Prof. Dr. S.V. Zagraevsky
The congress of Moscow Union of Artists
or a feast during the plague?
Attention!
The following text was translated from the Russian original by the computer program
and has not yet been edited.
So it can be used only for general introduction.
Here is the full text article. With some cuts article was published
in the newspaper "Moscow Artist», № 2, 2003.
Note: in 2009 for the elapsed
time since this writing, the guide of the Moscow Artists' Union took place in
ordinary stationery castle ": in 2006, Vasily Bubnov was replaced by board
chairman Ivan Kazansky (Chairman sculpture section), who, in turn, 2008 - Victor Glukhov (Chairman
picturesque sections). In general, the article is
relevant to the present day, and all new "art" group
Bubnov-Glukhova-Kazan are in keeping with their long-term activity: for the
Union lost the Moscow home of the sculptor (1 st Spasonalivkovsky lane., 4), many creative studios under the threat of selling the
premises is situated Library MoA (st. Upper Maslivka, 9), and the building of
sculptural plant (Starovatutinsky travel, 12) secret from members of the
sculpture section was given a pledge "Alta-Bank".
In late February 2003 Congress
passed another of the Moscow Union of Artists (USDA). For those who are not traces the
vicissitudes of life "post-Soviet" creative unions, explained: USDA
should not be confused with the famous MOSSHom - the Moscow branch of the Union
of Soviet Artists. In 1991 in the wake of the general division of the Moscow branch (even then the Union of Artists of the
RSFSR) emerged as an independent organization and into the "free
floating" under the name of the Moscow Union of Artists, taking virtually
all property earned by the labor of many generations of artists in Moscow.
The property was considerable:
three large exhibition halls, four art galleries, several thousand creative
studios, art plants in each section (painters, graphic artists, sculptors,
applied arts, poster), House Veterans, House of creativity, depot clinic ... In short, all that was required
for the effective implementation of the main functions of the creative union -
social protection and security of Moscow Artists.
From what Moscow Union of
Artists "sailed" to its Congress in 2003? Did his head Vasily Bubnov (in
the early nineties - Vice-President, in recent years - Chairman of the Board)
to preserve and enhance what is left of his "inherited" from the
Moscow Union of Artists of the USSR? Was the work of the Union, unanimously recognized by Congress "satisfactory", is indeed the case? Let's see.
"Moscow House of Artists"
at the Kuznetsk, 11, rented and actually redeveloped under the gift shop, in
the remaining areas are carried out only three or four art exhibitions a year. Not surprisingly - in 2001,
merchants tenant has reconstructed the "House" and now, of course,
"tune" them.
Most of the central office of
the Moscow Union of Artists - Estates in Starosad, 5, where there were
considerable showrooms - leased to several organizations, including
"lush" restaurant. In the evening, a quiet
courtyard with a statue of St. George into a "smoking room" for the
appropriate audience.
The only regularly operating
room at the Kuznetsk, 20 - also nothing more than a pathetic remnant of its
former splendor: in Soviet times he was on the ground floor, and now the first
floor and half of the second put (or provided by the so-called
"cooperation agreement"), many different organizations . Hall now huddled on the second
floor, where visitors drop in very rarely.
In the Moscow Union of Artists
have about 3500 shops, of which approximately 2700 artists occupy Member MOA,
the rest are "neuchtenkoy" and leased to third parties. Incidentally, the distribution
of the recorded "workshop is run by sections, that is actually Studios
went out of control of the Union.
Art salons (Petrovka 12, Leninsky
Prospekt, 99; Stroginskaya Blvd., 30, Sokolnicheskaya Sq., 4) were in the early
1990's, along with significant financial resources transferred to JSC
"Moscow Artist", where the USDA has been a controlling stake - 51%. It seems to be okay, but it was
only the first step. Then the board of the Moscow
Artists' Union has decided to increase the authorized capital of JSC, and when
he had to pay its share, "turned out" that the Union had no money for
it! Other shareholders, of course,
all made on time, and the share of USDA dropped to 20%, which meant the loss
control salons. What was it - or criminal
negligence by the Bubnov trick and his first deputy Victor Glukhova?
Currently JSC "Moscow
Artist" already belong only three compartment, and the most profitable -
at Petrovka - finally gone "on the side." How did his alienation - is
unknown. At the Congress in 2003 about
these salons have nobody even thought of.
Lost depot clinic, a house in Ermolaevsky Lane, unfinished house on the street veterans. Ak. Varga, House of creativity in
Tarusa Gzhel ceramic factory. Collection of USDA 18000
paintings in 1993 was sold to a certain Vladykin for a symbolic price (several
thousand dollars, although the assessment of the Tretyakov Gallery the cost was
several million).
In fairness, we note that the
President of the Moscow Union of Artists in 1993 was still Oleg Savostyuk, but
Bubnov was his first deputy. Known clerical castling was
"the first person or second person" can skillfully evade liability
for any fraud. Now about the same thing play
out Bubnov and his deputy (who was also chairman of the picturesque sections)
Glukhov. "Extreme" are one and
then another, and eventually no one to ask. Sometimes this
"tandem" connected CEO USDA Zaryankin Herman, director of the
association service MoA Levon Karapetyan (in charge of the workshops are
located), Chairman of the sculpture section of Ivan Kazansky, several other
people from their immediate environment, and as a result of "water"
is so muddy that the group which
seized power in the MoA, with impunity, "it catches fish" for twelve
years.
And
the "catch" there is still that. Despite the fact that the
greater part of the ownership of the Moscow Union of Artists squandered (find
no other word I can), huge funds held by the Ministry of Agriculture and the
budget now. Let us roughly calculate, on the
amounts involved.
By the most conservative
assessment, the income of the Moscow Union of Artists from the lease of 10,000 square meters. m area in the center of Moscow with an average (and in fact low) cost of $ 150 per square meter per year would
have to be 1.500.000 (six million dollars) annually. But in fact, the cost of rent
per square meter in the center - not 150, and at least $ 500!
But, for example, in 1999, the
official budget of the Ministry of Agriculture was 3 million rubles (about 100
thousand dollars), of which 95% went to the staff, and 5% - for social
assistance to artists. In 2003, the Union of Having
reported to the Congress on the budget of almost $ 8 million rubles (about 270
thousand dollars). The money was generated from
rental of 4,5 million rubles (about 150 thousand dollars). How much money has been spent
with the content management apparatus, and how much - on social assistance to
artists, speakers wisely silent. Apparently, the ratio of
approximately corresponded disgrace in 1999.
But in any case, we may conclude
that the 1999 budget by the Moscow Union of Artists was held, at least 1,4
million dollars, and in 2002 - about 1.25 million. This is a minimum. In fact, the amounts are not
reflected in the budget of the Ministry of Agriculture, estimated at 4-5
million dollars a year!
Where is the money in whose
pockets they settled, why they do not see the 6100 "ordinary" members
of the Union?
However, the "ordinary"
artists - a special talk. In theory, the election
management and evaluation of the board - their prerogative, after all the
Moscow Union of Artists - a public organization. In fact, we have the following
"democratic" procedure: the general assembly sections USDA is going
to average a quarter of their size, because the board sections invite only
"their" and verbally. These "their" claim
the list of delegates to the congress, which elects the "best
friends" in the reign of the Union, and then unanimously recognizes the
work of the board "satisfactory". This, in turn, elect the leaders
in "best friends" - Bubnov and Glukhova.
So it turns out that the Moscow
Union of Artists all members are equal, but some, like George Orwell,
"more equal than others".
And as the sounds in the Charter
of the Ministry of Agriculture grounds for exclusion from the Union and,
accordingly, taking away the shop? Purely in the Soviet:
"gross and systematic violation of the Charter of the Ministry of
Agriculture and application of moral and material damage". What is a "gross and
systematic"? What is a "moral
damages" and to whom it should be applied? But how the board decides, so be
it. So it turns out that at any
time, any artist can throw out of the studio. For example, in the last
Congress on the proposal of the Board was expelled "troublemaker" -
muralist Vladimir Bogachev, "who had a nerve to" write a statement
about abuses of the leaders of the Ministry of Agriculture to the prosecutor.
The idea is that in the interests
of "ordinary" members of the Moscow Union of Artists is the
exhibition industry. Most of the Congress in 2003
said about the large-scale event in the Manege, dedicated to the 70 th
anniversary of Moscow Union of Artists. But in fact it is good beginning
was completely ruined.
Holding an exhibition in the
most "golden" time - on New Year's, it used to be the one celebrated
in 1962. But for 40 years, much has
changed.
Yes, Khrushchev yelled at
artists and threatened them uranium mines. I am not in any way nostalgic
for those days. But why do we never cease to
live by the principle of "steal the nose - tail zavyaznet"? Instead of yelling Nikita
Sergeyevich - silence the media and the empty rooms (a huge crowd of artists,
their relatives and friends at the opening, of course, do not count). Instead of selecting office
"Socialist realism" - personal responsibility clerical labels with
the initials instead of names. Instead of political intrigue
chairman CX RSFSR Vladimir Serov - silent extortion of the current leaders of
the Moscow Union of Artists.
And if in 1962 after officials
vystavkoma broke even "belyutintsy", who in 2002 broke through the
absence of any public response from so unprofessionally organized the
exhibition?
Vasily Bubnov! Artists are well aware, how many
square meters of property you rent, and how the proceeds of millions of dollars
go nowhere. So at least bring the money in
the procedure room of the Union! At least do a competent
exhibition activities! Though invite professional art -
exhibition curators! Just a little money spend on
advertising, media publications and print directories! It's all paid back with interest
...
The
voice of one crying in the wilderness? Unfortunately, yes. That place and by the Moscow
Union of Artists, and its section "blind persons" exhibition -
"mass graves" - with thousands of anonymous works.
And in The Art of Nations
"(February 2003) in the Central House of Artists USDA provided all the
flow and direction, but completely haphazard. However, some "system"
in this systematic order was present, but it referred not to the expositions,
and to a desire vystavkoma flatter his superiors. Thus, the exposition of painting
begins with ... five works President of the Academy of Arts Zurab Tsereteli (though, like exhibition in honor of the 70 th anniversary
USDA). The rest of the artists gave to
hang a maximum one or two. Even
the most "Bubnov. But Irina Glukhova, wife of
Chairman of the picturesque sections poveski awarded at the beginning of
exposure, between Natalia Nesterova and Tatyana Nazarenko. Probably, otherwise as
"cronyism" this situation can not be named.
And the "Art-Salon" in
the CHA (mid-March) "cronyism" became even more exaggerated form:
half (!) Exposure USDA was busy working two sons Glukhova. In this regard, want only to
say: Victor, your boys have a long and, like all of us, not an easy life. Why do you lepite of them
followers of a very questionable morality, but also teaches them to an
unprecedented "of Exhibition Preferences"? Not always will you in the
leadership of USDA ...
The Congress leaders of the
Moscow Artists' Union spoke extensively about the need for "PR"
exhibition of the Union. Such declarative conversations
are not the first year, without giving any results. Why? But let's think: Do I need a
manual MOA literate exposition activities? Do I need to carry out loud and
truly effective exhibition? After all, their success will
attract the attention of the organizers of the general public and media
representatives. And if, God forbid, journalists,
and behind them and the public, will begin to "poke his nose in the
affairs of the Ministry of Agriculture guidelines. And then the artists with new
force irresistibly to join, and yet they must be somehow to work, to create the
appearance of relief, put on a waiting list of workshops!
No "extra" artists do
not need the leadership of the Ministry of Agriculture. Too bad most of them can not
refuse: leased to banks and firms to multi-million dollar property, inherited
from the Soviet Union still stood out not for a dozen officials from the art,
namely, for artists. But fewer new members of the
USDA and the lower the effectiveness of exhibitions, the less chance that the
society and the state of this recall. So, the artists engage in
"undesirable"!
But most of all to the huge problems - it is please: from
poor organization is now the press, public and government officials sick ahead
of time to hear about the problems are not interesting, and "unaccounted
for" a million in the budget of the Moscow Artists' Union is not visible!
Then - on the principle of
"black sheep even a tuft of wool": had at least this exhibition,
tick, reported at the Congress - and okay. Accidentally came sluggishly
visitor looked at the picture and left. Guide USDA can sleep - no one will disturb ...
Thus, today the Moscow Union of
Artists does not perform any of its functions. The artists are not provided any
effective financial, social, legal and show support. So why do artists today take MA?
The answer is simple - in the
hope of the workshop. But in order to dispel
unnecessary illusion, which unabashedly uses current USDA guidance, carry out
another simple calculation.
The Union has about 2700
"recorded" workshops. Members
of the USDA about 6100. In the year released an average
of about 40 workshops (usually in connection with the death of art - objects
such as houses on the streets Zholtovsky and Varga that could bring hundreds of
new USDA workshops, lost).
The most conservative estimate,
the studios claim to about 90% of the members of the Union (in fact, this
figure exceeds 100% because many shops are allocated to third parties).
Let's count: today, in 2003, the
length of the queue for the workshop is: 6100 - 2700 = 3400. Hence, all inscribed in the new
member of the MOA will receive through the studio: 3400 x 90%: 40 = 76 years,
ie in 2079. And every year, this period is extended,
for each of the Union shall take more than 40 members, and workshops at the
USDA are less and less.
Some artists find the time to
"negotiate" with the leadership of the relevant sections and get the
shop out of turn, but then for the rest of it getting pushed back,
respectively.
And it is a mockery of the
artists leadership of the Moscow Union of Artists proudly calls "the
struggle for their rights"?
In conclusion, we recall the
bleak poem written by one of the most famous Russian art critics (poetic
pseudonym - V. Dobrofobov) and published in № 4 "Art-Gazette in 2000.
Goals are coming,
Centuries flash,
And
in all USDA "Very Good" -
Resting on our laurels.
Everything that was once the Union,
Now - miniature.
Only Bubnov twisting his mustache,
As
if he - figure.
Where there once was a harvest
For the accession of the Spirit,
Now
the orange-homeless-
RNO
wrote one Glukhov.
Can
not save Beauty
Togo, in whom no Spirit.
Sweats
Glukhov from the canvas
In MA all hollow.
Moscow. 2003.
© Sergey Zagraevsky