We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
J. Vienožinskio ir V. Kairiūkščio pažiũros: dvi lietuvių tapybos raidos perspektyvos.
- Authors
Liutkus, Viktoras
- Abstract
This comparison between the fine art critical approach and perception of painting of Justinas Vienožinskis (1896-1960), a painter, a pedagogue and the founder of Kaunas Art School, and Vytautas Kairiūkštis (1890-1961), the most famous Lithuanian constructivist, reveals the polarization of Lithuanian fine arts critique in the nineteen twenties and thirties and demonstrates the differing stylistic perspectives upon the evolution of painting. Both artists concerned themselves with modern art. Consequently, although their perceptions of works differ, rather similar descriptions of the features of painting are presented in their critical articles. Vienožinskis was concerned with the emotional origin of painterly expression, whereas the discipline of painterly view and the logic of "construction" was predominant in Kairiūkštis' evaluations of painting. Both critics differently evaluated the painting of the thirties of the 20th century "Ars" group representatives Gudaitis, Samuolis and Vizgirda. Their approaches underscore the two dominant trends of the stylistic evolution of Lithuanian painting: the first (associated with Vienožinskis) was connected to Post-Impressionism (in particular the influence of Cezanne), whilst the other (that of Kairiūkštis) was based on Classical works of European fine art and had links to the Avantgarde. These approaches were influenced by the environment that formed the viewpoints of these artists: Vienožinskis was influenced by the ideas on art of the Polish neo-romantics through his experience and studies at the Krakow Academy of Fine Arts, Kairiūkštis was influenced by post-revolutionary Moscow with its rising avant-garde, and by Malewicz. Their attitudes to the features of folk art also differed. Having taken the attitudes of these painters and fine arts critics into consideration, it can be stated that the basis for Vienožinskis' approach was the spiritual and cultural aspirations of the national revival at the junction between the 19th and 20th centuries, the world outlook of the neo-romantics, and the efforts to associate the modernization of Lithuanian painting with ethnic culture. The position of Kairiūkštis was based on the ideas of New Art, which blended classical works of fine art (Renaissance) with the most modern avant-garde works of the 20th century. The pioneer of Lithuanian Constructivism perceived the perspective of national painting in a broader context than simply that of ethnic culture. The approaches of both painters are important in terms of the education of painters. The pedagogic methods of the early thirties in Kaunas Art School were outdated, and both artists stated that the school followed the old academic tendencies of painting. If the studio of Vienožinskis had worked in parallel with the studio of his opponent Kairiūkštis, would we have seen a further turning point in the history of Lithuanian Art? Unfortunately we will never know, as history did not provide as with such a possibility.
- Subjects
KAUNAS (Lithuania); LITHUANIA; LITHUANIAN painting; STUDY &; teaching of painting; CONSTRUCTIVISM (Education); DEVELOPMENTAL psychology; EDUCATIONAL ideologies; EXPRESSIONISM (Art); MODERNISM (Art); ART schools
- Publication
Acta Academiae Artium Vilnensis, 2008, Issue 49, p61
- ISSN
1392-0316
- Publication type
Article