… and I will put my sword in his hand.
Ezekiel, 30:24)
Art and history. Probably, there is no such person in Russia who has not seen or did not hold in his hands items from the village of Palekh. They are distinctive, they are beautiful, they are pleasant to look at. And then there are people who will be born in Palekh and see all this beauty from childhood. There she is an ordinary thing, there they talk about her at lunch, there they learn to draw in Palekh at the local school in drawing lessons and one by one in family workshops. But artists from Palekh painted not only lacquer miniatures. It was they who painted the Faceted Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin. And also Palekh masters have worked in the churches of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, and in the Novodevichy Convent in Moscow. So to be born there for many was a real happiness, because in the old days it guaranteed a sure income.
Eisenstein dressed the prince in long-length clothes, under which his shoes are practically invisible, and armor made of large, seemingly leather plates. The clothes of his associates are just as long.
Here is Pavel Korin, whose triptych dedicated to Alexander Nevsky, we will be examining today, was born in the same place - in Palekh. And first he studied painting at home, then at the Palekh icon-painting school, after which he was accepted as a student at the Moscow icon-painting chamber of the Donskoy Monastery, where the artist Nesterov was among his teachers. And he was a good teacher, because then Corinne wrote about him: "You threw your flame into my soul, you are the culprit that I became an artist."
Then Nesterov insisted that Korin in 1912 enter the School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture, which he graduated, became a real certified painter, and met with the Grand Duchess Elizaveta Fedorovna, at whose insistence he went to Yaroslavl and Rostov to study the frescoes of ancient Russian churches. And this princess was the empress's sister, and the terrorist Kaliayev killed her husband right in the Kremlin. And then she founded the Martha-Mariinsky monastery, Mikhail Nesterov and Pavel Korin were supposed to paint her church.
Why is there such a detailed story about the biography of this artist? Perhaps, go straight to the consideration of the triptych, one of the readers of "VO" may ask. The answer will be this: because in this particular case it just matters. Because this is how his worldview was formed, and it is the key to understanding the paintings of many artists.
And then Korin began to live and work in Moscow, where in February 1917 he settled in the attic of house 23 on the Arbat and lived there until 1934 - almost 17 years. He confessed: "Peeling the skin, I got out of the icon painting." And got out! Made a mosaic frieze for the Palace of Soviets "March to the Future", mosaic panels of his work decorate the underground stations of the Moscow metro "Komsomolskaya-Koltsevaya" and "Novoslobodskaya". On the instructions of the Bolshevik Party and the government, he painted portraits of the writer A. N. Tolstoy, the artists Kukryniksy, the artist V. I. Kachalov, the proletarian writer Maxim Gorky, the victory marshal Zhukov and many other famous figures of the USSR. And at the same time, it is known that all this time he remained a believer. He collected icons, but most importantly, he dreamed of painting a huge painting "Requiem", unthinkable in the country of socialist realism,because there (and this is known from the surviving sketches) he wanted to depict all the highest hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin, and he pulled a giant canvas on a stretcher and for thirty years did not make a single stroke on it, although he drew sketches. The Soviet power was treated kindly. He became a laureate of the Lenin Prize, but … about this very power, most likely, he did not think anything good. Although, on the other hand, after 17, he did not go abroad. And he had serious reasons for this. After all, it was his teacher Mikhail Nesterov who was arrested in 1938 on charges of espionage. His son-in-law, a prominent lawyer and professor at Moscow University, Viktor Shreter, was also accused of espionage and, naturally, was shot, and the artist's daughter Olga Mikhailovna was sent to a camp in Dzhambul, from where she returned on crutches as an invalid in 1941. It is unlikely that he was happy about the "good work" of the Soviet security organs. But he continued to write anyway. Otherwise, he too … was accused of espionage in favor of either Poland or Japan.
The famous triptych, in the center of which Alexander Nevsky is depicted, is a thing full of secrets even more than Rembrandt's "Night Watch", which we examined here. However, judge for yourself. In a triptych, therefore, he and a triptych, that is, something resembling … a church fold (!), There are three pictures. And each of them has its own name. And its own plot. Here is the left part - "Old Skaz", where we see a bent old woman and two strange men against the background of a gigantic image of Nikolai the Pleasant. One old with a donkey - a butt club with nails, and a young one, rolling up his sleeve, with a flail and obviously not Russian in appearance. We read what the art critic writes about him: "the picture" suggests the rich history and culture of the Russian people. " Well, isn't it nonsense? What culture, when it is clear that the main thing in this canvas is the image of the saint, and the abundance of crosses on his vestments. He, the saint, stands behind all these people, that's why they look so … obviously pleased. The grandmother clearly smiles (this is during disasters), the bearded one too… his chipped mouth is smiling, and the young one looks “on my mind” - “I won't let go of mine.” Well, in the hands of the saint is a sword and some strange temple of God. If this is the history of the Russian people, then it is all imbued with the spirit of Orthodoxy, and … somehow he got away with it, to see the time in the country was such that … the authorities turned a blind eye to such "pranks", only painting raised people against the enemy …
The right side, "Northern Ballad", is also kind of strange. Some vague and non-Soviet ideas are embedded in it. Well, and a sword … A sword, which Russian warriors never had, and in general it is difficult to understand who it could belong to at all. Although the handle is well drawn, correct, and blunt ricasos. But … well, with all these realistic details, swords were not of such proportions. That's what's important. And again - this picture adds epicness, fabulousness. But ideology is not. By the way, he has knightly armor on his feet … Who, in general, is this man with a gold ring on his finger? And it's not for nothing that we never liked to talk about these parts of the triptych.
But our art critics liked the central part of the triptych. And that's what they write about her. Official, so to speak: "While working on the triptych, the artist consulted with historians, employees of the Historical Museum, where he painted chain mail, armor, helmet - all the equipment of the protagonist, whose image he recreated on canvas in just three weeks." And if this is all true in fact, then it would be better if he did not consult with them and did not go to the museum. Because in terms of epic, again, everything is in order with this canvas, but the historicity in it, well, really, except that it’s just a penny.
At the same time, there is no doubt that the picture is icon-painting, epic and harsh. From the point of view of historicity, it does not stand up to criticism and could only cause laughter from both the Vasnetsov brothers and Surikov. The fact is that Alexander Nevsky is dressed as an artist in solid-forged armor and armor, strange and simply inconceivable for a Russian soldier of the 13th century, which were simply not known in Russia at that time. True, the prince's head is covered with a gilded helmet, very similar to the helmet of his father, Prince Yaroslav, which he lost in the Battle of Lipitsa in 1216, was found by a peasant in a hazel bush and has survived to this day. However, the helmet in the picture for Alexander is clearly small and hardly comfortable for him in it. Just compare the face of the commander and the helmet sitting on his head …
The very image of the prince is very controversial. In the year of the Battle of the Ice, he was only 21 years old. It also depicts a mature husband who is clearly "many years old." That is, it is clear that the artist wanted to show a wise, experienced, confident person, but … he could not express it in the person of a 21-year-old boy, or did not want to. After all, no one knew what Alexander really looked like. In 1942, when he drew it at three weeks, everyone saw only the movie "Battle on the Ice", where he was played by Cherkasov. By the way, it is he who is depicted in profile on the Order of Alexander Nevsky. And, apparently, Korin wanted to get away from the well-known "Cherkasov" image, both in facial features, and primarily in clothes. And he did go … but … went very far. But he painted another image behind the prince - the image of the Savior Not Made by Hands. And again, how and why? After all, the "godless five-year plans" just passed (they were called that), the image of the saints was not welcomed … And here … True, only one eye is visible to the saint, but he looks at them so piercingly that his alone is enough to remember that without God's providence, you won't even kill a flea, and "who is on us if God is with us ?!"
It is clear that the artist faced a very difficult task. It was necessary to portray Alexander so that he did not even resemble his movie counterpart in clothes, and this was difficult. Eisenstein tried to show him in attire, not inferior to the knight's, although the plates of his scaly shell look leather, not metal. And what was he to do? Put chain mail on him? After that, everyone would say that Eisenstein's Alexander looks richer … Take the scaly shell and gild it, as he did on the mosaic panel in the subway? Yes, it would be a good decision if it were not for the image of the Savior over him, which is also "golden". "Gold" in the center and "gold" on the right does not look good. So he, apparently, decided to dress him up in a completely unhistorical yushman.
And the legs? What about the legs? After all, they are wearing typical plate greaves and knee pads, which were not typical of our soldiers. A. V. Whiskey, our knights are depicted in chain mail trousers, although they have not been found by archaeologists. And here again the problem. Eisenstein's legs are covered with long-brimmed old Russian clothes. But the yushman was short. Draw a prince in pants and morocco boots? Nice, but … not harsh! So he clothed them in bluish steel.
The sword should be mentioned separately. The harness on it is quite consistent with that time and, most likely, Corinne took it from the books of Viollet le Duc. But here's the crosshair … The fact is that its "horns" are turned inward, although usually they were always bent outward or they were straight. But … "outward" is purely visual, always somehow aggressive. And Korin's prince is a defender, not an aggressor, so he bent them to himself, that is, to the handle, and not to the edge of the blade. The decision is psychologically correct, although, again, it does not even smell like historicism.
Well, as a result, we can say that the time was dramatic, the time was contradictory, which means that art was the same, it simply could not be otherwise!
By the way, Korin's work, which saw the light of day in 1943, just when the Soviet government went to reconcile with the church, the priests were returned from the camps, and parishes in churches that had recently been warehouses of MTS and granaries were opened, ripened very in time and therefore was received with a bang ! A person fell into a trend, so to speak, and this also became the reason for his success. And here is the question: what could be his prince in another image, more historically reliable? But who can say that today! The mystery of his images went away with the artist …
