligature of the countless gratings of St. Petersburg, antique masks of Empire buildings, contrasts of stone houses and cozy corners with rustic wooden houses, delighted with naive signs, pot-bellied striped barges on the Fontanka and motley people on Nevsky.

He begins to clearly understand that “Petersburg with all its appearance, with all the contrasts of the tragic, curious, majestic and cozy is really the only and most fantastic city in the world” (188). And before that, he already had the opportunity to travel around Europe, see Paris and some cities in Italy and Germany. And in the year of joining the circle of the world of art (1902), he felt that no one had yet expressed this beauty of the city “newly acquired” by him “with its languid and bitter poetry” in art, and directed his creative efforts towards this embodiment. “Of course,” he admits, “like my entire generation, I was seized by the spirit of symbolism, and naturally, I was close to the feeling of mystery, which seemed to be full of Petersburg, as I now saw it” (188). Through the "vulgarity and darkness of St. Petersburg everyday life" he constantly felt "something terribly serious and significant that lurked in the most depressing seamy side" of "his" St. "St. Petersburg nightmares and" petty devils "crawled out of all the cracks" (189). And this poetry of Peter attracted Dobuzhinsky, although it frightened at the same time.

He poetically describes the "terrible wall" that loomed in front of the windows of his apartment: "a deaf, wild-colored wall, also black, the saddest and most tragic one imaginable, with damp spots, peeling and with only one small, half-blind window." She irresistibly drew him to her and oppressed him, awakening memories of the gloomy worlds of Dostoevsky. And he overcame these oppressive impressions of the terrible wall, as he himself says, depicting it with “all its cracks and deprivations, ... already admiring it” - “the artist won in me” (190). Dobuzhinsky considered this pastel to be the first "real creative work", and many of his works, both in graphics and in theatrical and decorative art, are permeated with its spirit. Later he himself wondered why it was from this “seamy” side of Petersburg that he began his great work, although he was attracted from childhood by the ceremonial beauty of the capital city of Peter.

However, if we recall the work of Dobuzhinsky, we will see that it was the romantic (or neo-romantic) spirit of the old cities (especially St. In Vilna, which he fell in love with from adolescence and considered his second hometown along with St. Petersburg, he as an artist was most attracted by the old "ghetto" "with its narrow and crooked streets, crossed by arches, and with multi-colored houses" (195), where he made many sketches, and on them and beautiful, very delicate and highly artistic engravings. Yes, this is understandable if we take a closer look at the aesthetic predilections of the young Dobuzhinsky. This is not the clear and direct light and harmonious beauty of Raphael's "Sistine Madonna" (she did not make an impression on him in Dresden), but the mysterious twilight of Leonard's "Madonna of the Rocks" and "John the Baptist" (169). And then these are the early Italians, Sienese painting, Byzantine mosaics in San Marco and Tintoretto in Venice, Segantini and Zorn, Böcklin and Stuck, the Pre-Raphaelites, the Impressionists in Paris, especially Degas (who became for him forever one of the “gods”), Japanese engraving and, finally, the World of Artists, whose first exhibition he saw and carefully studied even before he personally met them in 1898, was delighted with their art. Most of all, as he confesses, he was "captivated" by the art of Somov, who amazed him with its subtlety, with whom, having entered the circle of his idols a few years later, he became friends. The sphere of the young Dobuzhinsky's aesthetic interests clearly testifies to the artistic orientation of his spirit. She, as we clearly see from his "Memories",

completely coincided with the symbolist-romantic and refined-aesthetic orientation of the main world of art, who immediately recognized their own in him.

Dobuzhinsky received basic information about the "World of Art" from Igor Grabar, with whom he became close friends in Munich during his apprenticeship with German teachers and who was one of the first to see him as a real artist and correctly helped his artistic development, gave clear guidelines in the field of art education ... For example, he drew up a detailed program of what to watch in Paris, before Dobuzhinsky's first short trip there, and later introduced him to the circle of the world of art. Dobuzhinsky carried gratitude to Grabar throughout his life. In general, he was a grateful student and sympathetic, benevolent colleague and friend of many artists close to him. The spirit of skepticism or snobbery characteristic of Somov in relation to his colleagues is completely alien to him.

Dobuzhinsky gave short, benevolent and apt characteristics to almost all the participants in the association, and they, to some extent, make it possible to get an idea of ​​the nature of the artistic and aesthetic atmosphere of this interesting trend in the culture of the Silver Age, and of the aesthetic consciousness of Do-Buzhinsky itself, because ... most of the notes about his friends he made through the prism of his work.

A. Benois "pricked" him in his student years, when his "romantic" drawings were shown at the first exhibition of the "World of Art", one of which bore a great resemblance to Dobuzhinsky's favorite motifs - the Vilna Baroque. Then Benoit strongly influenced the formation of the graphic style of the young Dobuzhinsky, strengthened him in the correctness of the chosen angle of vision of the urban landscape. Then they were brought together by the love of collecting, especially old prints, and the cult of their ancestors, and the craving for the theater, and the support that Benoit immediately provided to the young artist.

Dobuzhinsky became especially close to Somov, who turned out to be in tune with him with the amazing subtlety of graphics, "sad and poignant poetry", which was far from immediately appreciated by his contemporaries. Dobuzhinsky was in love with his art from the first meeting, it seemed to him precious and greatly influenced the formation of his own work, he admits. “This may seem strange, since his themes have never been my themes, but the amazing observation of his eyes and at the same time the“ diminutiveness ”, and in other cases the freedom and skill of his painting, where there was no

a piece that was not made with feeling - fascinated me. And most importantly, the extraordinary intimacy of his work, the mysteriousness of his images, his sense of sad humor and his then “Hoffman's” romance deeply worried me and revealed a strange world close to my vague moods ”(210). Dobuzhinsky and Somov came together very closely and often showed each other their work at the very initial stage in order to listen to each other's advice and comments. However, Dobuzhinsky, he admits, was often so amazed by Somov's sketches with their "weary poetry" and some inexpressible "aroma" that he could not find words to say anything about them.

He was close and with Leon Bakst, at one time even together with him taught classes at the art school of E.N. Zvantseva, among whose students was then also Marc Chagall. He loved Bakst as a person and appreciated him for his book graphics, but especially for the theatrical art, to which he devoted his whole life. Dobuzhinsky described his graphic works as "strikingly decorative", full of "special mysterious poetry" (296). He attributed great merit to Bakst both in the triumph of Diaghilev's "Russian Seasons", and in general in the development of theatrical and decorative art in the West. "His" Scheherazade "drove Paris crazy, and this is the beginning of Bakst's European and then world fame." Despite the seething artistic life in Paris, it was Bakst, according to Dobuzhinsky, for a long time "remained one of the irreplaceable legislators of" taste. " His performances evoked endless imitation in theaters, his ideas varied indefinitely, brought to the point of absurdity ", his name in Paris" began to sound like the most Parisian of Parisian names "(295). For the world of artists with their cosmopolitanism, this assessment sounded like a special praise.

Against the background of the St. Petersburg “Europeanism” of the main world of art, Ivan Bilibin, who wore a Russian beard à la moujik and limited himself only to Russian themes, expressed by a special exquisite calligraphic technique and subtle stylizations for folk art, stood out with his aesthetic Russophilia along with Roerich. In the circle of the world of art, he was a noticeable and sociable figure. N. Roerich, on the contrary, according to Dobuzhinsky's recollections, although he was a constant participant in the World of Art exhibitions, did not get close to its participants. Perhaps that is why “his great skill and very beautiful brilliance seemed too“ calculating ”, emphatically effective, but very decorative.<...>Roerich was a "mystery" for everyone, many doubted even, sincerely or only far-fetched, his work, and his personal life was hidden from everyone "(205).

Valentin Serov was a Moscow representative in the "World of Art" and was revered by all its participants for outstanding talent, extraordinary diligence, innovation in painting and constant artistic search. If the Wanderers and Academicians were counted among the supporters of historicism, they saw themselves as adherents of the "style." In this regard, Dobuzhinsky saw both those and other tendencies in Serov. Especially close in spirit to the "World of Art" was the late Serov "Peter", "Ida Rubinstein", "Europe", and Dobuzhinsky saw in this the beginning of a new stage, which, alas, "did not have to wait" (203).

Dobuzhinsky made short, purely personal, although often very accurate notes on almost all the world of art and the artists and writers who stood close to them. With good feelings, he recalls Vrubel, Ostroumova, Borisov-Musatov (beautiful, innovative, poetic painting), Kustodiev, Churlionis. In the latter, the world of art was attracted by his ability to "look into the infinity of space, into the depths of centuries", "he was pleased with his rare sincerity, a real dream, deep spiritual content." His works, "which appeared as if by themselves, with their gracefulness and lightness, amazing colors and composition seemed to us some kind of unfamiliar jewels" (303).

Among the writers of Dobuzhinsky, D. Merezhkovsky, V. Rozanov, Vyach. Ivanov (he was a frequent visitor to his famous Tower), F. Sologub, A. Blok, A. Remizov were especially attracted, i.e. authors who collaborated with the "World of Art" or those close to it in spirit, especially the Symbolists. In Rozanov, he was struck by an unusual mind and original writings, full of "the most daring and terrible paradoxes" (204). In Sologub's poetry, Dobuzhinsky admired the "salutary irony", while Remizov seemed to him in some things "a real surrealist even before surrealism" (277). In Ivanov, it was flattered that "he showed a particularly careful respect for the artist as the owner of some of his secrets, whose judgments are valuable and significant" (272).

With a special, almost intimate feeling of love, Dobuzhinsky describes the atmosphere that reigned in the union of the world of art. The soul of everything was Benoit, and the informal center was his cozy house, in which everyone often and regularly gathered. Issues of the magazine were also prepared there. In addition, they often met at Lanceray, Ostroumova, Dobuzhinsky at crowded evening tea parties. Dobuzhinsky emphasizes that the atmosphere in the "World of Art" was family, and not bohemian. In this "exceptional atmosphere of intimate life" and art was "a friendly common cause." Much has been done

together with the constant help and support of each other. Dobuzhinsky proudly writes that their work was extremely disinterested, independent, free from any tendencies or ideas. The only valuable opinion was the opinion of like-minded people, i.e. the members of the community themselves. The most important stimulus for creative activity was the feeling of being "pioneers", discovering new fields and spheres in art. “Now, looking back and remembering the unprecedented creative productivity of that time and everything that was beginning to be created around,” he wrote in adulthood, “we have the right to call this time really our“ Renaissance ”” (216); “It was a renewal of our artistic culture, one might say - its revival” (221).

Innovation and the "revival" of culture and art was understood in the sense of shifting the emphasis in art from everything secondary to its artistic side without rejecting the depiction of visible reality. “We loved the world and the beauty of things too much,” wrote Dobuzhinsky, “and then there was no need to deliberately distort reality. That time was far from any "isms" that came (to us) from Cezanne, Matisse and Van Gogh. We were naive and pure, and maybe this was the dignity of our art ”(317). Today, a century after those most interesting events, we, with some sadness and nostalgia, can kindly envy this highly artistic naivety and purity and regret that all this is far in the past.

And the process of close attention to the aesthetic specifics of art began even among the forerunners of the world of art, some of whom subsequently actively collaborated with the World of Art, feeling that he was continuing the work they had begun. Among such forerunners-participants, it is necessary, first of all, to name the names of the largest Russian artists Mikhail Vrubel (1856-1910) and Konstantin Korovin (1861-1939).

They, as well as the direct founders of the "World of Art", abhorred any tendentiousness of art, going to the detriment of purely artistic means, to the detriment of form and beauty. About one of the exhibitions of the Wanderers Vrubel complains that the overwhelming majority of artists care only about the news of the day, about topics that are interesting to the public, and “form, the main content of plastic, is in the pen” (59). In contrast to many professional aesthetics of their time, and modern, leading endless discussions about form and content in art, a real artist living in art feels well that the form is

this is the true content of art, and everything else is not directly related to art itself. This is the main aesthetic principle of art, by the way, and united so, in general, different artists like Vrubel, Korovin, Serov, with the actual world of art.

The true art form is obtained, according to Vrubel, when the artist conducts "love conversations with nature", is in love with the depicted object. Only then does a work emerge that gives a “special pleasure” to the soul, characteristic of the perception of a work of art and distinguishing it from the printed sheet, which describes the same events as in the painting. The main teacher of the art form is the form created by nature. She “stands at the head of beauty” and without any “code of international aesthetics” is dear to us because “she is the bearer of a soul that will open to you alone and tell you yours” (99-100). Nature, showing her soul in the beauty of form, thereby reveals our soul to us. Therefore, Vrubel sees true creativity not only in mastering the technical craft of an artist, but, first of all, in a deep direct feeling of the subject of the image: to feel deeply means “to forget that you are an artist and be glad that you are, first of all, a human being” (99).

However, the ability to “feel deeply” in young artists is often discouraged by the “school”, drilling them on plaster casts and sitters in working out technical details and etching in them all sorts of memories of direct aesthetic perception of the world. Vrubel, on the other hand, is convinced that along with mastering the technique, the artist must retain a “naive, individual view”, for in him is “all the artist's strength and source of pleasure” (64). Vrubel came to this on his own experience. He describes, for example, how dozens of times he altered the same place in his work, “and a week ago, the first living piece came out, which delighted me; I examine its focus and it turns out to be just a naive transfer of the most detailed living impressions of nature ”(65). He repeats almost the same thing and explains with the same words that the first impressionists did in Paris a dozen years ago, also admiring the direct impression of nature, conveyed on canvas, with whose art Vrubel, it seems, was not yet familiar. At that time he was more interested in Venice and the old Venetians Bellini, Tintoretto, Veronese. His relatives also imagined Byzantine art: “I was in Torcello, my heart moved joyfully - my dear, as it is, Byzantium” (96).

Even this intimate confession about the "native" Byzantine art is worth a lot, testifies to a deep understanding of the essence of real art. For all and throughout his life, his painful search for "pure and stylish beauty in art" (80) Vrubel well understood that this beautiful is an artistic expression of something deep, expressed only by these means. This boiled down to his long search for a form both when writing the famous lilac bush (109), and when working on Christian subjects for Kiev churches - the author's, artistic rethinking of the Byzantine and Old Russian stylistics of temple art, and when working on the eternal theme of the Demon for him, and when painting any picture. And he connected them with a purely Russian specificity of artistic thinking. “Now I’m back in Abramtsevo and again it’s doused me, no, it’s not doused, but I hear that intimate national note that I so want to catch on the canvas and in the ornament. This is the music of a whole person, not dismembered by the distractions of an ordered, differentiated and pale West ”(79).

And the music of this "whole person" can only be conveyed by purely pictorial means, therefore he constantly and painfully seeks "picturesqueness" in each of his work, notices it in nature. Yes, in fact, only such a nature attracts his attention. In 1883, in a letter from Peterhof to his parents, he described in detail the paintings in work and in plans, and all his attention was drawn exclusively to their pictorial side, to pure painting. "Instead of music" in the evenings he goes to look closely at the "very picturesque life" of local fishermen. “I took a liking to one old man between them: a face as dark as a copper penny, with faded gray hair and a tousled beard into felt; a smoky, tarred sweatshirt, white with brown stripes, strangely wrapped around his old waist with protruding shoulder blades, monstrous boots on his feet; his boat, dry inside and above, resembles weathered bone in shades; from the keel, wet, dark, velvety green, awkwardly arched - exactly like the back of some sea fish. A lovely boat - with patches of fresh wood, a silky shine in the sun reminiscent of the surface of Kuchkurov's straws. Add to it the lilac, bluish-blue tints of the evening swell, cut by the whimsical curves of the blue, reddish-green silhouette of the reflection, and this is the picture that I intend to paint ”(92-93).

The "picture" is so richly and picturesquely described that we can almost see it with our own eyes. Close to this he describes some of his other works and new ideas. At the same time, he does not forget to emphasize them.

picturesque character, picturesque nuances of the type: “This is a sketch for subtle nuances: silver, plaster of paris, lime, furniture coloring and upholstery, dress (blue) - a delicate and delicate scale; then the body transforms with a warm and deep chord to the variegation of colors and everything is covered with the harsh power of the blue velvet of the hat ”(92). Hence, it is clear that at noisy gatherings of modern youth, where questions of the purpose and significance of the plastic arts are discussed and the aesthetic treatises of Proudhon and Lessing are read, Vrubel is the only and consistent defender of the thesis "art for art", while "a mass of defenders of the utilization of art" opposes him ( 90). The same aesthetic position led him to the "World of Art", where he was immediately recognized as an authority and he felt himself a full participant in this movement of defenders of artistry in art. “We, the World of Art,” says Vrubel, not without pride, “want to find real bread for society” (102). And this bread is a good realistic art, where, with the help of purely pictorial means, not official documents of visible reality are created, but poetic works expressing the deep states of the soul ("illusion the soul"), awakening it "from the little things of everyday life with stately images" (113) , delivering spiritual pleasure to the viewer.

K. Korovin, who accepted the program of the world of art and actively participated in their exhibitions, studied the aesthetic-romantic view of nature and art from the wonderful landscape painter A.K. Savrasov. He remembered many of the teacher's aesthetic statements and followed them in his life and work. “The main thing,” Korovin wrote down Savrasov’s words to his students, among whom he and Levitan were in the forefront, “is contemplation - a sense of the motive of nature. Art and landscapes are not needed if there is no feeling. " “If there is no love for nature, then you don’t have to be an artist, don’t.<...>I need romance. Motive. Romance is immortal. The mood is necessary. Nature breathes forever. Always sings, and her song is solemn. There is no higher delight in contemplation of nature. After all, the earth is paradise - and life is a mystery, a beautiful mystery. Yes, a secret. Glorify life. An artist is the same poet ”(144, 146).

These and similar words of the teacher were very close to the spirit of Korovin himself, who retained the romantic and aesthetic pathos of Savrasov, but in expressing the beauty of nature he went much further than his teacher along the path of finding the latest artistic techniques and using modern pictorial finds, in particular impressionist ones. In theoretical terms, he does not make any discoveries, but simply, and sometimes even quite primitive

expresses his aesthetic position, akin to the position of the World of Artists and sharply contradicting the "aesthetics of life" of the Itinerants and democratically oriented aesthetics and art critics (like Pisarev, Stasov and others), which both him and Vrubel, and all the World of Artists after the first exhibitions of 1898 were recorded in bulk as decadents.

Korovin writes that from childhood he felt something fantastic, mysterious and beautiful in nature, and throughout his life he never tired of enjoying this mysterious beauty of nature. “How beautiful the evenings, sunsets, how much mood and impressions there are in nature,” he repeats, almost word for word, from Savrasov’s lessons. - This joy is like music, the perception of the soul. What poetic sadness ”(147). And in his art, he strove to express, embody the directly perceived beauty of nature, the impression of the experienced mood. At the same time, he was deeply convinced that "the art of painting has one goal - admiration for beauty" (163). He gave this maxim to Polenov himself when he asked him to speak about his large canvas "Christ and the Sinner." Out of decency, Korovin praised the painting, but remained cold to the subject matter, for he felt the coldness in the master's pictorial means themselves. At the same time, he actually followed the concept of Polenov himself, who, as Korovin once wrote down, was the first to tell his students “about pure painting, how it is written ... about the variety of colors ”(167). This how and became the main thing for Korovin in all his work.

“Feeling the beauty of paint, light - this is how art is expressed a little, but it is truly true to take, enjoy freely, the relationship of tones. Tones, tones are truer and more sober - they are content ”(221). Follow the principles of the impressionists in creativity. Search for a plot for tone, in tones, in color relations - the content of the picture. It is clear that such statements and searches were extremely revolutionary both for Russian academicians of painting and for the Itinerants of the 90s. XIX century. Only young people of the world of art could understand them, although they themselves had not yet reached the courage of Korovin and the Impressionists, but they treated them with reverence. With all this enthusiasm for searches in the field of purely artistic expressiveness, Korovin was well aware of the general aesthetic meaning of art in its historical retrospective. “Only art makes a person out of a person,” - the intuitive insight of the Russian artist, ascending in the heights of German classical aesthetics, to the aesthetics of the most important romantics. And here, too, unexpected for Korovin, a polemic with positivists and materialists: “It is not true, Christianity

did not deprive a person of a sense of aesthetics. Christ commanded to live and not bury talent. The pagan world was full of creativity, under Christianity, maybe twice ”(221).

In fact, Korovin, in his own way, seeks in art the same as all the world of art - artistry, the aesthetic quality of art. If it exists, he accepts any art: pagan, Christian, old and new, the most modern (impressionism, neo-impressionism, cubism). If only it would act on “aesthetic perception”, deliver “spiritual pleasure” (458). Therefore, his special interest in the decorativeness of painting as a purely aesthetic property. He writes extensively about the decorative qualities of theatrical sets, on which he constantly worked. And he saw the main purpose of the scenery in the fact that they organically participate in a single ensemble: dramatic action - music - decoration. In this regard, he wrote with special admiration about the successful production of Tsar Saltan by Rimsky-Korsakov, where the geniuses of Pushkin and the composer merged into a single action based on the scenery of Korovin himself (393).

In general, Korovin strove, as he writes, in his decorations, so that they give the eyes of the audience the same pleasure as music does to the ear. “I wanted the viewer's eye to enjoy aesthetically as well as the ear of the soul - music” (461). Therefore, in the foreground in his work, he always has how which it infers from something artist, not what which should be a consequence how... He writes about this repeatedly in his draft notes and letters. Wherein how is not something far-fetched, artificially tortured by the artist. No, according to Korovin, it is a consequence of his organic search for the "language of beauty", moreover, the search for an unconstrained, organic one - “art forms are only good when they are from love, freedom, from being unconstrained in themselves” (290). And true is any art where such an involuntary, but coupled with sincere searches, expression of beauty in an original form takes place.

Under all these and similar judgments of Korovin, almost every one of the world of art could subscribe. The search for the aesthetic quality of art, the ability to express it in an adequate form was the main task of this community, and almost all of its members managed to solve it in their own way in their work, to create, although not brilliant (with the exception of some outstanding paintings by Vrubel), but unique artistically valuable works of art that have taken their rightful place in the history of art.

Notes (edit)

See at least monographs: Benois A.N. The emergence of the "World of Art". L., 1928; Etkind M. Alexander Nikolaevich Benois. L.-M., 1965; A.P. Gusarova "World of Art". L., 1972; Lapshina N.P. "World of Art". Essays on history and creative practice. M., 1977; Pruzhan I. Konstantin Somov. M., 1972; Zhuravleva E.V. K.A. Somov. M., 1980; S.V. Golynets L.S. Bakst. L., 1981; Pozharskaya M.N. Russian theatrical and decorative art of the late XIX - early XX century. M., 1970, etc.

Artists of the World of Art.

The World of Art is an organization that emerged in St. Petersburg in 1898 and brought together masters of the highest artistic culture, the artistic elite of Russia in those years. The "World of Art" began with evenings at A. Benois's house dedicated to art, literature and music. The people who gathered there were united by a love of beauty and the confidence that it can only be found in art, since reality is ugly. Having also arisen as a reaction to the petty themes of late Wanderers, its edification and illustrativeness, the "World of Art" soon turned into one of the major phenomena of Russian artistic culture. This association was attended by almost all famous artists - Benois, Somov, Bakst, E.E. Lancere, Golovin, Dobuzhinsky, Vrubel, Serov, K. Korovin, Levitan, Nesterov, Ostroumova-Lebedeva, Bilibin, Sapunov, Sudeikin, Ryabushkin, Roerich, Kustodiev, Petrov-Vodkin, Malyavin, as well as Larionov and Goncharova. Personality was of great importance for the formation of this association. Diaghilev, patron and organizer of exhibitions, and later - impresario of Russian ballet and opera tours abroad ("Russian Seasons", which introduced Europe to the work of Chaliapin, Pavlova, Karsavina, Fokin, Nijinsky, etc. and showed the world an example of the highest culture of the forms of various arts: music , dance, painting, scenography). At the initial stage of the formation of the "World of Art" Diaghilev arranged an exhibition of English and German watercolors in St. Petersburg in 1897, then an exhibition of Russian and Finnish artists in 1898. From 1899 to 1904 he edited a magazine under the same name, consisting of two departments: artistic and literary. The editorials of the first issues of the magazine clearly formulated the main provisions of the "world of art» about the autonomy of art, that the problems of modern culture are exclusively problems of the artistic form and that the main task of art is to educate the aesthetic tastes of Russian society, primarily through acquaintance with the works of world art. We must pay tribute to them: thanks to the "world of art", English and German art was really appreciated in a new way, and most importantly, the painting of the Russian 18th century and the architecture of St. Petersburg classicism became a discovery for many. "Miriskusniki" fought for "criticism as art", proclaiming the ideal of a critic-artist with a high professional culture and erudition. The type of such a critic was embodied by one of the founders of the "World of Art" A.N. Benoit.

"Miriskusniki" organized exhibitions. The first was the only international one, which united, in addition to Russians, artists from France, England, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Norway, Finland, etc. Both St. Petersburg and Moscow painters and graphic artists took part in it. But the crack between these two schools - St. Petersburg and Moscow - has been outlined almost from the first day. In March 1903, the last, fifth exhibition of the "World of Art" was closed, in December 1904 the last issue of the magazine "World of Art" was published. Most of the artists moved to the Union of Russian Artists, organized on the basis of the Moscow exhibition “36”. Diaghilev went entirely to ballet and theater. His last significant work in the visual arts was a grandiose historical exhibition of Russian painting from icon painting to modern times in the Paris Autumn Salon 1906, then exhibited in Berlin and Venice (1906-1907). In the section of contemporary painting, the main place was occupied by the "world of art." overall for Western criticism and a real triumph of Russian art

The leading artist of the "World of Art" was Konstantin Andreevich Somov(1869-1939). The son of the chief curator of the Hermitage, who graduated from the Academy of Arts and traveled to Europe, Somov received an excellent education. Creative maturity came to him early, but, as the researcher (V.N.

Somov, as we know him, appeared in the portrait of the artist Martynova ("Lady in Blue", 1897-1900, Tretyakov Gallery), in the painting-portrait "Echo of the Past Tense" (1903, on maps, aqu., Gouache, Tretyakov Gallery ), where he creates a poetic description of the fragile, anemic female beauty of a decadent model, refusing to convey the real everyday signs of modernity. He dresses the models in old costumes, gives their appearance the features of secret suffering, sadness and dreaminess, painful brokenness.

Earlier than anyone else in The World of Art, Somov turned to the themes of the past, to the interpretation of the 18th century. ("Letter", 1896; "Confidentiality", 1897), being the predecessor of the Versailles landscapes of Benoit. He was the first to create an unreal world, woven from the motives of the noble estate and court culture and his own purely subjective artistic sensations, permeated with irony. The historicism of the "World of Artists" was an escape from reality. Not the past, but its dramatization, longing for its irrevocability - this is their main motive. Not true fun, but playing fun with kisses in the alleys - this is Somov.

Other works by Somov are pastoral and gallant festivities (Laughed Kiss, 1908, RM; Walk of the Marquise, 1909, RM), full of caustic irony, spiritual emptiness, even hopelessness. Love scenes from the 18th - early 19th centuries. given always with a touch of eroticism Somov worked a lot as a graphic artist, he designed a monograph by S. Diaghilev about D. Levitsky, a work by A. Benois about Tsarskoe Selo. The book as a single organism with its rhythmic and stylistic unity was raised by him to an extraordinary height. Somov is not an illustrator, he “illustrates not a text, but an era, using a literary device as a springboard,” wrote A.A. Sidorov, and this is very true.

Somov "The Lady in Blue" "At the Skating Rink" Benoit. A. "The King's Walk"

The ideological leader of the "World of Art" was Alexander Nikolaevich Benois(1870-1960) - an unusually versatile talent. A painter, graphic easel painter and illustrator, theater artist, director, author of ballet librettos, theoretician and art historian, musical figure, he was, in the words of A. Bely, the main politician and diplomat of the World of Art. Coming from the upper stratum of the St. Petersburg artistic intelligentsia (composers and conductors, architects and painters), he first studied at the law faculty of St. Petersburg University.

As an artist, he is related to Somov by stylistic tendencies and an addiction to the past (“I am intoxicated with Versailles, this is some kind of illness, love, criminal passion ... I have completely moved into the past ...”). Benois's Versailles landscapes merged the historical reconstruction of the 17th century. and contemporary impressions of the artist, his perception of French classicism, French engraving. Hence the clear composition, clear spatiality, grandeur and cold severity of rhythms, contrasting the grandeur of art monuments and the smallness of human figurines, which are only staffage among them (the 1st Versailles series 1896–1898 entitled “The Last Walks of Louis XIV”). In the second Versailles series (1905-1906), the irony, which is also characteristic of the first sheets, is colored with almost tragic notes ("The King's Walk",). Benoit's thinking is the thinking of a theater artist par excellence, who knew and felt the theater perfectly.

Nature is perceived by Benois in an associative connection with history (views of Pavlovsk, Peterhof, Tsarskoye Selo, performed by him in watercolor technique).

In a series of paintings from the Russian past, commissioned by the Moscow publishing house Knebel (illustrations for "The Tsar's Hunt"), in scenes of the noble, landlord life of the 18th century. Benois created an intimate image of this era, albeit a somewhat theatrical "Parade under Paul I". Benois the illustrator (Pushkin, Hoffmann) is a whole page in the history of the book. Unlike Somov, Benoit creates a narrative illustration. The plane of the page is not an end in itself for him. The illustrations for "The Queen of Spades" were more likely complete independent works, not so much "book art", according to A.A. Sidorov, how much "art is in the book." A masterpiece of book illustration was the graphic design of The Bronze Horseman (1903,1905,1916,1921–1922, ink and watercolor imitating color woodcut). In a series of illustrations for the great poem, the main character is the architectural landscape of St. Petersburg, now solemnly pathetic, now peaceful, now ominous, against which the figure of Eugene seems even more insignificant. This is how Benoit expresses the tragic conflict between the fate of the Russian statehood and the personal fate of the little man (“And the poor madman all night long, / Wherever he turned his feet, / 3 and he was everywhere the Copper Horseman / With a heavy stomp he rode”).

"Bronze Horseman"

"Parade under Paul I"

As a theater artist, Benoit designed the performances of the Russian Seasons, of which the most famous was the ballet Petrushka to the music of Stravinsky, worked extensively at the Moscow Art Theater, and subsequently on almost all major European stages.

The activity of Benoit, an art critic and art historian, who, together with Grabar, updated the methods, techniques and themes of Russian art history, is a whole stage in the history of art history (see R. Muter's "History of Painting of the 19th Century" - volume "Russian Painting", 1901– 1902; "Russian School of Painting", published in 1904; "Tsarskoe Selo during the reign of Empress Elizabeth Petrovna", 1910; articles in the magazines "World of Art" and "Old Years", "Artistic Treasures of Russia", etc.).

The third in the core of the "World of Art" was Lev Samuilovich Bakst(1866-1924), who became famous as a theater artist and was the first among the "world of art" to gain fame in Europe. He came to the "World of Art" from the Academy of Arts, then professed the Art Nouveau style, adjoined the left trends in European painting. At the first exhibitions of the World of Art, he exhibited a number of pictorial and graphic portraits (Benoit, Bely, Somov, Rozanov, Gippius, Diaghilev), where nature, coming in a stream of living conditions, was transformed into a kind of ideal idea of ​​a contemporary person. Bakst created the brand of the magazine "World of Art", which became the emblem of Diaghilev's "Russian Seasons" in Paris. There are no motives of the 18th century in Bakst's graphics. and manor themes. He gravitates towards antiquity, and towards the Greek archaic, interpreted symbolically. His painting "Ancient Horror" - "Terror antiquus" (tempera, 1908, RM) enjoyed particular success among the Symbolists. A terrible stormy sky, lightning that illuminates the abyss of the sea and the ancient city - and the archaic crust with a mysterious frozen smile dominates over this entire universal catastrophe. Soon Bakst completely went into theatrical and decorative work, and his scenery and costumes for the ballets of Diaghilev's entreprise, performed with extraordinary brilliance, masterly, artistically, brought him world fame. It was designed for performances with Anna Pavlova, Fokine's ballets. The artist made sets and costumes for Rimsky-Korsakov's Scheherazade, Stravinsky's Firebird (both -1910), Ravel's Daphnis and Chloe, and for the ballet Debussy's Afternoon of a Faun (both -1912).

"Ancient Horror" Afternoon of a Faun "Portrait of Gippius

Of the first generation of the "world of art", the younger in age was Evgeny Evgenievich Lanceray (1875-1946), in his work, having touched upon all the main problems of book graphics at the beginning of the XX century. (see his illustrations for the book "Legends of the Ancient Castles of Brittany", for Lermontov, the cover for "Nevsky Prospect" by Bozheryanov, etc.). Lanceray created a number of watercolors and lithographs in St. Petersburg (Kalinkin Bridge, Nikolsky Market, etc.). Architecture occupies a huge place in his historical compositions ("Empress Elizaveta Petrovna in Tsarskoe Selo", 1905, State Tretyakov Gallery). We can say that a new type of historical picture was created in the works of Serov, Benoit, Lanceray - it is devoid of a plot, but at the same time it perfectly recreates the appearance of the era, evokes many historical, literary and aesthetic associations. One of the best creations of Lanceray - 70 drawings and watercolors for the story by L.N. Tolstoy's "Hadji Murad" (1912-1915), which Benoit considered "an independent song, perfectly engaging in the mighty music of Tolstoy."

In the graphics of Mstislav Valerianovich Dobuzhinsky(1875–1957) not so much Petersburg of the Pushkin era or the 18th century is presented, as a modern city, which he was able to convey with almost tragic expressiveness ("The Old House", 1905, watercolor, Tretyakov Gallery), as well as a human inhabitant of such cities (" Man with Glasses, 1905-1906, pastel, State Tretyakov Gallery: lonely, against the background of dull houses, a sad man, whose head resembles a skull). The urbanism of the future inspired Dobuzhinsky with panic. He also worked a lot in illustration, where the most remarkable can be considered his cycle of ink drawings for "White Nights" by Dostoevsky (1922). Dobuzhinsky also worked in the theater, designed for Nemirovich-Danchenko's Nikolai Stavrogin (staging of Dostoevsky's Demons), Turgenev's plays A Month in the Country and Freeloader.

A special place in the "World of Art" is Nicholas Roerich(1874-1947). An expert in the philosophy and ethnography of the East, an archaeologist and scientist, Roerich received an excellent education first at home, then at the Faculty of Law and History and Philology of St. Petersburg University, then at the Academy of Arts, in Kuindzhi's workshop, and in Paris at F. Cormon's studio. He early acquired the authority of a scientist. He was related to the “world of art” by the same love of retrospection, only not of the 17th – 18th centuries, but of pagan Slavic and Scandinavian antiquity, to Ancient Russia; stylistic tendencies, theatrical decorativeness (The Messenger, 1897, State Tretyakov Gallery; The Elders Are Converging, 1898, State Russian Museum; "Sinister", 1901, State Russian Museum). Roerich was most closely associated with the philosophy and aesthetics of Russian symbolism, but his art did not fit into the framework of the existing trends, for in accordance with the artist's worldview it appealed to all of humanity, as it were, with an appeal for a friendly union of all peoples. Hence the special epic character of his canvases.

"Heavenly battle"

"Overseas guests"

After 1905, the mood of pantheistic mysticism grew in Roerich's work. Historical themes give way to religious legends ("Heavenly Battle", 1912, RM). The Russian icon had a huge influence on Roerich: his decorative panel Cutting at Kerzhenets (1911) was exhibited while performing a fragment of the same title from Rimsky-Korsakov's opera The Legend of the Invisible City of Kitezh and the Maiden Fevronia in the Parisian Russian Seasons.

In the second generation of the "World of Art" one of the most gifted artists was Boris Mikhailovich Kustodiev(1878-1927), a student of Repin, who helped him in the work on the "State Council". Kustodiev is also characterized by stylization, but this is the stylization of folk popular prints. Hence the bright festive "Fairs", "Maslenitsa", "Balagans", hence his paintings from the bourgeois and merchant life, conveyed with light irony, but not without admiration for these red-cheeked, half-asleep beauties at the samovar and with saucers in plump fingers ("Merchant", 1915, RM; "The merchant's wife at tea", 1918, RM).

A.Ya. Golovin - one of the largest theater artists of the first quarter of the 20th century, I. Ya. Bilibin, A.P. Ostroumova-Lebedev and others.

The World of Art was a major aesthetic movement at the turn of the century, which overestimated the entire modern artistic culture, approved new tastes and problems, and returned to art, at the highest professional level, the lost forms of book graphics and theatrical and decorative painting, which acquired through their efforts all-European recognition, which created new art criticism, promoting Russian art abroad, in fact, even opening some of its stages, like the Russian XVIII century. "Miriskusniki" created a new type of historical painting, portrait, landscape with their own stylistic features (distinct stylistic tendencies, the predominance of graphic techniques.