IZO

Nominees for the Innovation visual arts prize (Open Space, in Russian).

Kandinsky Prize reviews. Max Seddon (Moscow Times). Igor Markin (art4_ru, in Russian). Kotomish (kotomish, in Russian). By general report the highpoint of a dull ceremony seems to have been winner Vadim Zakharov's acceptance speech, in which he suggested the prize should have gone to Andrei Monastyrsky instead.

Vadim Zakharov was awarded the Kandinsky Prize on 10 December. Congratulations, Vadim! The media-art prize was given to Aristarkh Chernyshev and Aleksei Shulgin, and the young artist prize to Evgeni Antufev (Open Space, in Russian).

Viktor Pinchuk announces $100,000 Future Generation Art Prize for artists under 35 (NYT):

And à la “American Idol,” the public will also have something of a say. “We wanted this to be a totally democratic process,” Mr. Pinchuk said. After the finalists are announced, the public can vote online for the winner of a noncash People’s Choice Prize.

The PinchukArtCentre prizes have been awarded by a jury including Francesco Bonami (Italy), Udo Kittelmann (Germany), Jessica Morgan (UK) and Ukrainian artists Serhiy Bratkov and Boris Mikhailo. The main prize (100,000 UAH - $12,500) went to Artem Volokitin. Special prizes (25,000 UAH) went to Oleksi Salmanov and Masha Shubina. A people's choice prize of 10,000 UAH went to BLUEMOLOKO group [why do Russian art groups, if they choose to reference a colour, tend to call themselves blue-something?]. Details (2009-PAC_Prize_Winners_ENG). Below, Volokitin's painting Birch Tree.

Opinions on the Kandinsky Prize nominees (Open Space, in Russian). Ekaterina Degot on the PinchukArtCentre prize (Open Space, in Russian).

Kandinsky Prize finalists, from 45 candidates (artinvestment.ru, in Russian).

Project of the Year: Pavel Pepperstein; Nikolai Polisski; Vadim Zakharov.

Young artist of the year: Alexander Frolov; MEKO; Evgeni Antufev.

Media-art project of the year: Yuliya Devlyashova and Alexandra Toshchevikova; Aristarkh Chernyshev and Alexei Shulgin; Vadim Zakharov.

Interviews with PinchukArtCentre Prize nominees (Open Space, in Russian, video).

Kandinsky Prize list

The Kandinsky Prize nominees show opened last week in the Central House of the Artist. There are 45 nominees from 331 entries. Deutsche Bank's Friedhelm Hutte has left the jury; Alla Rosenfeld and Vasili Tsereteli have joined it (Open Space, in Russian). List of nominees below the cut. I see that Tanatos Banionis is nominated for media-project of the year. I mentioned this pseudonymous artist in my artnet column on the Biennale and ArtMoskva and also reported Dima Khankin's emphatic denial that he and co-gallerist Emelyan Zakharov were TB, despite widespread Moscow gossip (artnet). Taking Khankin at his word, and looking to see whose work that of TB resembles, one comes up with AES+F.

Shortlisted PinchukArtCentre Prize nominees; with .pdf catalogue download (PinchukArtCentre).

I didn't attend the Kandinsky Prize show opening in London, but several people tell me they were bemused by the absence at the vernissage and subsequent dinner of many of the artists involved. Photograph of the show's Russian-hut-style design (by Oleg Kulik Boris Bernaskoni) here (kotomish).

It's interesting (to me at least) that the show is being held at the premises of Louise T. Blouin, owner of Art+Auction. In Moscow, Art+Auction is published by Art Media Group, the direct rival of ArtKhronika, creator and sponsor of the Kandinsky Prize.

The Sergei Kuryokhin Modern Art Centre and Sergei Kuryokhin Charitable Foundation have founded an annual contemporary art prize worth 250,000 roubles ($8,000) to the winner (Open Space, in Russian).

Last Opening at ARTStrelka

What director Olga Lopukhova calls the "last opening" will take place at ARTStrelka on Saturday 30 May. Apparently, after five years of use by galleries and artists, the site is to be redeveloped. Full press-release (in Russian) below the cut. I believe the Innovation Prize winners are to be announced the same evening.

The Innovation Prizes for art have been awarded. Hors concours prizes were given to the late Alexander Sidorov, who died last year, and Igor Shelkovsky for creation of the emigre journal A-Ya. The visual arts' prize went to Vladislav Efimov. The curator's prize went to Anna Zaitseva. The regional prize was awarded to Dmitri Bulatov and Oleg Blyablyas. Andrei Kuzkin, who recently had a fine show at ArtStrelka projects, received the new generation prize. The art critics' prize was not awarded to any of the high-profile nominees (Degot, Misiano, Barabanov), it is claimed for reasons of "political correctness" [it's not clear to me at time of writing what this means] (Regnum, in Russian). Russian blogger kotomish was there and he was underwhelmed by the event (kotomish, in Russian):

The organisers were also singing the praises of the Minister of Culture, who was present. It turns out they were singing in expectation of a new 17-storey building for the National Centre of Contemporary Art, including several floors devoted to a state museum of contemporary art.

Of course after the recent Kandinsky Prize excitement anything would be an anti-climax.

Russian-born mathematician Mikhail Gromov has won the 2009 Abel Prize (Scientific American) (thanks, MK).

Ilya and Emilia Kabakov have withdrawn their work from the Innovation Prize competition. The letter of withdrawal to Mikhail Mindlin runs (NCCA):

 WE DO RESPECT THE PEOPLE AND ARTISTS PARTICIPATING. BUT AFTER READING ALL THE ARTICLES IN THE RUSSIAN PRESS WE DECIDED THAT WE REALLY DON'T WANT TO BE IN THE CENTER OF THE CONTROVERSIAL SITUATION. IN ALL THE OTHER SITUATIONS WE WERE JUST GETTING THE PRIZES, AND CONGRADULATIONS ON GETTING THEM. .HERE IT LOOKS LIKE PEOPLE GOT OVERLY AGITATED.

A discussion of the Kabakovs' decision here (OpenSpace, in Russian).

Photo-report on projects at the Innovation Art Prize show at the National Centre for Contemporary Art (Open Space).

Eurasian movement TV: writer Mikhail Elizarov argues that "Europe is our enemy" (evrazia.tv, in Russia). On the same site there's also a video commentary by Alexei Belyaev-Gintovt on the Kandinsky Prize, but when I go there I get a message "Connect Failed" (evrazia.tv).

The nominations for the Innovation Art Prize have been announced. There are five categories: Visual Art Work; Curatorial Project; Theory, Criticism, Art History; Regional Project; New Generation. The nominees for Visual Art Work are Nikita Alekseev; Viktor Alimpiev; Vladislav Efimov; Ilya and Emilia Kabakov; Nikolai Polissky.

My article on the Kandinsky Prize is up on artnet (artnet). For even more retrospective coverage, click on Kandinsky Prize in the Categories. Artnet also has a list of 300 most searched-for artists; nary a Russian, unless you include Naum Gabo (artnet); number one, currently, is adolescent-girl sentimentalist photographer Sally Mann.

Kandinsky Prize skandal "rumbles on" (John Varoli/Art Newspaper):

Emelyan Zakharov, co-owner of Triumph Gallery, which represents Beliayev-Guintovt, thinks the controversy is rooted in a conflict between two media groups. Ms Degot is a senior editor at Openspace.ru, a web portal for the arts launched last summer by Art Media Group; at the end of December it also launched the Russian-language edition of Art & Auction magazine.

Art Media Group’s main competitor is Art Chronika, one of Russia’s oldest and most established art magazines and published by the Art Chronika Foundation, co-sponsor of the Kandinsky Prize.

Actually, I don't agree with the conflict thesis. As far as I know Degot prosecuted her campaign querying the prize neither at the behest of her employer at Open Space, Valeri Nosov, nor indeed with his prior approval. 

A visit to Alexei Belyaev-Gintovt (John Varoli/Art Newspaper):

“I want to do a Eurasian parade of the future, depicted in about 15 large paintings. I want to give a futuristic view to the Soviet-Stalinist aesthetic.” 

Beliayev-Guintovt doesn't hide his fondness for the Stalinist-era aesthetic, and he is uncomfortable when it comes to passing judgment on the Soviet dictator. “I had family members on both sides during the Stalin era. Some worked for the NKVD (secret police), while others ended up in the Gulag.”

Friedhelm Hutte, the Deutsche Bank representative on the Kandinsky Prize jury, says he regrets voting for Alexei Belyaev-Gintovt to receive the prize (Open Space, in Russian).

A whole collection of comments on the Kandinsky Prize affair, copied from the private site Snob, were posted by Spider on 23 December (David Sarkisyan & Viktor Miziano; Olga Sviblova & Pavel Peppershtein; Emelyan Zakharov; Natalya Semenova & Aleksei Tarkhanov; Ivan Dykhovichny & Pavel Peppershtein; Mikhail Kamensky; Dmitri Khankin). I'll quote Viktor Miziano below:

When we are dealing with an artist who makes use of certain radical ideas it's important to understand the relationship of the artist to these ideas. Because there is a tradition in which an artist plays at being a supporter of such ideas without in fact believing in them. ... Knowing [Alexei] Belyaev [-Gintovt] and the stages of his artistic development, I am of the opinion that he is probably manipulating ideas.

Apparently the publisher of Open Space, Valeri Nosov, is pleased with the independent editorial line taken by the art section editor Ekaterina Degot in connection with the Kandinsky Prize controversy (which allays fears expressed on IZO earlier).

Another take, Western this time, on the Kandinsky Prize (Max Seddon/Frieze):

If Belyaev is persona non grata in Russian artistic discourse, he is perfectly at home among the oligarchs and jet-setters – he is represented by the appointment-only Triumph gallery, which he praises for its ‘metaphysical status’ and ‘palace style, reminiscent of a beautiful era.’ There’s absolutely no contradiction there. Belyaev’s glossy ultra-nationalism is a just winner as the only artist on the list who truly integrates Russia’s Soviet hangover with its hyper-capitalist present. 

Jury-member Alexander Borovsky on the Kandinsky Prize. He defends the jury against the charges brought by Degot and others. Interestingly, he draws multiple comparisons between the current debate and the polemics of the early Stalin era, late 1920s-1937. He explains why he voted for Belyaev-Gintovt.  Belyaev-Gintovt's political views he characterises as part of the artist's aesthetic project, a manipulation of context (ArtKhronika, in Russian):

Liberal critics got worked up about many things. They failed to understand one thing: the artist is manipulating politics, not vice-versa.

Possibly. On the other hand, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Deutsche Bank has published an idiotically bland review of this year's Kandinsky Prize, of which it was the sponsor (DB Art Mag).

I missed this: 24 photos from the Kandinsky Prize ceremony (mnog). Below: Anatoli Osmolovsky has his say.

Ekaterina Degot, who runs the widely-read art section of the Open Space portal, is under heavy pressure because of her leading role in the opposition to the Kandinsky Prize decision. "Prepare the obituary of a critic," she emails from Kiev. Let's hope she isn't in fact compelled to resign.

Some mystery about the views of of Jean-Hubert Martin, Kandinsky Prize judge and curator of the upcoming Moscow Biennale. When the Kandinsky Prizes were awarded, he was ill and couldn't attend, and therefore didn't vote. But he is on record as saying, of the overall winner, Alexei Belyaev-Gintovt: "I don't understand how such uninteresting works, devoid of any innovativeness, could win such a prize" (IZO, earlier). Yet, according to Kandinsky Prize committee chairman, Shalva Breus, at the long-list stage of voting Martin had given Belyaev-Gintovt nine marks out of a possible ten (IZO, earlier).

Radio interview with Ekaterina Bobrinskaya (judge), Shalva Breus (founder/sponsor), Alexander Borovsky (judge), Emelyan Zakharov (gallerist) and Alexander Panov (critic) about the Kandinsky Prize ceremony (Moskva FM). According to Breus, judge Jean-Hubert Martin, at the long-list stage of the voting, gave Belyaev-Gintovt (hereinafter, ABG) nine points out of ten (I believe Martin is later on record as wondering how such an artist could win the prize). Bobrinskaya says that the judges were pressured prior to the vote; Breus states that in Miami Valerie Hillings was approached by a leading Russian critic and asked not to vote for ABG. Breus's view is that "talented art is patriotic art"; Bobrinskaya states that no substantive artistic criticism has been made of ABG's work beyond objections to his use of gold. Zakharov says the whole scandal is "provincial". According to Bobrinskaya, jury-member Erofeev agitated against ABG on political grounds, even though he had earlier shown ABG's work in a Sotsart context and bought it for the Tretyakov Gallery. Alexander Panov gives an agitated commentary at the end in which he recants from the accusation of Fascism directed at ABG.

Dmitri Khankin, Alexei Belyaev-Gintovt's gallerist, has made a statement about the Kandinsky Prize award on the snob.ru website (via dmitrivrubel):

Belyaev-Gintovt is not new to the gallery scene, he's been working for a long time, consistently, and his work sells well. He is a good, talented artist. He has quite specific political views. He is a Eurasian, a follower of Dugin and other Russian philosophers. But the prize is awarded not for accomplishments in philosophy but for an art project.

Mark Kelner, well-known dealer in non-conformist art, has some thoughts about this year's Kandinsky Prize:

It would be certainly naive to leave politics abstract and apart from Russian art these days. And perhaps from a historical perspective, the Non-Conformists of the 70s and 80s, were equally as viable as political tools as I believe Belyaev-Gintovt to be now. The main difference being, whereas as a collective whole, the dissidents and those influenced by them artistically were in protest to the Establishment, Belyaev-Givtovt is in the support of it. And while I dislike his winning something so high-profile and something based on creative merit, (I feel Gutov's contribution was much more organic, engaging, while not being "easy-to-get" or too accessible!), I'm not actually that surprised really. It's beginning to make sense. Russia's strength in oil reserves and the (once!) high prices for it, supported the recent proliferation of the Bear's new found aggression towards the West -- the Georgian War, overt threats over NATO expansion and missile defense shields, bomber patrols off Alaska, Naval exercises in Venezuela, and deepening military ties to China. All of this needs to be reflected in art, of course, and in Belyaev-Gintovt, I feel that a not-too-subtle subtext exists between what's happening now and the end result of what's historically possible and proven as artistic emblems of power and symbolist imagery of fear, perhaps, I'm saddened to say, from not a too distant future.

UPDATE: Kelner's view coincides, more or less, with that of Groys, who sees Belyaev-Gintovt as a stark sign of the times. I'm more and more intrigued by Belyaev-Gintovt himself. Ekaterina Degot suggests his nationalistic art may have begun as a kind of joke. Yuri Albert says the hostility to him is because he's an outsider. Who is this ironic invader who has thrown the art-world into disarray? A quick browse suggests that the unusual (in Russian) surname Gintovt may be of Lithuanian origin. To be precise, the only Gintovts I can find listed in the cyrillic wikipedia are a Major-General in the C19 Russian army and two people who received Yad Vashem awards for saving Jews during the Holocaust in Belorussia.

Yuri Albert responds to Ekaterina Degot's analysis of the Kandinsky Prize result and puts the uproar in context (dmitrivrubel):

... it's too late to get upset and shout "For shame!": if you take part in such a contest you have to be ready to lose to a fascist. ... No-one was too fastidious to show next to a fascist until the final ceremony. ... Marat Guelman was not too fastidious to work for Rogozin and to give space to Krylov,  the poet-orgsniser of the Russian March, and to Limonov, the fascist. We weren't worried, we didn't even discuss it. We were indifferent to what Timur Novikov was preaching, and in what way is he better than Belyaev? Everyone's friend, the sensitive watercolourist Volodya Salnikov, publicly annunces he is a Stalinist and in his LiveJournal discusses the quantity of Aryan blood in his veins and we (me, too) prefer not to notice and we shake his hand because he's an old friend and it's awkward not to. It's easier for me not to shake Belyaev's hand because I don't know him. I think the storm of disapproval has blown up because Belyaev isn't one of our crowd, and so it's easier to take a principled stance.

More on the Kandinsky prize ceremony (Valentin Diaconov/Artinfo):

... rumors were flying that the prize’s sponsor, Deutsche Bank, would soon withdraw its support.

The Kandinsky Prize skandal seems capable of evolving as a confrontation between the old-established contemporary art magazine, ArtKhronika, which sponsors the prize, and the new stable of titles from Art Media Group: the Open Space website, where the Art section is headed by Ekaterina Degot; Blacksquare magazine; and the new Russian Art + Auction. In her most recent commentary on Open Space, Degot describes "Dugin's Eurasian nationalism", of which Belyaev-Gintovt's work is an expression, as "a point of consensus between Russian society and the authorities"; she implies that ArtKhronika, which expresses the views of the "new Russian ruling class", shares this consensus (Open Space, in Russian):

I don't know now how to behave towards ArtKhronika magazine. To advertise in it now is not an innocent act any more. To write an article for it is to support a certain kind of politics.

There's more and more Kandinsky Prize stuff pouring out: videos of the pre-prize picket, statements from artists, voting conspiracy theories from Ekaterina Degot and others. I can't keep up. Here's the group Krem'L, Peace Labour May (via dmitrivrubel).

Boris Grois on the Kandinsky Prize, video interview (Open Space, in Russian).

The inside dope on the Kandinsky Prize jury's voting (Milena Orlova/Kommersant):

"I don't understand how such uninteresting works, devoid of any innovativeness, could win such a prize," said Jean-Hubert Martin ... The charman of the prize steering committee, Shalva Breus, who had one vote, admitted that he voted for the sotsart veteran Boris Orlov. Andrei Erofeev spoke out sharply against Belyaev[-Gintovt], although earlier he had included him in an exhibition. But Belyaev's supporters had the extra vote: voting "for" were art critic Ekaterina Bobrinskaya, head of new directions at the Russian Museum Alexander Bobrovsky, Guggenheim Museum curator Valerie Hillings, and director of Deutsche Bank Art Friedhelm Hutte. The latter two admitted they were startled by the stormy discussion of Belyaev but they were judging the works, not the context. Alexander Borovsky called Belyaev an artist in the tradition of Timur Novikov and Sergei Kurekhin and announced that he would not allow him to be smeared.

More Kandinsky Prize/Belyaev-Gintovt stuff:

1) Dima Gutov on the prize ceremony (kava-bata, in Russian):

Osmolovsky's performance in which he caused a scandal by shouting out "Shame" was as good as his best actions. As the critics of the XIX century used to say: the masks are off. I was afraid the affair might be obscured by giving the prize to me or Orlov. Let them show it around the world, their ugly mugs plain for all to see.

In fact, I'm not sure a Western audience would pay much heed to the content of Belyaev-Gintovt's work. That's the beauty of a culture saturated with messages. But I think his paintings would get even less attention as art. I'm not saying he's devoid of ability, but his work's overblown in all respects.

2) The statement of the Kandinsky Prize protest groups who mounted a picket at Vinzavod (the socialist movement Forward [Социалистическое Движение Вперед]; What Is To Be Done group [группа "Что Делать]; independent critics, artists activists) (kava-bata, in Russian & English):

We could care less about the Kandinsky Prize. It doesn’t matter to us whether the ultra-rightwing artist Belyaev-Guintovt wins it or not. We do not appeal to the powers that be, whether cultural, political or judicial, because we have no illusions about their commitment to democracy. We address our appeal to the art community and civil society. Our purpose is to draw their attention to the fascization of Russia’s ruling class.

This is happening in parallel with the profound crisis of the neoliberal order and its ideology, which makes no distinction between right and left, brown and red, fascism and communism, recognizing only private property and the “self-regulating” market. Thus does the eclectic “left-nationalist” ideology of Eurasianism converge with the stance of the prominent members of Russia’s business and media elite who serve on the prize’s jury and board of trustees. “Let a thousand flowers bloom!” “All ideologies are equal!” “Art beyond politics!” These slogans, which have always served the uncontrolled expansion of the market, are today being spouted by these respectable men and women. As they thus make profitable investments in art, flagrantly fascist utterances are legitimized in the public sphere.

Marat Guelman on the Kandinsky Prize: basically he seems to think along the same lines as me (galerist in Russian):

The worst thing is that despite the starry jury the prize went to the least interesting project of the three on the shortlist. ... It's lifeless kitsch, but because it's lifeless not everyone sees it for what it is. Gilding, pretentiousness - it's rubbish.

There are loads of art and culture prizes in Moscow these days. For example, the FSB arts prizes have just been awarded (Axis, scroll down).

Kandinsky Prize follow-up: Cheers and jeers at Kandinsky Prize (NY Times). Osmolovsky leads revolt (Reuters). Dmitri Khankin, Triumph Gallery, defends Belyaev-Gintovt (John Varoli/Bloomberg).

Dmitri Vrubel has a photo of the prize-winner (dmitrivrubel).

Boris Groys, awarding the Kandinsky Prize this evening, before he opened the envelope containing the winner's name, made the point that all the three artists represented on the finalists' shortlist had distinct political views and that the choice of the jury would inevitably have a political resonance. After the choice of Belyaev-Gintovt was announced, a number of Moscow's most prominent art-world figures made their dissent and disgust known to Shalva Breus, owner of Art Khronika magazine, which organises the prize. This event looks like it will turn into the biggest scandal in the Russian art-world for quite some time, dwarfing questions of state censorship of exhibitions etc.

Belyaev-Gintovt's aggressively nationalistic politics, which have been characterised as "crypto-fascism", may be deduced from his work and manifestoes (see for example the website doctrine.ru or the page atnazbol.ru). Belyaev-Gintovt rejects the "fascist" moniker (evrazia.org, in Russian):

I'm more used to being accused of communism than of fascism. But accusations of fascism are obviously misdirected. I am a member of the Eurasian Movement, which looks to the East, to a union with our great Eastern neighbours - China, India, Turkey, Persia and others.

There's an interview with Belyaev-Gintovt in Art Khronika in which he explains his participation in the Eurasian Youth Movement, rejects accusations of anti-semitism, and explains his ambitions for a Grand Style (artchronika.ru, in Russian). I won't analyse his statements in detail here: apart from anything he is a painter and his major utterances are visual not verbal. He appears to be a favoured artist of Alexander Dugin, a leading ideologist of Russian nationalism and expansionism.

The question arises whether the prize's sponsors, Deutsche Bank, and its non-Russian jurors, including Valerie Hillings (of the Guggenheim Museum), Jean-Hubert Martin (curator of the upcoming Moscow Biennale) and Friedhelm Hutte (Global Head Deutsche Bank Art) were or are aware of the political implications of their choice. It's also unclear what kind of horse-trading went on in the jury that Russian members such as Andrei Erofeev, Ekaterina Bobrinskaya and Alexander Borovsky should have participated in the unexpected decision.

Alexei Belyaev-Gintovt has won the Kandinsky Prize. I was, er, wrong ;) And I'm surprised. Congratulations to him.

Kandinsky Prize (Премия Кандинского) first results: young artist winner is Diana Machulina, media art project of the year is by PG Group.

The Kandinsky Prize to be announced this evening is a three-way final between Dima Gutov, Boris Orlov and Alexei Belyaev-Gintovt. Who will win? Well, I'll stick my neck out and make a prediction. My guess is that Belyaev-Gintovt won't win: he is in the shortlist for reasons of pr, or zeitgeist, or to create a mini-scandal, or whatever; apart from his perceived "crypto-fascism", which would cause a bigger scandal if he won, he is the weakest of the three nominees. Of the other two, my pick would be Gutov, but he is a Guelman Gallery artist and another Guelman artist, Anatoli Osmolovsky, won last year. So I think for that reason, if no other, the prize may go to Orlov, who shows with XL. I'm not saying that the judges will necessarily reason along my lines, but I think they may be subtly guided, or subconsciously incline, in that direction. Meanwhile, Tatyana Nazarenko has today won one of the $50,000 Triumph prizes awarded annually to artists, writers and performers (RIA Novosti, in Russian).

You too can vote in Igor Markin's You Are An Artist competition (art4.ru). I can't quite understand what Alexei Sundukov is doing there: he's been an artist for some time.