Terra sebv s acta mvsei sabesiensi s

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

---