Chapman University
Chapman University Digital Commons
Art Faculty Articles and Research
1994
Design Education and the Quest for National
Identity in Late Imperial Russia: The Case of the
Stroganov School
Wendy Salmond
Chapman University, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/art_articles
Part of the Art and Design Commons, and the Slavic Languages and Societies Commons
Recommended Citation
Salmond, Wendy. "Design Education and the Quest for National Identity in Late Imperial Russia: The Case of the Stroganov School,"
Studies in the Decorative Arts, 1.2 (1994): pp. 2-24.
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Art at Chapman University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Art
Faculty Articles and Research by an authorized administrator of Chapman University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact
[email protected].
Art
Design Education and the Quest for National Identity in Late Imperial
Russia: The Case of the Stroganov School
Comments
This article was originally published in Studies in the Decorative Arts, volume 1, issue 2, in 1994.
Copyright
University of Chicago Press
This article is available at Chapman University Digital Commons: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/art_articles/8
WENDY R. SALMOND
DesignEducationand theQuestforNational
in LateImperialRussia:The Case of
Identity
theStroganov
School
in Russiaon theeve of
artschoolsoperating
Of thethreemajorindustrial
SchoolofTechnical
the1917Revolution,
theImperial
CentralStroganov
in
Moscow
was
the
the
most
and the most
oldest,
innovative,
Design
inRussia
controversial.1
The Stroganov
Schoolwasthefirst
artinstitution
to confrontthe dauntingproblemsof moldingconsumertaste and of
manufactured
the Empire's
goods aesthetically
by providing
improving
and
schools
with
well-trained
industrial
artists.For
factories,
workshops,
over halfa century,
it blazeda trailforotherindustrial
art schoolsto
as
its
museum
follow,
facilities,
curriculum,
exhibitions,
publications,
and factory
all demonstrated
a thoughtful
and
workshops,
internships
of
modern
Western
ideas
to
local
conditions.
imaginative
adaptation
a distinctively
Above all, the Stroganovwas knownforchampioning
Russianstylein manufactured
its
mission
to
objects,
being weanRussian
consumersfromwhat was consideredtheirinordinatelove of foreign
productswhileat the same timeopeningup new marketsforRussian
goodsabroad.
None ofthesegoalswas at all uniqueto Russia,ofcourse.That the
nationaleconomyof any industrializing
nationcould benefitfromthe
of
aesthetics
and
the
marks
of
nationaldistinctiveness
into
injection
variousmanufacturing
sectorswasan acceptedfactbythemid-nineteenth
and
the
ofindustrial
artschoolsthroughout
century,
Europe,
proliferation
the role that art educationwas
England,and Americaacknowledged
believedcapableofplayingin economiclife.What madetheStroganov
School'smissionso unusual,and so problematic,
wasthematrixofsocial,
in
and
economic
factors
which
it
cultural,
operated.Allocateda central
part in the creationof a new Russianproducerand consumer,the
camefaceto facewithlong-standing
issuesofRussianidentity
Stroganov
that it was powerlessto resolve.In its effortsto forgea stylistic
betweenRussianandEuropeanculture(theso-calledStrogacompromise
nov stylewas essentially
a RussianvariantofArtNouveau),the school
exacerbatedthe tensionsthat arose when a traditional
involuntarily
cultureconfronted
thedemandsofmodernindustrial
agrarian
society.
Wendy R. Salmond is Assistant Professorof Art History at Chapman University,Orange,
California.
2
Studies
intheDecorative
Arts/Spring
1994
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
School 3
TheStroganov
oftheSchool(18254859)
ThePrehistory
Althoughit was not until 1860 that the StroganovSchool was
to
itimportant
oftheschoolhavethought
historians
established,
officially
in
In
Count
1825.2
that
narrative
their
year
SergeiStroganov,a
begin
in Moscowartistic,
and archaeological
circles,
literary,
figure
prominent
foundeda "DrawingSchoolRelatedto theArtsand Crafts"in Moscow.3
On a visitto Paris in 1822 the count had been "astonishedby the
thatthe Parisianworkers
bringto all the goodsproducedin
perfection
ofeducational
itto uthelargenumber
andhe attributed
theirworkshops/'
notedthe
He particularly
thatserveall levelsof society."4
institutions
emphasisplaced on drawing."Only withits aid," he wrote,"will [the
execution
worker]be able to attainthatpurityof formand confident
arenownothing."5
whichtheartsandcrafts
without
home,he
Returning
schoolthat
from
CzarAlexanderI to founda drawing
receivedpermission
and
rulesofpracticalGeometry,
would"teachelementary
Architecture,
variouskindsof drawingrelatedto the Mechanicalarts to artisans,
and serfs),
boys,and childrenofpoorparents(bothfreemen
apprentices,
with
trades
to
their
with
the
means
them
principal
ply
thereby
providing
to outsidehelp."6
andskill,andwithout
convenience
resorting
greater
was his
for
the
count's
motive
An important
generosity
practical
showed
thatRussianconsumers
thestrong
desiretocounteract
preference
"We
for
disdain
and
their
forforeign
home-grown.
anything
products,
decorateourroomswithFrenchgoods,and all themechanicalgoodswe
makesus a slaveto theFrench,
he pointedout."Luxury
use areEnglish,"
us to theEnglish."7
anda whimsical
subjugates
passionforimprovements
"modelsofrefined
first
to
borrow
at
be
his
school
might obliged
Though
frommorecivilizednations,he cautiouslyhoped
tasteand correctness"
thatRussiamightin timedevelopthosenationalqualitiesthatmadethe
ofFranceandEnglandso admirable.
products
Beforethat could happen,however,the wretchedstatusof the
A systematic
tobe addressed.
andappliedartsin Russiahadfirst
industrial
whenthe
artshad begunearlierin thecentury
demotionoftheindustrial
fromits
AcademyofFineArtsdroppedtheteachingofcrafts(masterstva)
arts"
of
the
"free
of
the
curriculum,
therebyestablishing hegemony
fromabroadbyPetertheGreatin the
and sculpture
(introduced
painting
Russian
craftssuchas enamel,filigree,
over
traditional
goldearly1700s)
on a
The lowlystatusthusconferred
and woodcarving.8
and silverwork,
state
the
careerin theusefulartswasfurther
by primitive of
compounded
tastesof the Russian
and the undiscriminating
Russianmanufacturing
fromthecount'sschool,manypupilsgladlychosea
public.On graduating
poorlypaid but sociallyrespectablepositionas a drawingteacherin a
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
4
intheDecorative
Studies
Arts
1994
/Spring
remoteprovincialtown,ratherthan take up the lifeofa factorydraftsman,
whichwas lucrativebut viewed as uncouth and demeaning:
A manufacturer
whosemainpurposeis to satisfy
thetastesofthepublic
hasveryspecificdemandsin mindas regards
anda youngman
patterns,
who has graduatedfroma specializededucationalinstitution
mustput
asidethosecreativeaspirations
inhim The
thathisteachersinspired
specializedartistis set to workcopyingready-made
designsadaptedto
thistraining
to
and adjusting
publictaste,and onlyaftergoingthrough
newconditionscan he relyon a moreor lessstableincome.Moreover,
hispersonalaspirations
and individual
giftsare notfreeto developand
with everyyear become increasingly
stifled.The artistdisappears,
who not onlyfailsto shape the
leavingonlythe practicaldraftsman
tastesofthepublic,butactuallyspoilsthelittlethatsocietyhas gained
fromart.9
The Russian factoryin the pre-Reformera was no place forthose with
artisticaspirations,and the complete lack of practicaltrainingreceivedin
the count's school virtuallyguaranteed that factoryartistswould fail in
their loftygoals. When the school was transferredto the Ministryof
Finance's jurisdictionin 1843, the curriculumwas weightedstill further
towardtrainingdrawingand calligraphyteachersforthe Empire'sgrowing
education system. It is not surprising,therefore,that the count's
institutiondid more to definethe massive problemsfacingindustrialart
education in Russia than to solve them.
The Directorship
ofVictorButovsky
(18604881)
The firstof several metamorphosesin the historyof the Stroganov
School took place in 1859, when the Ministryof Finance mergedit witha
drawing school founded in 1836 by the Moscow Court Architectural
Institute.The followingyearVictor Butovskywas appointed as the new
school's director.A career bureaucratin the Departmentof Trade and
Industry,Butovskyhad no formaltrainingin the arts,but he did possess a
keen appreciationof the measuresneeded to jolt Russian manufacturing
out of its humiliatingrut. AfterEngland's successes at the international
exhibitionsof the previousdecade, no European nation could ignorethe
benefits of a state-sponsored industrial art education, and Russia's
reputationforslavishlyimitatingthe goods of other countrieswas now
recognized as a significantdeterrentto industrial growth. Butovsky's
solutionwas to promoteindustrialarteducation as "one of the best means
ofensuringthe prosperity
of the country,as well as strengthening
national
ideas." Under his direction,the StroganovSchool was to lead a national
campaign to give Russian manufacturing"that distinctivecharacter in
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheStroganov
School 5
the lack of whichwas one of the principal
conjunctionwithartistry,
in the eyes of
reasonsfor [Russian]industry's
negligiblesignificance
Europe."10
twoastonishingly
ambitious
had pushedthrough
By 1870 Butovsky
and foremost
a bastionofnational
projectsto promotetheschoolas first
Museumand themuseumsofLyons
ideas.TakingtheSouthKensington
andBerlinas models,in 1863he beganto drumup supportfromMoscow
art.On thepremise
thatRussian
fora museumofindustrial
manufacturers
draw
for
on
national
ornamental
should
manufacturing
inspiration
a comprehensive
he instituted
traditions,
plan forcollectingin facsimile
detailsfromthe
form(plastercasts and drawings)selectedornamental
applied art, and
majorexamplesof precedine Russianarchitecture,
with
artifacts
(enamels,niello,jewelry,
genuine
Together
manuscripts.
and liturgical
furniture,
objects),these
plate,weapons,harness,fabrics,
formedthebasisof the StroganovMuseum'sRussiansection
facsimiles
whenitfinally
openedin 1868 (Fig.1).
Encouragedby the responsethat a selection of the facsimile
in Moscow,Vienna,andParis,Butovsky
elicitedat exhibitions
ornaments
taskofpublishing
one hundredmanu'
themonumental
nextundertook
deVornement
russeduXe au
a volumehe titledHistoire
scriptilluminations,
In
his
foreword
to
thisdeluxe
XVIe siècled'aprèslesmanuscrits
(Fig. 2).
as follows:
itspracticalbenefits
of1870-1873,he defined
publication
artists
andartisans
thesources
andtypes
for
Itattempts
toshowRussian
in
...
and
ideas
for
use
It
is
a
collection
of
materials
a truenational
style.
and
for
fabric
all areasof ornamentation:
designs
weaving printing,
forworksin goldand for
forfurniture
and furnishings,
decorations
onglassand
andrepoussé,
ceramics,
engraving,
painting
chasing
jewelry,
and
crystal, bookbinding.11
set up several
thathisclaimcouldbe realized,Butovsky
To demonstrate
workshopsattachedto the museumon MiasnitskaiaStreet,and free
access was givento anyonewantingpracticalexperiencein weaving,
and paintingon pottery,
fabricprinting,
modeling,chromolithography,
ofprototypes
fortheapplicationofbona
faïence,andporcelain.A variety
fideRussianornamentto functional
objectswereproducedhere,and
thesegoods were exhibitedand sold in the 1870s with considerable
success.However,it was oftenartisanswho actuallyproducedthese
examplesof an "Old Russianstyle,"the Stroganovstudentsthemselves
beinginvolvedin copyingand compilingdesignsfromthe extensive
considered
thatwasevidently
nowavailableto them,an activity
resources
moresuitedto theircreativeaspirations.
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
6
StudiesintheDecorative
Arts/Spring
1994
FIGURE 1
The Russian section of the Museum of
IndustrialArt attached to the Stroganov
School, Moscow. From Iskusstvoi
3 (1898).
khudozhestvennaia
promyshlennost
In all of these endeavors,Butovsky'sattentionseemed focused
on changingtheexternalperception
oftheStroganov
School
exclusively
as the necessaryprerequisite
to reforming
it fromwithin.This would
his
deferential
attitude
to
French
explain
glancesits
opinion,whichat first
ratheroddlywithhis nationalistintentions.
As his primary
mentor,he
chosenota notedRussianscholar,likeFedorBuslaevorVladimir
Stasov,
but the Frenchauthorityon industrialart, Natalis Rondot,whose
ArtMuseumwasadopted
three-part
planof1858fortheLyonsIndustrial
in fullforMoscow.12It was also at Rondot'sprompting
thatButovsky
chose to have his Histoire
de l'ornement
russepublishedin Parisin 1870.
Fullyalive to the dangersof "designespionage"amongthe English,he
motiveson Rondot's part.Thus,when
appearedobliviousto anyulterior
HenryCole and Owen Jonesofferedto buy some of his ornamental
drawingsat the 1867 ParisExposition,Butovsky"was afraidof giving
Englandour nationaldesignsand declined,demandinga far higher
Butittooka cynicalFrenchobserver,
AlfredDarcel,to pointout
price."13
the value thata grammar
of Russianornamentmighthave forFrench
"IftheLyonssilkmakersareto continueto findan*
textilemanufacturers:
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheStroganov
School 7
FIGURE 2
Plate fromHistoirede l'ornement
russedu Xe
au XVle siècled'après les manuscrits(Paris,
1870-1873).Photo:GettyCenterforthe
ofArtand theHumanities,
Santa
History
California.
Monica,
inline
themselves
outletinRussia,"Darcelwrote,"theyneedto transform
withthisrevivalof taste[forRussianpopularart]."14It seemsprobable
chose to ally himselfand his school with
that Butovskydeliberately
France,Europe'sacknowledged
capitalof good taste.If NatalisRondot
the
school
had taken,whatphilistine
Russian
the
direction
that
praised
him?
woulddareto contradict
were both impressedand
more
scholarlycompatriots
Butovsky's
irritated
bythespectacleofRussiatakenunderthewingofFrance.True,
he had succeededin attracting
foreignattentionto his school and to
Russianculture,but whychoose a Frenchpublisherover a
traditional
intended
ofRussianornament,
Russian?Whywasa grammar
purportedly
so prohibitively
forhumbleRussianartisans,
expensive(a hundredrubles
withtheir
forthecompleteset)?AndwhywereRussia'sByzantine
origins,
fromwithout,
overall
unfortunate
taintofculturalassimilation
privileged
mostnotablythosederived
othersourcesof an ornamental
renaissance,
frompeasantculture?Accordingto his foremost
critic,VladimirStasov,
but
full
of
too"in hisattempts
"full
of
was
ignorance
Butovsky
patriotism,
artsbasedexclusively
on
to revivean Old Russianstylefortheindustrial
Russiancourt."It is now
habitsofa Byzantine-dominated
thearistocratic
cleartomanypeoplethatthereis no specialhonorforRussiansin anysort
Stasov wrote."Does anyone now, except for Mr.
of Byzantinism,"
his
and
associates,have any desiremerelyto pass on stale
Butovsky
news?"15
foreign
d'ornement
russebroughttheStrogaWhateveritsflaws,theHistoire
nov School, and Russianindustrialart,to nationaland international
withtheSchooloftheSocietyfor
It inciteda healthyrivalry
prominence.
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8
Studiesin theDecorativeArts/Spring1994
the Encouragementof the Arts in St. Petersburg,which one year later
published its own, very differentversion of a grammar of Russian
ornament,Stasov's Russian Folk Ornament,But perhaps most important
for Butovsky'spromotional purposes, his book earned the approval of
visitorsfromabroad, such as the EnglishcriticA. BeavingtonAtkinson,
who reportedin 1872 that "l'École Stroganoff"mightindeed be able to
"supplythose aestheticwantswhichare nevermorekeenlyfeltthan at the
turningpoint when a nation is passing out of barbarisminto nascent
civilization."16
The Reforms
ofNikolaiGloba (18964917)
Between 1881, the yearof Butovsky'sdeath, and 1896, the Stroganov
School suffereda temporarysetback. The workshopswere closed down,
fundingwas tight,and because of the lack of practical trainingmost
graduatestook teachingpositions in the provinces,much as theyhad in
Count Stroganov'sday. Meanwhile,Moscow was fastbecomingthe hub of
a nationwide railwaynetworkand the centerof a rapidlygrowingtextile
industry.The Moscow industrialregion'sneed fortraineddesign person*
nel was urgent,and Butovsky'sachievements had scarcely affectedthe
realitiesof industrialproduction,as the followingdescriptionof cut-and*
paste designpracticesin a textilefactorydemonstrates:
Let's say a new pattern for a calico, batiste, upholsterycretonne, or
velveteen is asked for.The factoryhas an artistforthispurpose,but very
rarelyis this"artist"reallyone. In mostcases he's a peasant fromKholui,
Mstera,or Palekh, villagesin Vladimirprovinceemployedexclusivelyin
icon painting.The poor chap, havingbeen raised on imageswithascetic
faces and figures,and straightdraperyfolds,turnsup at the factoryas a
"draftsman,"and instead of St. Basil or St. Nicholas he has to design "a
nice jolly littlepattern."... He sits and sweats over his patternmaking,
usingas models calico patternsthat are alreadyout of fashion.Fromone
he takes a sprig,fromanother a leaf,a flowerfroma third,and voilà! a
colorfulmonstrosity.17
The aesthetic shortcomingsof Russian manufacturingwere not lost
on Count SergeiWitte,ministeroffinancefrom1892 to 1903 and a strong
supporterof both art education and industrialexpansion. In 1896 Witte
appointed his protégé,Nikolai Globa, to the post of Stroganovdirector.
Globa was alreadywell acquainted with the dismal state of industrialart
education in Russia. A graduateof the Academy ofArts,he had taughtfor
several years in the Women's Drawing Class at the Society for the
Encouragementof the Arts in St. Petersburg,before being appointed
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheStroganov
School 9
ofindustrial
arteducationbyWittein 1895.In thiscapacityhe
inspector
theSocietyforthePropagation
ofIndustrial
ArtEducation
helpedtoform
inMoscow,witha membership
some
of
the
including
city'sleadingtextile
He also deviseda plan forsettingup
magnatesand manufacturers.18
theEmpire,
butsoonfoundthelack
designschoolsthroughout
specialized
a seriousobstacle.19
oftrained
instructors
As thenewdirector,
Globaimmediately
undertook
a setofsweeping
froma drawing
theStroganov
schoolintoa
reforms
designedto transform
industrial
art
where
would
takeits
institute,
fully
fledged
practicaltraining
properplace alongsidetheoreticalknowledge.Old workshopswere
reactivatedand new ones graduallyadded,withfundsfromboth the
of Financeand the manufacturing
sector:donationsfromthe
Ministry
and
Mikhailov,
Morozov,
Rybakovfirms,for example,
Sapozhnikov,
withsix newlooms.In
helpedto equip thereopenedweavingworkshop
stillmorecloselyin the
1897 Globa involvedthe city'sindustrialists
a systemof annualdesigncompetitions,
school'saffairs
by introducing
thatcouldbe putinto
withlocalfirms
offering
prizesfororiginalpatterns
It now becameobligatory
forstudentsto spend
immediate
production.
in
interns
their
fields
ofspecialization.
as
theirsummer
factory
holidays
Along with these practicalmeasures,the school's alreadystrong
in everypossibleway.If
witha nationalstylewasstrengthened
association
ofhistenureGloba'saimswereofthevaguestkind- "to
at thebeginning
to developthestudents'abilityto capturetheidea ofartistic
use drawing
and the
ofthelawsofbeautyand refinement,
theirunderstanding
form,
the
of theirideas in beautifulformsthatwouldsatisfy
communication
most
1900
the
school's
aesthetic
taste"
demandsof developed
by
the
students'
artistic
instinct
towardseeking
was
"to
direct
goal
important
in
art."20
national
Russian
a distinctive
anddeveloping
Beginning
beauty
to St. Petersburg,
wereorganized
in 1899,excursions
Iaroslavl,Vladimir,
Rostov,and otherhistoriccities,"to acquaintstudentswithold Russian
architecture,
paintingand appliedart,and also withpeasanthandicrafts
When local jewelry,
and factory
ceramics,or textilefirms
production."21
offered
theyfrequently
specified
prizesin theannualdesigncompetitions,
In
the
five
for
a Russianor Byzantine
prizeswere
style. 1899, example,
as follows:
described
I. Prizefora hanging
bronze
lampintheLouisXVorXVIstyle,
Elizaveta
Fedorovna.
Duchess
byGrand
given
intheRussian
fabric
II.Prizefora juteupholstery
style,
given
by
V. G. Sapozhnikov.
ina Byzantine
orRussian
III. Prizefora tombstone
style,
given
A.
List.
by
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
10
1994
Arts/Spring
StudksintheDecorative
setfora man'sdeskin the
IV. Prizefora completesilverwriting
Russianstyle,givenbyM. P. Ovchinnikov.
V. Prizefora tea set in the Russianstyle,givenby M. S.
KuznetsovandCo.22
Over time,the revivalof national traditionsbecame an integralpart
of the basic curriculum,which was now divided into a five-yearLower
School programand three years of composition classes in the Upper
School. The firsttwo "historyof style" classes taught at the Stroganov
weredevoted exclusivelyto Russian styles,
in viewof theacknowledged
abilityofchildrento assimilatethings
withcomparative
ease and to remember
themforthe restof their
in a Russianschoolthestudyofone'snativehistory,
lives.Naturally,
and in art schools of one's native art antiquities,should take
overthestudyofthearthistory
ofothernations,andone
precedence
mustthinkthattheforms
ofone'snativeart,storedawayduringthe
will alwaysremainan
and curiosity,
yearsof greatestreceptivity
unshakablefoundation
formsdear to the
upon whichever^newer
be developed.23
spiritofRussianartwillsubsequently
In 1908 the drawingcourseswerereorganizedand expanded to encourage
greaterindependence and imagination.A class in "creativedrawing"was
introducedto develop uthecreativeabilitieswithwhichRussian youthare
especiallyendowed, but which are usuallystifledfromearliestchildhood
by that urgeto imitatethatis so widespreadin Russian society."24Instead
of "the drypedantic tracingof dull models,pupils [were] taughtto make
both line and color drawingsof objects familiarto themfromtheirhome
environment,or shown them fromthe Museum collection."25Academic
drawingfromcasts was deferreduntilthe fourthyear,bywhichtimepupils
would have acquired "a sufficientstore of theirown individualthoughts
and observations."26
And in the seniorcompositionclasses forstudentsin
theirfinalthreeyears,the firstclass was devoted exclusivelyto designing
in a Russian style.
These adjustmentsto a systemof arteducation importedfromabroad
seem rational and necessarysteps to producinga new breed of Russian
designer,one capable of independentthoughtand naturallypredisposed
toward primaryaesthetic habits acquired in childhood- in short, to a
native Russian style. This, after all, was the goal to which Count
Stroganovhad hoped his school mightaspire.But it was also the direction
in which Russia was being prodded by other nations, not merelyout of
self'interest(to protect theirown markets),but also in response to the
specterof an industrializedworldin which all nations would be culturally
homogeneous. As the nineteenth centurydrew to a close, backward
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheStroganov
School 11
countrieslike Russiawere increasingly
exhortedto protecttheirpreindustrial
culturebeforeit disappeared.In the wordsof one English
"Whatwas wanted[in Russia]was thatthenationalartshould
observer,
be fostered,
so thattheworldshouldnotbecomemorecommonplace,
as
theresultofcommercial
and travelling
facilities."27
Freetrade
enterprise
was a dangerthreatening
that"Russiawouldbe speedilysuppliedwith
waresfromotherEuropeanmarkets,
whichwouldultimately
lead to the
sameresultsthathad to be deploredin India,thedecayofnativeart."28
These veiled prescriptions
were not lost on the StroganovSchool's
administration.
It is no accidentthat the launchingof a distinctive
Stroganovstyleoccurredat the 1900 Paris Exposition,where Art
Nouveau and the culturesof countrieshithertodismissedas primitive
in tandem.
werecelebrated
The Stroganov
Style
had establisheda Russianstyleforthe StroganovSchool
Butovsky
thatwas rootedin the relatively
new scienceof archaeology,
and that
to
sources.
Globa's
stressed
reforms
contrast,
fidelity original
By
promoted
as a fundamental
the conceptof stylization
designprinciple.Although
artifacts
continuedto serveas models,thecreativeprocesswasno longer
forpassivereproduction.
Studentswere
confinedto selectingornament
to transform
motifs
andforms
the
nowencouraged
through prismoftheir
be argued
age and theirown experience.It could certainly
fin-de-siècle
and
both
natural
forms
and
that,bydistorting,
exaggerating, simplifying
to theworldas
thenationalculturalheritage,
theywereonlyresponding
theirmedievalancestorshad done,or as the Russianpeasantstilldid.29
But mostobservers
merelysaw the insidiousinfluenceof "Viennaand
dismissed
as "decadence."
Munichchic"at work,a tendency
Thisfundamentally
xenophobicconclusionwasnotreachedimmedi'
it
was
observed
that"the attemptof the new directorto
ately.Initially
'art' deservesevery
raisethe level of our wretchedso-calledindustrial
When the StroganovSchool scoredan unexpectedand
attention."30
withtwoGrandsPrix
successat the1900ParisExposition,
unprecedented
and six goldand six silvermedalsawardedbyan international
jury,the
because
were
were
"not
entries
they
simple
winning
praisedprecisely
fromourantiquities
butfreecompositions
based
motifs
copiesoffamiliar
on our ancientstyle.One sensesin themthe breathof the past and
new,something
something
uniqueto themselves."31
a
of the annual Stroganovexhibition
reviewer
By 1901, however,
soundeda note of caution:"The Russianstylepredominates,
although
... In the
forfashionable
tendencies.
someworksreflectan enthusiasm
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
12
StuäesintheDecorative
Arts/Spring
1994
"32Two
'Stylizationof Flowers'class one senses a desire to 'go decadent/
yearslater,it was observedin more pointed language that the school was
"imbuing designs and finishedobjects with a life and nature that are
foreignto our spirit,that are more like work fromsome German or new
Zionist school
Everythingshown here reveals well-establishedprinciples of applied art borrowedfromGerman stylemodernepublications.
The workshopscan go no further
in thisdirection."33
The immediate source of this problematicnew style was not the
Pan, and Studio,as these reviews
availabilityof artjournalssuch as Jugend,
mightsuggest,but the Stroganovfacultyitself,which from1898 included
the most progressivearchitectsand artiststhen involved in articulatinga
new Russian style.To teach the seniorcompositionclasses, Globa invited
the architectsFedor Shekhtel, Lev Brailovsky,Lev Kekushchev, Sergei
Solovev, Konstantin Bykovsky,Ivan Zholtovsky,Sergei Vashkov, and
Alexander Shchusev. Anatomyclasses weretaughtbySergeiGoloushev, a
FIGURE 3
Design fora fireplace,c. 1898. From Zapiski
Obshchestva.
Moskovskogo
Arkhitektumogo
Ezhegodnik1 (1909).
medical doctor more famousforhis art criticism,which appeared under
the pseudonymSergei Glagol. KonstantinKorovin,whose designsforthe
Russian pavilionsat the 1900 ParisExpositionwerewidelyseen as the first
viable prototypefor a neo-Russian style in architecture,was appointed
head of the stage designprogram.And Mikhail Vrubel,then approaching
the peak ofhis notorietyas a "decadent" painter,was invitedto teach two
new courses called "Plant Stylization"and "Exercisesin Stylization."
During the 1890s, Vrubel had been the creative force behind the
success of the Abramtsevo Ceramic Factory,a commercial enterprise
fundedby the railwaymagnate and art patron Sawa Mamontov, where
painters like Korovin, Valentin Serov, Vasily Polenov, and Vrubel
experimentedwith art ceramics,majolica, and new glazes. Signs of the
Abramtsevoinfluencecan alreadybe detected in a Stroganov student's
design fora tiled fireplace(a favoriteVrubel project) fromthe late 1890s
(Fig. 3). In itselfa very "Russian" object, the fireplacecombines two
varietiesof plant ornament(one traditional,one more fantastic)withthe
squat, bulbous columns that were an integral part of the Russian
architecturalvocabulary. Under the direction of the sculptor Nikolai
Andreev, the Stroganov ceramics workshop acquired an international
reputationfornew forms,new ornamentation,and new high-fireglazes
and metalliceffects(Fig. 4).34
In the weaving and fabricprintingworkshops,the peculiar brand of
neo-Russian ornamentfavoredtherewas also indebted to the decorative
experimentsof artistsfromthe Abramtsevo circle, above all to Elena
Polenova, Alexander Golovin, and Natalia Iakovlevna Davydova. In the
1890s these artistshad devised a new grammarof Russian ornamentbased
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheStroganov
School 13
FIGURE 4
oftheStroganov
The ceramicworkshop
ofNikolai
School,underthedirection
Andreev,early1900s.FromK. E. Pruslina,
Russkaiakeramika
(Moscow,1974).
on stylizedmotifsfromlocal floraand fauna,whichwas intendedto
- traditional
breathenewlifeintoRussia'sdecliningkustarartindustries
and wood carving.35
fabricprinting,
peasantcraftssuch as embroidery,
of
word
a
the
German
was
Künstler,
artist.)
(Kustar apparentlycorruption
visiblein twofabricdesignsthatwerepublished
Theirlegacyis especially
in a Moscow architectural
journalin 1909. In one, a hen pecks at a
bushwithspatulateleavesthatundulateupwardto endin giant
sprawling
and
circularblooms(Fig.5). The other,a repeatpatternofcloudberries
fantastic
foliageon a darkground(Fig. 6), recallsthe splendidwoven
itcalls
butmorevividly
brocadesforwhichRussiahad longbeenfamous,
to mind the plant fantasiesof Elena Polenova with theircuriously
andexpressionist
stylizations.36
grotesque
hyperboles
Stroganovpupilswerealso awareof activitiesat Talashkino,the
SmolenskestateofPrincessMariaTenisheva,wherea revivalofpeasant
in theearly1900s.Tenisheva'sMoscowstoreThe
craftswas attempted
Source sold an arrayof one'of'a'kinddecorativeobjectsproducedby
Moscowartists,and the
usingdesignsby prominent
peasantcraftsmen
in 1903 to
wasknownto haveselectedtwoStroganov
graduates
princess
headherTalashkinoworkshops.37
Withoutaccess to the Stroganov'sarchives,any pictureof the
withboththemajorcentersofprogressive
school'sinteraction
designand
firms
remainsfrustratingly
theleadingcommercial
incomplete.38
It seems clear, however,that the school acted as the primary
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
14
1994
Arts/Spring
StudiesintheDecorative
FIGURE 5
S. Markelov, design forthe textileworkshop
at the Stroganov School. From Zapisid
Obshchestva.
Moshovskogo
Arkhitektumogo
Ezhegodnik1 (1909).
betweenthe "avant-garde"Moscow art worldand the
intermediary
middle-class
its own formof Russianmoderne
consumer,disseminating
itsstoreon Rozhdestvenka
Street.HeretheMoscowpubliccould
through
in
made
the
school's
seventeen
"ceramics,
buygoods
including
workshops,
silver,
bronze,copperwork,enamels,furniture,
icons,embroidery,
textiles,
in
work
leather
and
horn,bookbinding,
glassware,
chromolithography,
at the annual
etching,and otherformsof printmaking."39
Similarly,
exhibitions
ofstudentwork,thevisitor
couldbuydecorative
objectsofthe
in theposteradvertising
kindfeatured
the 1913-1914studentexhibition:
a metalcupwithfernlike
for
spirals handles,a repoussémetalteapot,anda
naboika(blockprinted
fabric)suitablefora portière
lengthofboldlyprinted
(Fig.7).
The decorativeeffect
thatcouldbe achievedbycombining
thebest
efforts
of all seventeenworkshops
was demonstrated
in 1908,whenthe
school exhibitedseveralmodel interiorsat the International
Art and
Construction
Exhibitionin St. Petersburg
The
walls
of the
(Fig. 8).
side tables,
buffets,
crampeddiningroomwerelinedwithcumbersome
chairs,and a divan,hangingcupboardsand shelves,decorativemajolica,
and wooden platters.On everysurface,caskets and kovshchi(both
traditional
Russianshapes in wood and metalwork)
jostledJugendstil
clocksand vases.The diningtablewas setwitheverykindofdecorative
metallampshade.
The sheer
utensil,beneaththeshadowofan impressive
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
School 15
TheStroganov
the school'sallegianceto the productionof consumer
clutterconfirms
life.
ofeveryday
than
to theUtopianaestheticization
rather
goods
The CampaignforGraphicLiteracy
to a
confined
In 1902theStroganov's
previously
sphereofinfluence,
was
social
and
a
welUtO'do
area
limited
stratum,
fairly
geographical
ofFinancepasseda Statuteon
dramatically
expandedwhentheMinistry
ArtEducation.Forthenextdecadetheschoolbecamethenucleusofa
nationwidecampaignfor "graphicliteracy,"trainingdesignersand
teachersforall levelsand branchesof industrial
throughout
production
FIGURE 6
V. Akimov, design forthe textileworkshop
at the Stroganov School. From Zapiski
Obshchestoa.
MoskovskogoArkhitektumogo
Ezhegodník1 (1909).
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Arts
1994
intheDecorative
16 Studies
/Spring
FIGURE 7
ofStudentWork
PosterfortheExhibition
School 1913-1914.From
at theStroganov
N. I. Baburina,Russkiiplakatvtoroipoloviny
XlX-nachaiaXXveka
1988).
(Leningrad,
the Empire.40Within its officialpurview now came all of those issues
which the schools of fineart had traditionallyignored:"questions about
the general aesthetic education of the people, about art in the lifeof the
child at school, about the developmentof folkart throughthe kustarand
the artisan,and the statusand goals of our industrialart."41
Particularattentionwas given to the aesthetic education of Russia's
kustarpopulation,comprisingsome threemillionpeasants who produced
a range of consumer products under a cottage industrysystem.In the
1870s the revivalof certainkustarartsand craftshad been recognizedas a
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheStroganov
School 17
thesocialstatusquo
sourceofrevenueanda wayofmaintaining
potential
in the countryside,
while celebratingindigenousculturaltraditions.
WidelyconsideredRussia'slastdirectlinkwiththosenativeartswhich
Russiankustar
in theeighteenth
Westernculturehadsupplanted
century,
art was now perceivedas an economicgold mine that with proper
couldyieldgoodreturns.
management
outreacheffort
The Stroganov's
beganwiththe openingof branch
schoolsin the villagesof Ligachev,Rechitsa,SergiusPosad, and Osand toy
woodcarving,
all important
centersofkustar
furniture,
trogozhsk,
was
of
schools
and
A
network
trainingworkshops subseproduction.
in
quentlyestablishedin key kustardistrictslike Kamenets-Podolsk
A 1913photograph
Poltavaprovince,
an areawellknownforitsceramics.
Artsand CraftsTrainingWorkshop'sproducoftheKamenetS'Podolsk
theemphasisthattheschool'sadministration
tionreflects
placedon all
NikolaiRoot,ardently
supported
aspectsofdrawing(Fig.9). Itsdirector,
have
"We
basedon Westernprinciples,
an arteducationsystem
claiming:
FIGURE 8
The diningroomexhibited
bytheStroganov
Artand
Schoolat theInternational
in St. Petersburg,
Exhibition
Construction
1908.FromNiva32 (1908).
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
18
1994
Arts/Spring
StuäesintheDecorative
FIGURE 9
View of the Kamenets-Podolsk Arts and
CraftsTraining Workshop's section at the
Second All-Russian Kustar Exhibitionin
Petrograd,1914. From SolntseRossü (1913).
ofindustrial
arteducation.The
nothingto fearfromtheEuropeanization
of
theachievement
Russianartistin theappliedarts,havingassimilated
ofRussianartin all spheres,can create
Europe,as shownbythehistory
art
not
is
not
Russian
and
that
national,ifthebasisforindustrial
nothing
But as thecampaign
on cultivatedprinciples."42
educationis established
a majorquestionarose. If
to educate the Russiankustarprogressed,
and colorful
peasant art were valued for its "naïveté,spontaneity,
"43
maintain
those
"untutored"
would
it
be
able
to
for
being
'savagery,'
qualitiesin thefaceofan educationsystemthatvaluedcorrectdrawing,
Would the "real" Russian art
technicalprecision,and refinement?
practicedin countlesspeasantvillagesbe able to holditsownagainstthe
reconstituted,
espoused by the
updatedstylerussemoderneofficially
School?
Stroganov
trainedunderthe Globa
1913
severalclassesof "Stroganovtsy"
By
systemhad graduatedand found positionseither in factoriesand
in provincialschools.
or as instructors
and artisticdirectors
workshops,
thattheiralma
Some conscientiously
practicedthenationalist
principles
materhad taughtthem.EkaterinaVorobevabecame directorof the
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheStroganov
School 19
a state-run
schoolcommitted
to
Lace Schoolin St. Petersburg,
Mariinsky
oftraditional
women'shandcrafts.
the
1910s
and
thepreservation
During
offormer
students
workedas staff
artists
forthe
intothe1920s,a number
in
Kustar
Museum
Leon
tie
Moscow
vskyLane, helpingto
important
In thesouthern
ofkustarartcenters.44
designnewproductsfora variety
V.
I.
a
Cherchenko
of
developed kind of "neoprovince Poltava,
Ukrainian"decorativestyleforthe carpentry
workshopsrun by the
or
local
Poltavaprovincial
zemstvo,
government
(Fig.10).
instrucwhereStroganov-trained
Therewerealsoinstances,
however,
the
anomalies.
Under
torswere the source of extraordinary
stylistic
studentsat the Bolshoe Krasnoe
directionof foursuch instructors,
in Kostromaprovincewere
silversmiths
for
and
training
workshop goldin the Russian
revivalthenfashionable
to the Biedermeier
introduced
in
In
fashion
workers
the
"Marble"
similar
Lapidary
capitals(Fig. 11).
producedframes,
TrainingWorkshopin theUralstownofEkaterinburg
and statuettesin a neo-Egyptian
style,thanksto the
paperweights,
A. N. Shapochkin(Fig.12).
oftheStroganov-trained
initiative
Instancesof this sortfueleda bitterdebate over the wisdomof
fromgovernment
interference
agenciessuchas theStroganovSchool in
FIGURE 10
Carved sideboard made in the carpentry
workshopof the Poltava provincialzemstvo,
c. 1913. From Russicoenarodnoeiskusstvona
vtoroivserossiishoi
kustamoivystavkev
Petrogradev 1913 g (Petrograd,1914).
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
intheDecorative
1994
20 Studies
Arts
/Spring
FIGURE 11
Silver,gilt,and enameled goods made by
formerstudentsof the Bolshoe Krasnoe Arts
and CraftsSchool, Kostroma province,c.
1913. From Russkoenarodnoeiskusstw.
the natural evolution (or decline) of Russian peasant culture.Far from
raisingthe wretchedRussiankustarto a level of taste and cultureon a par
with that of Europe,the Stroganovseemed to conspirein erodingthe last
shredsofthosequalitiesthatconstituted
hisabsolutevalue and difference.
Such incidents also suggest that the "psychological training" in
national values thatthe school triedto emphasizewas both superficialand
artificial.Few people, it seemed,reallybelieved thatthe neo-Russianstyle,
with its tendencytoward theatricalexcess and impracticality,
was more
than a clever marketingdevice best suited forinternationalexhibitions
and the exporttrade.Althoughthe StroganovSchool doggedlyattempted
uto instillin Russian societygreaterconfidencein its own artisticpowers
and to have a broad moral and practical significance,"45
it ultimately
to
the
of a consumingpublic thatstill
provedpowerless withstand
tyranny
looked to Europe to findout what it should buy. With the exception of
religiousart,wherenational stylewas alwaysconsideredmostappropriate,
the demand forthe neo-Russianstylein everydaylifelasted onlyas long as
it was valued abroad.
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheStroganov
School 21
Schoolafter1917
The Stroganov
In theory,
the history
of the ImperialCentralStroganovSchool of
Artendsin September1918 when,bydecreeof the People's
Industrial
withthe Moscow
of Enlightenment,
it was amalgamated
Commissariat
to formthe FreeState
School of Painting,Sculpture,and Architecture
ArtStudios,or SVOMAS. Two yearslatertheSVOMAS werereconstitutedas theHigherStateArtStudios,or VKhUTEMAS,and forseveral
and debatesof the
yearsthe schoolwas an arenaforthe experiments
factionas represented
Constructivist
byAlexanderRodchenko,Varvara
Stepanova,andotheryoungVKhUTEMAS faculty.46
and personnel,
Yet sweeping
designedto
changesin name,structure,
put as muchdistanceas possiblebetweenthe Soviet presentand the
discredited
bourgeoispast, could not whollyobliteratethe veryreal
betweenVKhUTEMAS and the StroganovSchool. For one
continuity
identicalto thatof its
thing,the VKhUTEMAS missionwas virtually
dedicatedto preparing
"highlyqualifiedmasterartistsfor
predecessor,
ofprofessional
and technical
and
directors
instructors
as wellas
industry
education,""developingand encouragingartisticactivityamong the
FIGURE 12
Carved marble and stoneworkmade by
pupils of the "Marble" LapidaryTraining
Workshop of the Ekaterinburgdistrict
zemstvo,Perm province,c. 1913. From
Russkoenarodnoeiskusstoo.
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
22
Studiesin theDecorativeArts/SpringÎ 994
People/' and fostering"the enormousrole" that industrialart would play
in "the internationalexchange market."47Principlesthat had formedthe
cornerstoneof Globa's reformedStroganov School in the early 1900spractical training,links with industrythrough internships,mass art
education- were replicatedas essentialcomponentsof the Constructivist
ethos. And an unusuallyhighnumberof avant-gardeartistscommittedto
the restructuringof Soviet art and life were themselves former
"Stroganovtsy,"among themAlexander Rodchenko,Varvara Stepanova,
Olga Rozanova, Konstantin Vialov, Aleksei Morgunov, Georgii and
VladimirStenberg,and KonstantinMedunitsky.48
As late as 1922 it was still possible and permissibleto acknowledge
the obvious continuitybetween the formerStroganov School and its
restructuredself, as an encyclopedia entryfor that year demonstrates:
"Having begun by trainingcraftsmen,the StroganovSchool later shifted
to educating drawing teachers and factorydesigners.Around 1900 it
began to steer a course toward the trainingof kustarartists,and finally
VKhUTEMAS has made its primarygoal the creation of a closer bond
between the related branches of our industry."49By 1927, however,
to discuss
changes in the political climate had made it extremelydifficult
the StroganovSchool, or forthatmatterany prerevolutionary
institution,
outside the rhetoricof class struggle.The highlycriticalreminiscencesof
IgnatiiNivinsky,a formerpupil and teacherat the formerStroganov,were
symptomaticof thisgrowingintolerance:
I was educatedat the StroganovSchool duringtheera of "artistic
reaction."The mainobjectandthedominant
ideabehindourstudies
wastheso-called"appliedarts,"ornamentation,
theaccumulation
of
uselessbut"chic"detailsforobjectsthathadno specific
purpose.All
vitalthought
was absentfromtheprogram,
and itwas impossible
to
findtheslightest
in
allusionto fundamental
Everywhere,
problems.
boththeclassrooms
and theworkshops,
therereignedthedesireto
thepublictaste,a desirethatwas sustainedbytheshopthat
satisfy
was openedin the school.... In fact,the school producedclever
whoseideal was to makeobjectsthat"sold well"on the
compilers
industrial
artmarket.50
For the past seventyyears, such caricaturesof the Stroganov School's
complex historyhave effectivelyobscured its contributionto design
education in Russia. With the passingof Communismand the waning of
Modernism,it may now be possible to reintegratethe Stroganov School
and all thatit standsfor- the quest fornational identity,the formationof
- into
popular culture,the integrationof the decorative and functional
the historyof Russian artin its broadestsense.51
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheStroganov
School 23
NOTES
9. Gartvig,
Shkolarisovaniia,
282-83.
1. The other two schools were both in St.
The School of the Society for the
Petersburg.
iskusstvo
i mnenie
o
10. ViktorI. Butovskii,
Russkoe
of the Arts was foundedas a
Encouragement
i F. 1. Buslaeva[RussianArtand
nemViollet-le-Duc
schoolin 1839,and in 1862 expandedto
drawing
the Opinion of Viollet-le-Ducand F. I. Buslaev
includeappliedarts.In 1906,whenNikolaiRoerich
It] (Moscow,1879),4.
was appointeddirector,the school was reformed Regarding
in
Moscow.
School
alongthelinesoftheStroganov
de Moscou,Histoire
11. Musée d'artet d'industrie
See Nikolai Makarenko,Shkola Imperatorskogode l'ornement
russedu Xe au XVle siècled'aprèsles
LXXV [The manuscrits,
Pooshchreniia
Obshchestva
Khudozhesto
vol. 1 (Paris,1870), 1.
Schoolof the ImperialSocietyforthe EncourageArtin Moscow,
mentoftheArtsl(Petrograd,
1914).The Shtieglits 12. On theMuseumofIndustrial
later renamed the Alexander II Museum of
CentralSchool ofTechnicalDrawing(foundedin
Art,see NatalisRondot,"Muséed'artet
and Industrial
1874)waswellknownforitsexcellentfacilities
25
de Moscou,"Gazettedes beaux-arts
and for its fundamentally d'industrie
technicalpreparation,
82-85.
1868):
(July
andcurriculum.
Germanfaculty
Russkoe
13. Butovskii,
172.
iskusstvo,
oftheschoolbefore1860is A.
2. The majorhistory
k iskusstvam
i
v otnoshenii
Shkolarisovaniia
Gartvig,
14. AlfredDarcel,"L'artrusse,"Gazettedesbeauxv 1825 GrafomS. G.
uchrezhdennaia
remeslam,
arts17 (March1878): 285.
do I860 [The
i razvitie
Ee vozniknovenie
Stroganovom.
Stasov,"Eshcherazpo povodukritika
DrawingSchool Relatedto the Artsand Crafts, 15. Vladimir
"
Foundedin 1825 by Count S. G. Stroganov.Its 'MoskovskikhVedomostei,' Sobraniesochinenii
Critic for 'The
More
the
to
1860] (Moscow, ["Once
Regarding
Origins and Development
"Stroga- MoscowGazette,'" CollectedWorks],vol. 2 (St.
1901). See also Moskvich[pseudonym],
novskoetsentralnoeuchilishchetekhnicheskogo Petersburg,
1894),285.
i khudozhestvennaia
v Moskve,"iskusstvo
rizovaniia
An ArtTourtoRussia
16. J.Beavington
Atkinson,
[A Muscovite,"The Stroganov
promyshlennost
251.
1986),
(London,
CentralSchoolofTechnicalDrawingin Moscow,"
Artand Industrial
Art] 3 (1898): 286-93; and S.
17. A. P-v. [MaximGorky],"Khudozhestvennaia
VKhUTEMAS (Paris, 1990),
Khan-Magomedov,
Iskusstvo
Art,"Art]5
["Industrial
promyshlennost,"
145-57.
(1936): 140.
3. It is worthnotingthat,whereasbymid-century
art
RussialaggedfarbehindEnglandin industrial
schoolpredatesbya
education,CountStroganov's
ofthefirst
decadethefoundation
Englishschoolof
design,in 1837. The parallelsbetweenthesefirst
Moscow and London schools are striking.See
ofDesign(London,1963).
QuentinBell,TheSchools
105.
Shkolarisovaniia,
4. Gartvig,
5. Ibid.,106.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.,136.
8. "Only worksof paintingand some sculptural
worksactuallybelongto the freearts.The rest
relatemoreto mechanicalworksandsome,suchas
crafts
are essentially
and lathe-turning,
carpentry
Theirprice
thatbearno relationto worksofart
and
ofworkers
is usuallydetermined
bythenumber
daysrequiredto producetheseworks,as wellas by
Citedin I. A. Pronina,
thevalueofthematerials."
vAkademii
iskusstvo
Dekorativnoe
khudozhestv
[DecorativeArt in the Academyof Arts] (Moscow,
1983),140n. 53.
ShekhKekushev,
Zhukovsky,
(Brailovsky,
Bykovsky,
mostcloselyinvolvedin
tel)andthoseindustrialists
arteducation:Sawa Mamontov,Sergei
industrial
T. Morozov,M. P. Ovchinnikov,Ivan Tsvetaev,
and PetrShchukhin.
20.
23. Otchet,
24. Ibid.,19.
25. Ibid.
26. Ibid.,21.
27. E. DelmarMorgan,"RussianIndustrialArt,"
Journal
ofArts14 (May19,1894):662.
oftheSociety
28. Ibid.
29. A similarpoint was made by the popular
theornament
illustrator
IvanBilibin,whodescribed
on embroidered
peasanttowelsas "so fantastical
used an exact copy in a
that if an illustrator
publicationthe public would proclaim,'What a
decadent.'" Ivan Bilibin,"Ostaticiiskusstvav
russkoiderevne,"Zhumaldliavsekh["The Remains
ofArtsin theRussianCountryside,"
Magazinefor
Everyone]10 (1904): 617.
Rossii
sokrovishcha
30. "Izvestiia,"
Khudozhestvennye
["News,"ArtTreasuresofRussia]4 (1901): 63.
i khudozhestvennaia
31. "Zametka,"Iskusstvo
proArt] 12
["A Note,"Artand Industrial
myshlennost
(1899): 1046.
18. MembersincludedN. A. Naidenov(president
of the Moscow Stock ExchangeCommittee),the
M. A. Morozov,V. G. Sapozhnikov,
industrialists
Sergei and Savva Morozov (all heads of major
textileconcerns),M. S. Kuznetsov(ceramics),
M. P. Ovchinnikov(gold and silver),and the
railwaymagnateSawa Mamontov.Novostidnia
14, 1896): 2.
[NewsoftheDay] (January
32. "Vystavka v Stroganovskomuchilishche,"
at theStroganov
["Exhibition
motivy
Arkhitektumye
School,"Architectural
Motifs]25 (May1901): 1.
19. Globa's programis outlined in "S'ezd v
Moskve,"Novoe vremia["Congressin Moscow,"
NewTimes]7134 (January
8, 1896): 3.
(1903): 24.
des élèvesde l'école
20. Recueilsdes compositions
à Moscou,vol. 1 (Moscow,1900), 1.
Stroganoff
33. B. [articlesignedwithinitialonly],"Vystavka
uchenischeskikhmasterskikhStroganovskogo
i dekorativnoe
uchilishcha,"Iskusstvostroitelnoe
["Exhibitionof the StudentWorkshopsat the
School,"BuildingandDecorativeArt]3
Stroganov
34. On the ceramicworkshopat the Stroganov
School, see Klara N. Pruslina,Russkaiakeramika
[RussianCeramics](Moscow,1974),91-109.
Tsen21. Otchetpo imperatorskomu
Stroganovskomu
UchiUshtralnomu
Khudozhestvenno-Promyshlennomu
chuza 1909 g [Reporton the ImperialStroganov
ArtSchool for1909] (Moscow,
CentralIndustrial
1910),46.
see
revivalmovement,
35. On aspectsofthekustar
Wendy Salmond, "The SolomenkoEmbroidery
and Propaganda
Journal
ofDecorative
Workshops,"
Arts (Summer 1987): 126-43, and idem, "La
riscopertadell'artepopolare,"Ricerchedi storia
39 (1989): 39-52.
dell'arte
i khudozhestvennaia
22. "Konkursy,"
Iskusstvo
proArt and Industrial
["Competitions,"
myshlennost
Art]9-10 (1899): lxxiv.The jurywas made up of
on theStroganov
and architects
bothartists
faculty
36. On Polenova,see WendyRuthSalmond,"The
ofFolkArtinRussia:The Revivalof
Modernization
1885-1917"(Ph.D. diss.,
theKustarArtIndustries
ofTexas at Austin,1989),chaps.1-2.
University
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1994
Arts
intheDecorative
24 Studies
/Spring
dataon theseandotherartists
37. See PrincessM. K. Tenisheva,Vpechatleniia noe obrazovaniev Rossii i za granitsei,"Zodchii 48. Forbiographical
in
see TheAvant-Garde,
ArtEducationin Russiaand Abroad," oftheRussianavant-garde,
of My Life] (Leningrad, ["Industrial
moeizhizni[Impressions
Russia Ì 910- I 930. Neu; Perspectives,ed. Stephanie
The Architect]1 Ganuary3,1910): 1.
1991),208.
Barronand Maurice Tuchman,exh. cat. (Los
38. Afterthe 1917 Revolution,the Stroganov's 42. NikolaiRoot,"Khudozhestvenno-promyshlenAngeles: Los Angeles CountyMuseum of Art,
museumcollectionsand itsarchiveweredispersed noe obrazovaniei Kamenets-Podolskaia
khudo1980).
in the courseof the zhestvenno-remeslennaia
and in somecases destroyed
uchebnaiamasterskaia,"
firstinto SVOMAS (the Iskusstvo
school'stransformation,
ArtEducation 49. N. Tarasov,"Stroganovskoe
v luzhnoiRossii["Industrial
uchilishche
tekhFree State Art Studios) and thenVKhUTEMAS
Artsand CraftsTrain- nicheskogo
and theKamenets-Podolsk
v Moskev,"Entsiklopedicheskii
risovaniia
(the Higher Art and Technical Studios). See
instituía Granat
ing Workshops,"Art in SouthernRussia] (Kiev) slovar russkogo bibiiograficheskogo
VKhUTEMAS,151.
9-10 (1913): 405.
Khan-Magomedov,
["The StroganovSchool of TechnicalDrawingin
Moscow," Encyclopediaof the Granat Russian
39. Zapisid Moskovskogo ArkhitektumogoObshv
"Vserossiisskaia
43. GeorgiiLukomskii,
vystavka
vol. 41, pt. 5 (Moscow,
Institute],
Bibliographical
chestva.
[NotesoftheMoscowArchitec- Kieve," Apolon["The All-RussianExhibitionin
Ezhegodxuk
col. 33.
1922),
turalSociety.Annual]1 (1909): xxi.
Kiev,"Apotio]7 (September1913): 72.
40. The statute instituteda four-tiersystem 44.
AmongthemwereE. G. Teliakovskii,B. N.
of educationinstitutions:
drawingschools, arts Lange,andZ. D. Kashkarova.
industrial
artschools(shkoly),
andcrafts
workshops,
and industrialart institutes(uchilishcha).See
45. Otchet,
49.
E. Baumgarten,
"Khudozhestvenno-promyshlennoe
ConstrucLodder,Russian
ArtEducation," 46. On this,seeChristina
Zodchii["Industrial
obrazovanie,"
tivism
(NewHaven,1983), 109-44.
28 (1902): 322.
The Architect]
41. NikolaiRoot,"Khudozhestvenno-promyshlen47. Ibid.,112-13.
50. Quoted in Khan-Magomedov,
VKhUTEMAS,
152.
to thisday,as
51. The factthattheschoolsurvives
ArtSchool (formerly
theMoscowHigherIndustrial
theStroganov),
is a tribute
to itsexceptional
ability
to survivepoliticalandsocialupheavalsintact.The
schoolanditsmuseum(nowconsiderably
depleted)
arelocatedat 9 Volokolamskoe
Shossein Moscow.
This content downloaded from 206.211.139.204 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:06:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions