P. P. Konchalovsky (1876–1956) (On his methods as a painter of pictures)

Leonardo. Vol. 11, pp. 321-325. 0Pergamon Press Ltd. 1978. Printed in Great Britain. P. P. KONCHALOVSKY (1876-1956) (ON HIS METHODS AS A PAINTER OF PICTURES)* . Kirill Sokolov** I. INTRODUCTION P. P. Konchalovsky’spainting deserves attention not only because his practice was contrary to naive views as to the characteristics of Socialist Realism in the U.S.S.R. but rather because his efforts were to achievean art following in the footsteps of European medieval wall painters. He was one of the organizers and, for several years, the chairman of the Knave of Diamonds Group in Moscow. This Group exercised an important influence on the development of acertain kind of 20th-century painting. A very productive artist, Konchalovsky is not easyto reduce to specific categories and periods. Py&trPetrovichKonchalovsky( 1876-1956)was bornin the family of a translator and publisher who was on friendly terms with many Russian artists of note at the end of the 19thcentury. He studied painting first in Paris (1897-1898) and then in the Petersburg Academy of Art (1899-1907). He made his debut at the Salon des Indipendents exhibition in Paris in 1908, and during the first period of his work he was close to the fauvists. During the next five years he visited Italy (Sienna) and Spain. Back in Russia he took part in the important Zolotoye Runo (Golden Fleece) exhibition in Moscow, where works by French artists were exhibited side by side with pictures by Larionov, Goncharova, Fal’k, Sar’yan, Kuprin and others. In 1910, Konchalovsky, Kandinsky, Larionov and Goncharova (to mention only those better known in the West) formed the Knave of Diamonds Group. In November 1911 they drew up the aims and rules of the Group and shortly afterwards elected Konchalovsky their chairman. It was the painter Matiros Sar’yan of the rival Blue Rose Group who later came out with a good description of the Knave of DiamondsGroup when he wrote that it sought ‘to unite the stylistic system of Cezanne with the traditions of primitive folk art, the Russian lubok (popular prints) and tradesmen’s signs, while nevertheless taking into account the experiment in the deformation of nature’ [cf. R. Fal’k, Vystavka proizvedeniy. Catalogue. A. V. Shchekin-Krotova and E. V. Chlenova, Moscow, 1966. p. 71. From the description just quoted it is clear that this Group was not content with continuing to work alongthe lines of the Analytical Cubism of Braque and Picasso. Broadly speaking, where some of the cubists had brought a fresh element to the visual conception of Cezanne, an element drawn from their experience of primitive African *Extracts from the book by P. P. Konchalovsky entitled Khudozltestrennoye Naeslediye (Artisiic Heritage) (Moscow: Izd-vo Iskusstvo, 1964). Translated from the Russian by Avril Pyman. **Russian artist, c/oLeonardo,Pergamon Press Ltd.. Journals Division, Headington Hill Hall, Oxford OX3 OBW,England. 321 I mlpture, the Group drew upon their experience of ndigenous tradesmen’s signs. They found a relationship 2etween the depiction .of objects in space in the early Renaissance and those they found in these 19th century Dut ‘primitive’ signs. Of fundamental importance was the Fact that, in contradistinction to Cubism, the tenets advanced by the Group made way for an innovative use 3f intense colours and the further development of portrait painting. From 1914to 1916, Konchalovsky served in the army. After 1918,his painting took a new direction. This period, which lasted roughly from 1918 to 1925, was marked by the exclusion of black from his palette and by an increasing affinity with CBzanne. In the middle of this period the influence of Rembrandt is very strong, an influence that contributed to several remarkably independent and interesting pictures (the self-portrait with toothache, for instance, or the portrait of his wife). Towards the end of the period Konchalovsky’s painting became less ascetic and he began to attach more significance to dabs of colour. More and more a preference for working on paintings in series, each in a sufficient quantity to furnish an entire separate exhibition , came into evidence. His work became more realistic, his technique more virtuoso. I believe he was less interested in final results than in his process of work...