«...у нас нет литературы художеств» (А.Н. Майков): к вопросу о состоянии российской художественной критики 1840 - начала 1850-х гг. Статья вторая. Новые веяния в русской художественной критике; Вестник Томского государственного университета; № 422
| Parent link: | Вестник Томского государственного университета/ Национальный исследовательский Томский государственный университет (ТГУ).— , 1998- № 422.— 2017.— [С. 32-39] |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Körperschaft: | |
| Zusammenfassung: | Заглавие с экрана Во второй статье цикла представлен обзор критических статей, появлявшихся с 1842 по 1847 г. в журналах «Отечественные записки» и «Современник» параллельно деятельности В.Г. Белинского и развивающих методологию главы новой русской критики в непосредственном приложении к произведениям пластического искусства. Концептуальный анализ содержания публикаций В.П. Боткина, П.Н. Кудрявцева, П.В. Анненкова, Вал.Н. Майкова об изобразительном искусстве позволяет установить важнейшие тенденции развития русской художественной критики в период ее специализации и профессионализации и выявить уникальность позиции каждого критика в контексте эстетического многоголосия эпохи культурногоперепутья. The second article of the cycle presents an overview of publications that reflect important changes in the condition of Russian art criticism of the 1840s, which started under the influence of V. G. Belinsky's critical works. In 1842, V.P. Botkin's review "Exhibition in the Saint Petersburg Imperial Academy of Arts in 1842", standing out from similar texts with its conceptual approach to the assessment of the pictures via comprehension of the condition of modern art and defining tendencies of its development, appeared. Botkin reflects on the critical condition of art, but, unlike the proponents of academism, his pathos does not come down to stating degradation of art during the practical age. Botkin raises the question of searching for the new content of art, which has to meet moral needs of the modern man. In 1846-47, P.N. Kudryavtsev published a set of articles reflecting his thoughts caused by the visit to the Belvedere and the Louvre. The author compensates for the significant drawback of the Russian "literature of art" of the time, which was only shaping its methodological basis. Historicism, educational principle, precision in aesthetical terminology and consecution of judgements made Kudryavtsev's articles meet the most important requirements of the age. Herewith, Kudryavtsev showed lack of interest to the problems of modern art. In "The Belvedere" and "Letters from Paris", the author does not emphasize, yet shows his loyalty to the academic view that the best periods in the history of pictorial art were in the past. In early 1847, V.N. Maikov joined the debate on the mission of modern art in his article "One Hundred Drawings from N.V. Gogol's Dead Souls". The critic considered advantages and disadvantages of Agin's drawings in the context of modern visual art development, taking into account the experience of landscape and genre painting. Maikov's speculation about the artistic principles of depicting the trivial, developing his previously stated "law of sympathy" and strengthening the anthropological aspect of his criticism as a whole, seems the most significant thesis of the work. Finally, another important factor in the development of Russian art criticism was P.V. Annenkov's review "The Louvre Exhibition of Paintings of 1847". The critic acknowledges the downfall of religious and history painting and mastery of genre painting in the French art. On the ground of this thesis, Annenkov goes to comprehension of creative experiments of some pioneer artists. Historicism, deep understanding of the social role of art together with the awareness of the necessity to save the artistic advantages of a piece of art make Annenkov's review an important factor in the history of Russian art criticism of the 1840s. The analysis of Botkin, Kudryavtsev, Annenkov and Maikov's publications helps to elicit the main tendencies of Russian art criticism development in the period of its specialization and professionalization and reveal the unique position of each critic in the context of the aesthetic polyphony of the time. |
| Sprache: | Russisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2017
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | http://dx.doi.org/10.17223/15617793/422/5 |
| Format: | Elektronisch Buchkapitel |
| KOHA link: | https://koha.lib.tpu.ru/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=658975 |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa0a2200000 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 658975 | ||
| 005 | 20250228173305.0 | ||
| 035 | |a (RuTPU)RU\TPU\network\27253 | ||
| 035 | |a RU\TPU\network\26505 | ||
| 090 | |a 658975 | ||
| 100 | |a 20181220d2017 k||y0rusy50 ca | ||
| 101 | 0 | |a rus | |
| 102 | |a RU | ||
| 135 | |a drcn ---uucaa | ||
| 181 | 0 | |a i | |
| 182 | 0 | |a b | |
| 200 | 1 | |a «...у нас нет литературы художеств» (А.Н. Майков): к вопросу о состоянии российской художественной критики 1840 - начала 1850-х гг. Статья вторая. Новые веяния в русской художественной критике |d "We have no literature of art" (A. N. Maikov): on the state of Russian art criticism in the 1840s - early 1850s. Article two: New trends in Russian art criticism of the 1840s - early 1850s |f О. В. Седельникова | |
| 203 | |a Текст |c электронный | ||
| 300 | |a Заглавие с экрана | ||
| 320 | |a [Библиогр.: 32 назв.] | ||
| 330 | |a Во второй статье цикла представлен обзор критических статей, появлявшихся с 1842 по 1847 г. в журналах «Отечественные записки» и «Современник» параллельно деятельности В.Г. Белинского и развивающих методологию главы новой русской критики в непосредственном приложении к произведениям пластического искусства. Концептуальный анализ содержания публикаций В.П. Боткина, П.Н. Кудрявцева, П.В. Анненкова, Вал.Н. Майкова об изобразительном искусстве позволяет установить важнейшие тенденции развития русской художественной критики в период ее специализации и профессионализации и выявить уникальность позиции каждого критика в контексте эстетического многоголосия эпохи культурногоперепутья. | ||
| 330 | |a The second article of the cycle presents an overview of publications that reflect important changes in the condition of Russian art criticism of the 1840s, which started under the influence of V. G. Belinsky's critical works. In 1842, V.P. Botkin's review "Exhibition in the Saint Petersburg Imperial Academy of Arts in 1842", standing out from similar texts with its conceptual approach to the assessment of the pictures via comprehension of the condition of modern art and defining tendencies of its development, appeared. Botkin reflects on the critical condition of art, but, unlike the proponents of academism, his pathos does not come down to stating degradation of art during the practical age. Botkin raises the question of searching for the new content of art, which has to meet moral needs of the modern man. In 1846-47, P.N. Kudryavtsev published a set of articles reflecting his thoughts caused by the visit to the Belvedere and the Louvre. The author compensates for the significant drawback of the Russian "literature of art" of the time, which was only shaping its methodological basis. Historicism, educational principle, precision in aesthetical terminology and consecution of judgements made Kudryavtsev's articles meet the most important requirements of the age. Herewith, Kudryavtsev showed lack of interest to the problems of modern art. In "The Belvedere" and "Letters from Paris", the author does not emphasize, yet shows his loyalty to the academic view that the best periods in the history of pictorial art were in the past. In early 1847, V.N. Maikov joined the debate on the mission of modern art in his article "One Hundred Drawings from N.V. Gogol's Dead Souls". | ||
| 330 | |a The critic considered advantages and disadvantages of Agin's drawings in the context of modern visual art development, taking into account the experience of landscape and genre painting. Maikov's speculation about the artistic principles of depicting the trivial, developing his previously stated "law of sympathy" and strengthening the anthropological aspect of his criticism as a whole, seems the most significant thesis of the work. Finally, another important factor in the development of Russian art criticism was P.V. Annenkov's review "The Louvre Exhibition of Paintings of 1847". The critic acknowledges the downfall of religious and history painting and mastery of genre painting in the French art. On the ground of this thesis, Annenkov goes to comprehension of creative experiments of some pioneer artists. Historicism, deep understanding of the social role of art together with the awareness of the necessity to save the artistic advantages of a piece of art make Annenkov's review an important factor in the history of Russian art criticism of the 1840s. The analysis of Botkin, Kudryavtsev, Annenkov and Maikov's publications helps to elicit the main tendencies of Russian art criticism development in the period of its specialization and professionalization and reveal the unique position of each critic in the context of the aesthetic polyphony of the time. | ||
| 461 | 1 | |t Вестник Томского государственного университета |f Национальный исследовательский Томский государственный университет (ТГУ) |d 1998- | |
| 463 | 1 | |t № 422 |v [С. 32-39] |d 2017 | |
| 510 | 1 | |a "We have no literature of art" (A. N. Maikov): on the state of Russian art criticism in the 1840s - early 1850s. Article two: New trends in Russian art criticism of the 1840s - early 1850s |z eng | |
| 600 | 1 | |a Белинский |g Виссарион Григорьевич |b В. Г. |c российский общественный деятель |f 1811-1848 |c литературный критик |2 stltpush |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\pers\1212 | |
| 600 | 1 | |a Боткин |b В. П. |c русский писатель, критик |f 1811-1869 |g Василий Петрович |2 stltpush |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\pers\9624 |9 1913 | |
| 600 | 1 | |a Кудрявцев |b П. Н. |c историк |c профессор Московского университета |f 1816-1858 |g Петр Николаевич |2 stltpush |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\pers\20039 |9 7954 | |
| 600 | 1 | |a Анненков |b П. В. |c российский литературный критик |c мемуарист |f 1813-1887 |g Павел Васильевич |2 stltpush |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\pers\14369 |9 4750 | |
| 610 | 1 | |a электронный ресурс | |
| 610 | 1 | |a труды учёных ТПУ | |
| 610 | 1 | |a художественная критика | |
| 610 | 1 | |a методологии | |
| 610 | 1 | |a академические труды | |
| 610 | 1 | |a эстетика | |
| 610 | 1 | |a историзм | |
| 610 | 1 | |a живопись | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Седельникова |b О. В. |c лингвист |c профессор Томского политехнического университета, доктор филологических наук |f 1972- |g Ольга Викторовна |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\pers\24608 |9 10898 | |
| 712 | 0 | 2 | |a Национальный исследовательский Томский политехнический университет |b Школа базовой инженерной подготовки |b Отделение русского языка |3 (RuTPU)RU\TPU\col\23517 |
| 801 | 2 | |a RU |b 63413507 |c 20181220 |g RCR | |
| 856 | 4 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.17223/15617793/422/5 | |
| 942 | |c CF | ||