A Portrait of P. A. Zubov (Ivan Eggink, beginning of the 19th century)
Monday, 19 January 2009
Ivan Eggink. Grand Prince St Vladimir Examines the Faith. undated (first quarter of the 19th century?)
Grand Prince St Vladimir Examines the Faith (Ivan Eggink, undated (first quarter of the 19th century?))
Of course, this depiction is highly stylised, but, it does symbolise the fact that Grand Prince St Vladimir chose Orthodoxy over Roman Catholicism in 988. Do not forget that St Vladimir consciously rejected both Islam and Roman Catholicism… he was not merely ignorant of them. The former he considered too fanatical (for it forbade liquor) and the latter he found confusing (for his emissaries were not impressed with RC liturgy, finding it irreverent). Orthodoxy both he and his ambassadors found “just right” (“We did not know if we were in heaven or on earth”, in regards to the liturgy at Agia Sofia).
Russia is deeply Orthodox to this day… and shall remain so until the Last Trump, I am sure (Am I Orthodox? Well… I’m Russian… does that answer your question?).
Ivan Eggink. A Portrait of the Writer I. A. Krylov. 1834
A Portrait of the Writer I. A. Krylov (Ivan Eggink, 1834)
Krylov is a houehold word in Russia, for he made a famous collection of fairy tales that is still in print.
Firs Zhuravlyov. A Replete Table. undated (1860s-80s)
A Replete Table (Firs Zhuravlyov, undated (1860s-80s))
This painting reminds you of a Hogarth engraving, does it not? There is the same exaggerated satire, the same biting observation of sinful–ginful humanity. Obviously, this is a depiction of a party held by a lower official or the lower kind of merchnt. Certainly, it is not a gathering of the local gentry!
Indeed, it appears to be a cutting artistic comment on the “new men” of the period. This is GLUTTONY. Note well that the priest and deacon are sitting near the host and they are stuffing themselves as cheerfully as the rest. One can see the artist holding his nose as he stands at his easel…
Aleksandr Sokolov. A Portrait of the Artist’s Daughter with Flowers. 1884
A Portrait of the Artist’s Daughter with Flowers (Aleksandr Sokolov, 1884)
Iosif Braz. A Portrait of Yelizaveta Martynova. 1896
A Portrait of Yelizaveta Martynova (Iosif Braz, 1896)
Iosif Braz. A Portrait of the Writer Anton Chekhov. 1898
A Portrait of the Writer Anton Chekhov (Iosif Braz, 1898)
Iosif Braz. A Portrait of the Painter Aleksandr Sokolov. 1898
A Portrait of the Painter Aleksandr Sokolov (Iosif Braz, 1898)
Sunday, 18 January 2009
Nikolai Bogatov. A Pier on the Volga. undated (1880s-1900s?)
A Pier on the Volga (Nikolai Bogatov, undated (1880s-1900s?))
Sunday, 4 January 2009
Vasili Golinsky. A Letter to the Capital. no date (1880s-90s?)
A Letter to the Capital (Vasili Golinsky, no date (1880s-90s?)
Firstly, I would like to give a reason for my “Englishing” of the title of this work. Literally, it is A Letter to Piter. The usage of “Piter” rather than “Pyotr” or “Petya” is a strong implication that the letter is not a personal family letter to a loved one in the army or prison. “Piter” is Russian slang for “St Petersburg”, the imperial capital at the time. The other two usages are the proper name “Peter” and the Russian equivalent of “Pete”. Therefore, I went for meaning rather than literalism. All those who disagree may establish their own websites and label the work differently there. I shall not argue the point. My choice was taken to make the meaning of the title clear to the average English-speaking reader. Translation is not a picnic, even simple things such as titles!
The composition of the painting makes it clear that an illiterate peasant woman is asking the local school-teacher to write an official letter for her. Her husband is not with her, so, it is clear that the letter concerns him. Is she a war widow from the Russo-Turkish War or is she the wife of a soldier on active service? Is her husband is in prison? Has he gone to the “big city” to find work? That is not obvious. Note the fruits and eggs on the red cloth on the table, these are, obviously, a gift to the teacher for writing the letter. The middle-class woman is obviously not of the nobility, for her clothing and the tell-tales in the house stamp her as one of the official class or the merchantry.
It is clear that the peasant woman and her child are very ill-at-ease in the teacher’s house. However, in Russia, at least, the nobles, officials, merchantry, and peasantry all shared the same faith, so, there was a common point of reference. In Galicia and Carpatho-Russia, the nobles, officials, and merchantry were of a different faith than the peasants, which led to misunderstanding and “poaching” by the “superior” Roman Catholics. It is why many of the peasants returned to Orthodoxy once they arrived in America. If you doubt me, ask the people at St Mary’s parish in Minneapolis MN. They would tell the tale far better than I could!
