T. M. Stepanskaya, L. I. Nekhvyadovich
162
geographical principles, finds reflection in national (regional) art.
5
According
to T. M. Stepanskaya, the basic features of the Russian School of easel
painting are: the presence of common motifs; the stability of compositional
schemes; the common character of coloristic developments; the relatedness
of textural developments; the presence of facts of mastering general motifs
in aquarelle, lithography and linoleum engraving; and also the significant
role of landscape painting as a spiritual constituent of the picture.
6
In this
regard, the significance of artistic traditions and their role in developing the
artistic canon is great, as such traditions are smoothly absorbed into the
systems of the school itself offering, on the one hand, their unique
characteristics and a way in to the study of the school’s national
idiosyncrasies and, on the other, their particular ethnocultural memory.
7
The term “Russian style” is used in native art studies to describe the
creative works of masters who draw upon traditions from Russian national
art. The notions “Russian,” “Russian tradition” and “national identity” are
connected with native Russian artistic traditions, reflecting the originality of
sources from within Russian culture.
8
There is a theory that the originality
of the Russian School arises from the mutual influence of two spatial-
temporal models: the archaic-mythological or folklore model and the
national-spatial model.
9
The archaic-mythological (folklore) model is characterised by its
connection with Slavonic pagan mythological traditions.
10
Material for its
reconstruction is provided by the analysis of folkloric works and the study
of the more archaic and stable images in Russian decorative and applied
arts. The national-spatial model of the world arises within the context of
two influences. Firstly, there is the influence of natural-geographical factors
(character of the landscape, typical climate, hours of daylight, local flora,
etc.) which form not only the subject matter but also a number of
archetypical images and, consequently, shape the worldview of Russian
painters. Secondly, there are historical-ethnographical factors (specific
location within the territory, population density, prior types of labour
activity, threatening factors relating to the survival of the artist’s ethnos).
Essentially, the author of this theory, E. S. Medkova, insists on the role of
ethnocultural tradition as a source of the national distinctiveness of the
Russian School.
11
5
Vlasov 1998, p. 599.
6
Stepanskaya, Melehova 2013, p. 87-93.
7
Nekchvyadovich 2009, p. 97.
8
Kirichenko 1997, p. 8-10.
9
Medkova 2009, p. 113.
10
Ibid.
11
Ibid.
www.cclbsebes.ro/muzeul-municipal-ioan-raica.html / www.cimec.ro
Ethnocultural Traditions as a Basis of National Originality of Schools of Art
163
V. M. Petrov, an expert in fine arts, offers a hypothesis regarding the
role of geographical space: where different national cultures function,
individual styles of each national school arise.
12
He suggests that the
particular preferences of the Russian School have their roots in geographical
circumstances, and their distinctiveness is determined according to the
prevalent national “light-colour model.” The “light-colour model” is based
on the concept that sunlight occupies a central position in the system of
humanity’s visual life. With regards to local peculiarities of sunlight, Russia
is a northern domain, whose light-colour model is characterised by diffuse
solar rays; consequently, its model tends towards the use of white. The
Russian school, in the opinion of investigators, can be characterised by the
trinity of white, red and green.
13
In the authors’ opinion, art in practice
prevents the literal confirmation of this hypothesis, as artists’ interpretation
of the surrounding world is characterised by variety and individuality of
perception, creative method and style.
Historical circumstances prevented it from becoming the leading
artistic idea of the epoch and creating a stable and mature tradition. As well
as everyday themes, the emerging Russian genre painting was also
characterised by a diversity of narrative material and a search for stylistic
individuality. Y. V. Bruk states that the “genre issue in Russian art is a
problem of art seeking a way into national life.”
14
This was reflected in
genre paintings of the mid-18
th
century: in pictures of Russian life, the
“costume tableaus”
15
of J. Le Prince, the depiction of Moscow streets by J.
Develi, national portraits and “heads”
16
by P. Rotari, and sketches of
Russian peasants by A. Losenko. The second half of the 18
th
century saw
efforts to distinguish the purely genre picture from other types, thus around
this time the first examples of Russian genre painting appear. In 1770, the
Academy of Arts started a “homework” class.
Two of M. Shibanov’s works, The Peasant Dinner (1774) and The
Celebration of the Wedding Contract (1777), are considered to represent the
origin of ethnographical themes in Russian genre painting. The pictures are
held by the State Tretyakov Gallery.
17
Let us consider the composition of
12
Petrov 2004, p. 32.
12
Ibid., p. 32-34.
13
Ibid., p. 32.
12
Ibid., p. 32-34.
14
Bruk 1990, p. 231.
15
Costume tableau: a theme in Russian fine art of the 18
th
-first half of the 19
th
century.
16
The head: a type of small picture, where young girls, women and youths are depicted as
far down as the shoulder or breast.
17
The State Tretyakov Gallery: A Federal State Budgetary Cultural Institution “All-Russian
Museum Association
The State Tretyakov Gallery” (STG), Moscow, Russia.
www.cclbsebes.ro/muzeul-municipal-ioan-raica.html / www.cimec.ro