(E-E) Ev.g.e.n.i.j ..K.o.z.l.o.     Berlin                                                  


      (E-E) Evgenij Kozlov: Leningrad 80s >>

The New Artists.

Timur Novikov: Roots – E-E Kozlov: Cosmos

Text: Hannelore Fobo, 2020

Chapter 2. Perestroika, the Mayakovsky Friends Club, and pop art

previous page: Chapter 1. Timur Novikov: native roots and western influences
next page: Chapter 3. E-E Kozlov: Two Cosmic Systems

Table of contents: see bottom of page >>




Detail of a picture with a Campbell's soup can Andrey Medvedev used for mixing paint. The picture was taken at Medvedev's studio in Saint Petersburg in 1992. Most likely, the can is one of those legendary Campbell's soup cans signed by Andy Warhol Joanna Stingray brought her Leningrad friends in 1986 as a gift from the famous American artist (see below) Photo: Hannelore Fobo 1992

Detail of a picture with a Campbell's soup can Andrey Medvedev used for mixing paint. The picture was taken at Medvedev's studio in Saint Petersburg in 1992. Most likely, the can is one of those legendary Campbell's soup cans signed by Andy Warhol Joanna Stingray brought her Leningrad friends in 1986 as a gift from the famous American artist (see below)
Photo: Hannelore Fobo 1992



Chapter 2 Perestroika, the Mayakovsky Friends Club, and pop art

In the previous chapter, I spoke of the ideological charge of Novikov’s statement “The victory for our own native roots over western influences”. Why does it appear to be ideologically motivated?

Unfortunately, no visual documentation of New Artists exhibitions exists for the period of 1986-1987, but it helps to look at pictures from the Leningrad TEII exhibitions. The TEII or The Society for Experimental Visual Art (1981-1991)[1] was Leningrad’s first and most important self-organised association of unofficial artists, and at TEII exhibitions, which sometimes showed works by more than one hundred artists, the New Artists displayed their works together, on one wall. When we look at pictures from the New Artists section of the 1986 and 1987 TEII exhibitions, we cannot say that with regard to style, these works were closer to “native roots” than those shown at the New Artists’ group exhibition Happy New Year in December 1985.

The 8th General TEII Exhibition, Leningrad, May 1986. Partial view of the section with works by the New Artists. Because of problems with censorship, the organisers decided not to open the exhibition. Source: ТЭИИ – Товариществo экспериментального изобразительного искусства –«Неофициальное» искусство 1981 – 1991 годов. (From Leningrad to Saint-Petersburg. TEII – The Society for Experimental Visual Art. ‘Non-Official’ Art 1981-1991, p. 224
The 8th General TEII Exhibition, Leningrad, May 1986. Partial view of the section with works by the New Artists. Because of problems with censorship, the organisers decided not to open the exhibition.
Source: ТЭИИ – Товариществo экспериментального изобразительного искусства –«Неофициальное» искусство 1981 – 1991 годов. (From Leningrad to Saint-Petersburg. TEII – The Society for Experimental Visual Art. ‘Non-Official’ Art 1981-1991, p. 224


The 9th General TEII Exhibition, Leningrad, January 1987. The picture displays a wall with works by the New Artists. Source: ТЭИИ – Товариществo экспериментального изобразительного искусства –«Неофициальное» искусство 1981 – 1991 годов. (From Leningrad to Saint-Petersburg. TEII – The Society for Experimental Visual Art. ‘Non-Official’ Art 1981-1991, p. 271 Photo: Alexander Rets
The 9th General TEII Exhibition, Leningrad, January 1987. The picture displays a wall with works by the New Artists.
Source: ТЭИИ – Товариществo экспериментального изобразительного искусства –«Неофициальное» искусство 1981 – 1991 годов. (From Leningrad to Saint-Petersburg. TEII – The Society for Experimental Visual Art. ‘Non-Official’ Art 1981-1991, p. 271
Photo: Alexander Rets




What about Novikov’s other argument – that with the arrival of new artists in the mid eighties, and after a short-live interest in graffiti art, comics and computers, a process of mutual influence started?

When we divide the group into artists of the first generation and artists of the second generation, that is, founding members from 1982 and artists joining around 1984-1986 – who, according to Novikov, stirred the interest of their “older” colleagues in contemporary world culture – it is hard to see how these mutual influences actually worked, because instead of discontinuity in personal styles, we find continuity.

The paintings displayed on the wall span over three decades of Ivan Sotnikov's artistic production. Photo: Hannelore Fobo, 2017
The paintings displayed on the wall span over three decades of Ivan Sotnikov's artistic production
The large painting top right, an abstract view of the city of Leningrad, is from the mid 1980s. It was shown at the first large international New Artists exhbition "The New from Leningrad", Kulturthuset, Stockholm, 1988.
The painting with two boats (on the left) is from 2015. Its title is Paromnaya pereprava mezhdu Kamernari i Lepetani / Паромная переправа между Каменари и Лепетани / Ferry Crossing between Kamernari and Lepetane. It is one of many views of Montenegro from Ivan Sotnikov's later years and also one of his last paintings; the artist died in autumn 2015.
Photo: Hannelore Fobo, 2017




Concerning the first generation of New Artists – according to Novikov, founding members were Kirill Khazanovich, Oleg Kotelnikov, Evgenij Kozlov, Timur Novikov and Ivan Sotnikov[2] – we can say that Ivan Sotnikov‘s folkloric pop-art was a constant throughout most of his artistic career. We also note that the “wild” style of “figuration libre” characteristic for Oleg Kotelnikov’s works actually existed before the second generation of New Artists joined, and the same goes for Kirill Khazanovich’s comic art.

Oleg Kotelnikov Unitled. Gouche on paper, approx. 45 x 60 cm, 1984. The Kozlov & Fobo Collection, Berlin Photo: Hannelore Fobo
Oleg Kotelnikov
Unitled. Gouche on paper, approx. 45 x 60 cm, 1984.

The Kozlov & Fobo Collection, Berlin
Photo: Hannelore Fobo




We find the same constancy with the second generation of artists mentioned in Novikov’s New Artists text. Novikov introduces most of them with the statement “with the arrival of new artists in the group” – Sergei Bugaev, Andrei Krisanov, Inal Savchenkov, Oleg Maslov, Alexei Kozin, Michail Taratuta, Vadim Ovchinnikov and Sergey Shutov – although some more names appear in other text passages. To name just a few: Vladislav Gutsevich remained faithful to his bright primitivism. Andrei Krisanov and Inal Savchenkov never changed their comic styles – this “age-related affliction”, in Novikov’s terms (literally “this childhood disease”), just didn’t pass.

The 5th General TEII Exhibition "Facets of Portraiture", Leningrad, September 1984 more >> Second painting on the left: (E-E) Evgenij Kozlov Noli me tangere, original title Туареги • Tuaregs Tempera, gouache watercolour and collage on canvas, 93 x 106 cm, 1982. The Kozlov & Fobo Collection, Berlin Paintings on the right: two portraits by Vladislav Gutsevich Bottom right: a fragment of Timur Noikov's portrait of Sergei Bugaev from 1984 photo: Alexander Boyko, 1984
The 5th General TEII Exhibition "Facets of Portraiture", Leningrad, September 1984 more >>
Second painting on the left:
(E-E) Evgenij Kozlov Noli me tangere, original title Туареги • Tuaregs
Tempera, gouache watercolour and collage on canvas, 93 x 106 cm, 1982.
The Kozlov & Fobo Collection, Berlin
Paintings on the right: two portraits by Vladislav Gutsevich
Bottom right: a fragment of Timur Noikov's portrait of Sergei Bugaev from 1984
photo: Alexander Boyko, 1984




Inal Savchenkov Улица нашего города /The Streets of Our Town Mixed media on canvas, framed, 74.5 x 95.cm, 1995 The Kozlov & Fobo Collection, Berlin Photo: Hannelore Fobo
Exhibition DE NYA FRÅN LENINGRAD • The New from Leningrad • Aug 27 - Sept 25, 1988, Kulturhuset, Stockholm
Top from left to right: works by Viktor Tsoy, Georgy Gurianov, Andrey Krisanov
Bottom Sergei Bugaev (Afrika) and Oleg Kotelnikov?
Photo: Fredrik Vogel, 1988 more >>



Left: (E-E) Evgenij Kozlov Мертвые Ласки Века, До… This Century‘s Dead Affections, Up Until ... (Внешний облик отношений двух держав) (The Outward Appearance of the Relationship Between the Two World Powers), 95.5. x 72 cm, 1980
Inal Savchenkov
Улица нашего города /The Streets of Our Town
Mixed media on canvas, framed, 74.5 x 95.cm, 1995
The Kozlov & Fobo Collection, Berlin
Photo: Hannelore Fobo




Perhaps Novikov was referring to himself. His carefully structured, minimalistic  “Horizons” appeared around 1985, gradually substituting his earlier expressionistic style.

On the other hand, (E-E) Evgenij Kozlov changed his style approximately every two years in the decade of the 1980s, without completely abandoning his previous styles.[3]  Would he have done so without looking at the works of his artist friends? Most likely so, as the stylistic features they preferred had a limited influence on his works. We notice avant-garde influences in his work already in 1980, with Мертвые Ласки Века, До… / This Century’s Dead Caresses, Up Until… (1980), a highly sophisticated composition reminiscent both of Kasimir Malevitch’s interpretation of Russian folk art and of Vladimir Lebedev’s poster art (see Chapter4). At that time Kozlov was a member of the group “Letopis”, the style of which Novikov described as “primitive art, primitivism and expression” leading to a “somewhat wild output”.[4] Contrary to Novikov’s description of a collective style, Kozlov’s composition is carefully structured and worked out.

Maya Khlobystina Патриотический алфавит • Patriotic Alphabet. Stencil printing on textile, approx. 1988 or earlier. Photo: Courtesy of Andrey Khlobystin. The work was shown at the New Artists‘ exhibition, Leningrad, Sverdlov House of Culture, 22-25 April 1988.
Left: (E-E) Evgenij Kozlov Мертвые Ласки Века, До… This Century‘s Dead Affections, Up Until ...
(Внешний облик отношений двух держав)
(The Outward Appearance of the Relationship Between the Two World Powers), 95.5. x 72 cm, 1980

Centre: Kasimir Malevich На сенокосе • Haymaking 85.8 х 65.6 cm 1929
The State Tretyakov Gallery

Right: Vladimir Lebedev A workman sweeping the criminal
in:
RUSSIAN PLACARDS 1917 — 1922, 1st Part
Petersburg office of the Russian Telegraph Agency ROSTA
Petersburg Branch of the News of the All-Russia
Central Executive Committee („Isvestia VCIK”)
PETERSBURG — 1923
http://bibliodyssey.blogspot.de/2014_01_19_archive.html




Returning to what I said about the other New artists, their attachment to a particular style, the situation looks somewhat different only towards the end of the 1980s, when there is a certain trend towards a “cleaner” style – for instance in the works of Kotelnikov and Bugaev – possibly influenced by Novikov’s minimalism. I will be more specific about these changes in Chapter 6.

An explicit Mayakovskian style manifested itself, however, only in 1988 – when Andrey Khlobystin and his sister Maya Khlobystina first exhibited their works together with the New Artists at the Sverdlov House of Culture, Leningrad. It is not the first time Mayakovsky’s compositional features were adapted by a New artist: Kozlov did so in 1983, as I will show in chapter 4. But it is the first time we find an unmistakable interpretation of Mayakovsky. It emerged only towards the end of the New Artists’ existence as a group, and also from outside the “old” group.  

Maya Khlobystina
Патриотический алфавит • Patriotic Alphabet.
Stencil printing on textile, approx. 1988 or earlier.
Photo: Courtesy of Andrey Khlobystin. The work was shown at the New Artists‘ exhibition, Leningrad, Sverdlov House of Culture, 22-25 April 1988.
more >>




Vladimir Mayakovsky (text and design), Rosta Window No 742 Мы зажгли над миром истину эту... • We Sparked this Truth over the World. Four stencil drawings, 128 x 102 cm, December 1920 Ria Novosti, Wikipedia Public Domain
Andrey Khlobystin: Весна • Spring
Mixed media on canvas,, approx 100 x 50 cm no later than 1988.
Picture from the exhibition 7 Independent Artists Live from Leningrad at the Young Unknowns Gallery, London, 1988. More>>
Vladimir Mayakovsky (text and design), Rosta Window No 742
Мы зажгли над миром истину эту... • We Sparked this Truth over the World.
Four stencil drawings, 128 x 102 cm, December 1920
Ria Novosti, Wikipedia Public Domain more >>




So what motivated Novikov’s statement? Registering the “Club of Friends of V. V. Mayakovsky” (Клуб друзей В.В.Маяковского / Klub druzey V. V. Maiakovskogo) with the local authorities in September 1986, when, at the beginning of perestroika, a new Soviet law finally permitted the existence of “amateur associations and interest clubs”, Novikov pursued a practical aim: to obtain premises for his art group. To use Mayakovsky‘s name for it – a household name in the Soviet Union – seemed to be helpful, as the club’s members, the New Artists, could pretend to further engage themselves in the noble task of paying homage to Mayakovsky, with Mayakovsky evenings, Mayakovsky performances and a Mayakovsky memorial room – all part of the working plan for the first year. In my opinion, this fiction then spilled over to Novikov’s  New Artists text from1986.

Working Plan for the Mayakovsky Friends Club 1986-1987, the Club's first year of existence..The Sergey Chubraev Archive, Saint Petersburg
Working Plan for the Mayakovsky Friends Club 1986-1987, its first year of existence.
The last two lines are Ответственные за проведение: С.А.Бугаев, А.Т. Драгомощенко, Т.П. Новиков, Ю.Н.Красев, А.Н. Тулякова. (In charge of carrying out the working plan: S.A. Bugaev, A.T. Dragomoshenko, T.P. Novikov, Yu.N. Krasev and A. N.Tulyakova)
Only a small number of the acitivities the Club proposed were actually carried out; among them was the performance "Вон, самогон" (“Out, Moonshine), Mayakovsky’s poem from 1923, staged on 21 December 1986 at the Vodokanal Club, the parent organisation of the Maykovsky Friends Club

Typescript carbon copy on paper approx A4, upper half (The lower half of the document is empty). 1986
The Sergey Chubraev Archive, Saint Petersburg




At the same time, Novikov put forward a pop-art concept: If Warhol featured Elvis Presley and Marilyn Monroe, then why shouldn‘t the New Artists feature Mayakovsky & Co? After all, we may add, every country has its pop artists selecting what seems to be relevant for the country’s history: Germany, for instance, has Gerhard Richter, who featured, in the 1970s, members of the Red Army Faction, the so-called Baader-Meinhof Gang.

What is more, American rock singer Joanna Stingray, who was befriended with Leningrad rock singers and artists, but also knew Andy Warhol personally, was able to establish a link between Warhol, the personification of pop art, and her Russian friends. In her article “The New Artists are Coming”, Ekaterina Andreeva describes this link:

    In 1985, Stingray brought Novikov’s collage City and Kotelnikov’s collage Ye-Ye to Andy Warhol as gifts from the New Artists (who practised the same aesthetic recycling of the urban environment as Warhol himself), and Warhol responded to this gesture by sending them his own works. In 1986, a package from Warhol arrived in Leningrad containing several cans of Campbell’s soup cans autographed by Warhol and two autographed copies of the first edition of The Philosophy of Andy Warhol (From A to B and Back Again).[5]

Saint Peterburg, 1992. Andrey Medvedev in his studio working on a series of stencil composition for an exhibition in Berlin. Photo: Hannelore Fobo, 1992 Saint Peterburg, 1992. Andrey Medvedev in his studio working on a series of stencil composition for an exhibition in Berlin. Photo: Hannelore Fobo, 1992
Saint Peterburg, 1992. Andrey Medvedev in his studio working on a series of stencil composition for an exhibition in Berlin. Photo: Hannelore Fobo, 1992 Saint Peterburg, 1992. On the table is a open Campbell's soup can Andrey Medvedev used for his work to mix paint. Most likely, it is one of those legendary Campbell's soup cans signed by Andy Warhol Joanna Stingray brought her Leningrad friends in 1986 as a gift from the famous American artist. Photo: Hannelore Fobo, 1992
Saint Peterburg, 1992.
Andrey Medvedev in his studio working on a series of stencil composition for an exhibition in Berlin more >>
The picture at the bottom right shows a detail from the picture top right: On the table is a open Campbell's soup can Andrey Medvedev used for his work to mix paint. Most likely, it is one of those legendary Campbell's soup cans signed by Andy Warhol Joanna Stingray brought her Leningrad friends in 1986 as a gift from the famous American artist.
Photos: Hannelore Fobo, 1992




From a Russian point of view, the problem with western pop culture is that it’s alleged shallowness is so successful, which in turn makes it so attractive even to those who criticise its shallowness. So what you want is a Russian brand that is more profound or meaningful than western pop art, doesn’t care about money (is utopian), but is just as successful – and that will not lose its depth as its becomes commercially successful. In other words, what you want to do is squaring the circle.[6] Mayakovsky’s name possessed the potential to work in this direction.

The Mayakovsky Friends Club, though, never became an analogy of Warhol’s Factory – it simply never received premises for its own activities, unlike the NCh-VCh (НЧ-ВЧ), founded in the same way as the Mayakovsky Friends Club as a registered association with the Vodokanal Club in 1986.[7] Thanks to the engagement of its director Oleg Sumarokov, the NCh-VCh acquired a certain degree of institutional independence. It became a venue for concerts and exhibitions and attracted a number of artists, many from the circle of the New Artists, especially from the “second” generation of the New Artists who, like Inal Savchenkov with the “Engineers of Art” or Oleg Maslov with the “New Wild Ones”, also formed their own groups.

The Mayakovsky Friends Club, on the other hand, remained a name the New Artists sometimes used (until 1990) to promote their own exhibitions and parties, thus providing their activities with some of Mayakovsky’s glamour. Among those activities was a Mayakovsky Friends Club exhibition at the NCh-VCh on the occasion of Mayakovsky’s 95th birthday, in the summer of 1988. A picture from Ágnes F. Horváth’s archive shows a section of the exhibition with works by Ivan Sotnikov, Oleg Maslov, (E-E) Evgenij Kozlov, and Igor “Sten” Smirnov. Smirnov’s large portrait of Mayakovsky might have been the clearest reference to the concept of the exhibition, but like Andrey Khlobystin and Maya Khlobystina, Smirnov participated at New Artists exhibitions only starting in 1988 – shortly before the New Artists dissolved or disintegrated as a group.

Exhibition of the "Mayakovsky Friends Club” (aka the New Artists) at the NCh-VCh, Leningrad, summer of 1988. From left to right: Oleg Maslov, Ágnes F. Horváth, Timur Novikov, Sergei Bugaev, Ivan Sotnikov, and Inal Savchenkov. The picture displays paintings by Ivan Sotnikov (fragment on the left wall), (E-E) Evgenij Kozlov ("Star", centre), Igor Smirnov (Sten) (right, portrait of Mayakovsky) and Oleg Maslov (stencilled posters bottom right). Picture courtesy Ágnes F. Horváth.
Exhibition of the "Mayakovsky Friends Club” (aka the New Artists) at the NCh-VCh, Leningrad, summer of 1988.
From left to right: Oleg Maslov, Ágnes F. Horváth, Timur Novikov, Sergei Bugaev, Ivan Sotnikov, and Inal Savchenkov.
The picture displays paintings by Ivan Sotnikov (fragment on the left wall), (E-E) Evgenij Kozlov ("Star", centre), Igor Smirnov (Sten) (right, portrait of Mayakovsky) and Oleg Maslov (stencilled posters bottom right).
Picture courtesy Ágnes F. Horváth.
more >>




Presumably, the concept of paying homage to Mayakovsky was more attractive to some newcomers than to those “old” New artists – at least it doesn’t seem that those “old” New artists started creating Mayakovsky’s portraits, as did Smirnov and Khlobystin. The New Artists portrayed each other instead.[8] But once the Mayakovsky Friends Club had been established for formal purposes, its myth expanded, and it took on a life of its own, as a label, last but not least because Bugaev and Novikov had an interest in promoting their own functions at the Mayakovsky Friends Club, as chairman and deputy chairman, respectively, and, in the case of Novikov, as head (chairman) of the fine arts section. The catalogue of the Young Unknowns Gallery for 7 Independent Artists Live from Leningrad demonstrates this principle.[9]

Having said that, Russian avant-garde styles did play a role in the works of the New Artists, but such influences on their art manifested themselves much before 1986, as I will discuss in the next chapters.

Yet to speak of developing an ”innovative tradition” of native roots, as Novikov did in 1986, is creating an oxymoron: either you are a New artist or you follow a tradition.

If Novikov had in mind that Russian artists have always been innovative and that Mayakovsky is just one example among many others, then to follow this tradition means disruption. It means to create something absolutely new, leaving Mayakovsky and his Futurist manifesto from 1912 behind – just as Mayakovsky had demanded to Throw Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, etc., etc. overboard from the Ship of Modernity.[10]

To promote a native or national heritage, on the other hand, means continuity. It means to be conservative, which is not a bad thing at all, especially if you haven‘t been aware of these roots before – but in this case you are not innovative.

Therefore, the question is not whether any such native or national influences appeared in the work of a particular New artist  – they obviously did – but how this very artist was using such features in a particular work. To say that this artist pursued the purpose of strengthening and cultivating innovative native traditions is political propaganda in the tradition of Soviet party speak; with regard to art, it is nonsense.




previous page: Chapter 1. Timur Novikov: native roots and western influences
next page: Chapter 3. E-E Kozlov: Two Cosmic Systems



[1] TEII = ТЭИИ – Товариществo экспериментального изобразительного искусства

[2] Novikov, who was not always entirely consistent with his artists lists, gives the names of founding members on several occasions. The five names of Khazanovich, Kozlov, Kotelnikov Novikv and Sotnikov are in Novikov’s (Potapov’s) “The New Artists” text from 1986 and in his lecture “The New Artists” from March 2002 for the Pro Arte Institute, Saint Petersburg. The latter is available online https://docplayer.ru/25805056-Lekciya-byla-prochitana-v-institute-pro-arte-v-marte-2002-goda.html and in print form in Russian and English in the catalogue “Timur”, Moscow Museum of Modern Art, Moscow 2013, ed. by Ekaterina Andreeva, Nelly Podgorskaya and Ksenia Novikova, pp. 110

These five artists participated in a 1984 group exhibition at Novikov’s squat “ASSA Gallery” to which I dedicated an extensive research in 2017, availabe at http://www.e-e.eu/ASSA-Gallery/index.htm

[3] Fobo, Hannelore. “Colour and Line” in: Evgenij Kozlov: B(L)ACK ART 1985 – 1987 (2012). Web 12 August 2020. http://www.e-e.eu/BLACK-ART/index-eng.htm

[4] Potapov, Igor (pseud. Timur Novikov)

“Novye Khudozhniki” (Russian) [“Новые художники”] “The New Artists” (English), 1986

In: Novye Khudozhniki [Новые художники]  / The New Artists, Moscow Museum of Modern Art, edited by Ekaterina Andreeva and Nelly Podgorskaya. Moscow: Moscow Museum of Modern Art, 2012, p. 27

[5] Andreeva, Ekaterina, “The New Artists are Coming” in: The New Artists. Edited by Ekaterina Andreeva and Nelly Podgorskaya. Moscow: Moscow Museum of Modern Art, 2012, pp. 23  

[6] Soviet and post-Soviet pop art, better known as Sots art, became popular in the West to some degree through Alexander Kosalopov’s Coca Cola / Lenin paintings and the slightly more refined “Nostalgic Socialist Realism series” by Komar and Melamid, but by and large, it has taken its place as “exotica” in the cabinet of curiosity. The boundaries between Sots art and Moscow conceptualism (Kabakov, Prigov and others) are not always clearly defined, for instance with regard to Grisha Bruskin, but generally speaking, Moscow conceptualism is considered to be more complex than Sots art.

[7] The institutional side of the Mayakovsky Friends Club will be the subject of my article The New Artists and the Mayakovsky Friends Club. See Introduction.

The abbreviation NChVCh stands for Nizkie Chastoty / Vysokie Chastoty (“Низкие Частоты / Высокие частоты”), or Low Frequency / High Frequency. According to Andrei Khlobystin, New artist Oleg Kotelnikov created NChVCh as a band name for his own band in 1983, by analogy with the band name of AC/DC, an abbreviation of “alternating current / direct current”.

Khlobystin, Andrei. Shizorevolutsiia,(Schizorevolution) [Шизореволуция] Saint Petersburg: Borey Art,  2017, p. 257

[8] Ibid. p. 73

[9] 7 Independent Artists Live from Leningrad. Young Unknowns Gallery, London 1988. Catalogue. Web 3 October 2020.

http://www.e-e.eu/Young-Unknowns-Gallery/index2.html

See also Chapter 6.

[10] David Burliuk, Alexander Kruchenykh, Vladimir Mayakovsky, and Victor Khlebnikov: Пощёчина общественному вкусу / Slap in the Face of Public Taste, 15 December 1912. Web 20 August 2020.

https://391.org/manifestos/1912-slap-in-the-face-of-public-taste-burliuk-kruchenykh-mayakovsky-khlebnikov/




Introduction: The ostensibly synchronistic evolution of the New Artists

Part One: The New Artists and the Russian avant-garde

Chapter 1. Timur Novikov: native roots and western influences

Chapter 2. Perestroika, the Mayakovsky Friends Club, and pop art

Chapter 3. E-E Kozlov: Two Cosmic Systems

Chapter 4. ROSTA Windows stencil techniques – updated

Chapter 5. The inclusion or exclusion of stylistic influences

Chapter 6. From Mayakovsky to Larionov and folk art: something of everything

Chapter 7. Beyond the trend: Kozlov’s portrait of Timur Novikov (1988)

Chapter 8. Cosmopolitism and ethnicity: how Russian is the Russian avant-garde?

Chapter 9. Narodnost’: quite simply the people

Part Two: E-E Kozlov and Peterhof

Chapter 10. Fishing at Peter the Great’s pond
Chapter 11. The Petrodvorets Canteen Combine

Chapter 12. Galaxy Gallery

Chapter 13. A perception of pureness

– Works cited –




Research / text / layout: Hannelore Fobo, May / September 2020.

Uploaded 24 September 2020
Last updated 12 November 2020